Caught on video: shameful cover-up of the crescent-topped Tower of Voices
Background
For three years, the Flight 93 Memorial Project has been relentlessly dishonest, publicly denying damning facts like the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent while making excuses for these facts in private.
Example: Before the 2007 Memorial Project meeting, Project Partner and Flight 93 family member Patrick White was asked by the press about claims that the giant Crescent of Embrace points to Mecca. He said that all of the claims about what is in the design had been thoroughly investigated and been found to be untrue and "preposterous."
In private conversation at the meeting itself, White acknowledged the Mecca-orientation of the crescent and made excuses for it, arguing that the almost-exact Mecca orientation cannot be seen as a tribute to Islam because the in-exactness of it would be "disrespectful to Islam."
It is difficult enough to comprehend how Flight 93 family members can know that the giant crescent does indeed point almost exactly at Mecca, as critics are claiming, and still be okay with it. But White and the other Project Partners are going even further. They are knowingly covering up this damning information, and even flat lying to the public about it.
Whatever the explanation, this is what we are up against. Memorial Project participants know that the press will only cover our denunciations of the crescent design in those rare instances where we are able to mount a substantial public protest. Since the press never checks the facts, Project partners just issue whatever denials will get them through that news cycle, no matter how dishonest.
The above video
An example of this shameless misdirection was caught on video at last summer’s Memorial Project meeting. Alec Rawls, who made the trip to Somerset PA along with Tom Burnett Sr. (father of Flight 93 hero Tom Jr.), directed public attention to the crescent-topped Tower of Voices. A full-color advertisement in the Somerset newspaper showed the public what the Memorial Project and the press would not: that the Tower of Voices is topped with an Islamic shaped crescent, soaring in the sky above the symbolic lives of the 40 heroes:
At the meeting, Patrick White castigated Rawls for showing the meeting this artist’s rendering of the crescent topped tower, even as this very same graphic was on display by the Memorial Project itself just outside of the courtroom where the meeting was taking place.
White angrily denounced any suggestion that the approved plans for the memorial were indicative of what would actually be built, clearly implying that the crescent topped tower is no longer part of the planned memorial. Yet White had asserted exactly the opposite just three months earlier, when he and other family members involved with the Memorial Project declared that they would fight to build the design as approved:
Commission Chairman John Reynolds said he anticipated that people who opposed the memorial design would present a petition to throw it out.
But family members yesterday said they will work tirelessly to have the monument completed according to the design by the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks.
"We’re standing up and saying, ‘Enough.’ We’re proponents of the winning design," said Patrick White, whose cousin, Louis "Joey" Nacke II, died on Flight 93.
…
Mr. White said his group rejected any wholesale change to the design but allowed that it would have to be modified as it shifts from paper to reality.
However, Mr. White added, "They’re not going to be changed based upon the idea that someone sees crescents everywhere."
This was shortly after our blogburst group started hitting hard on the crescent-topped tower, which the Project Partners are known to have been angry about. In effect, White was directly insisting that the Tower would not be changed just because people were upset about its crescent shape.
The press ignored White’s implied denial that the crescent shaped tower will be built
If the crescent shaped tower is actually to be removed, or changed to some other shape, that is a significant concession, and should have been widely reported, at least by the western Pennsylvania press, but it was not mentioned in any newspaper.
Has the blatant Islamic-Supremacist symbolism of the crescent-topped tower actually penetrated the thick skulls of Patrick White and his cohorts? That is doubtful. When they only faced blogosphere pressure over the crescent-topped tower, their response was angry insistence that the design would NOT be altered. The difference in August was that everyone they had to deal with face-to-face had just seen the crescent topped tower in the local newspaper. The difference was exposure.
Since the press went on to cover up what we worked so hard to expose, there is no reason to think that the Memorial Project will change the design at all. They managed to sneak their cover-up through one more news cycle, which is all they have ever cared about.
Not that any tweaking of the design could ever make it anything but a terrorist memorial mosque in any case. The Tower, for instance, will still be a year round accurate Islamic prayer-time sundial, regardless of any change to the Tower’s profile. (The Memorial Project knows about this too, and makes utterly dishonest excuses for it.)
Better stand up and fight America, or there WILL be a terrorist memorial mosque on the Flight 93 crash site.
Barack Hussein Obama today signed an executive order, ordering that Club Gitmo be closed within a year. He didn’t say what we’re going to do with the tangos currently cooling there heels in there.
It’s been my understanding, their birth countries don’t want them back. So, what’s left? Well, I suppose we could just drop them back where we picked them up from. But that’s more than likely to ‘inhumane’ for the bleeding hearts to do. No…more than likely, they’re gonna end up right here in the USofA.
Earlier last week, in a perfect example of leftist "nimbyism" Kansas Gov. Katie Sebelius mentioned that she fully supported the dismantling of Club Gitmo
"…oh…. but… uhm… yeah.. .we don’t want these… uhm… nice folks… to be detained in Ft. Leavenworth military prison (or anywhere in Kansas for that matter)."
Okay okay, I’m paraphrasin’ but that’s basically what she said. Now, being a capitalist, the gears in my mind start turning, and I’m thinking…why not? Why not Ft. Leavenworth military prison? Seriously, think of the revenue that would bring in Lady Gov!
First off, jobs will be created. They’ll need to hire people to build the new mosque in Leavenworth, where all the terror…err…detainees supporters will be worshipping. Secondly, the town will grow in size, with the number of attorneys, and reporters and lookey-loos who will be utilizing hotels, motels, spending their dough in the restaurants and gas stations and such.
Katey…you need to think about the big pitcure hun.
Architect Paul Murdoch split his giant Crescent of Embrace memorial to Flight 93 into two separate arcs at the top, in effect creating two separate crescents:
Detail view shows the pair of thousand foot long, fifty foot tall, Entry Portal walls. Both walls roughly follow the line of the circle that is symbolically broken by the flight path (seen coming down from the NNE).
The crescent defined by the end of the inner Entry Portal Wall points 1.8° north of Mecca, ± a tenth of a degree. The crescent defined by the end of the outer Entry Portal Wall points exactly at Mecca (± 0.1°):
The hidden exact Mecca orientation of the giant crescent is only one of the ways that Murdoch proves he pointed the crescent towards Mecca on purpose (making it a mihrab, the Mecca direction indicator around which every mosque is built). He also proves intent by exactly repeating both of the Mecca orientations of his giant central crescent in the crescents of trees that surround the Tower of Voices part of the memorial.
That two different crescent structures would by chance turn out to have this exact same multi-Mecca oriented geometry is 1 in 131 billion. Just run the numbers (with some help from Mr. Morricone):
The previous two parts of this video series here and here.
To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.
For the past…oh..year and a half at least, when watching the television, I’ve had to sit through crappy, tacky public service announcements about how on 17 February, 2009, people who have old TVs and don’t have cable or satellite hooked up to them, are going to have problems.
17 Feb. 09 is when the television stations, by decree of the fine and upstanding *cough* people in Congress, all television signals must be broadcast digitally. Buh-bye analog signals. The whole idea is to move the country forward technologically. Doing this, frees up all those frequencies used now by broadcasters, for use by internet broadband companies, and emergency responders (you know, the cops, the firemen..those kind of folks).
Now, just to be sure, this date was set almost 4 years go, waaaaay back in 2005. There’s been nearly four years..that’s FOUR YEARS…that’s 1,460 days folks, for everyone to get their act together. The government’s been offering coupons to help the poor buy digital converter boxes. Our tax dollars at work (and hey, at least this time it is for something useful).
But the candidate of ‘change’, President-elect Barack Hussein Obama, doesn’t want that kind of change. Nnooooo, his idea of change, is not to move America forward, embracing new, better technology, but to change the switch date. To postpone it. Until when? Who knows? That part isn’t in the details…of which there are few.
Why does he want to do this? Because it might adversely affect poor, elderly and *cough* rural folks. Really? Rural folks? I can see the poor, if there wasn’t the government basically handing out converter boxes. I can see the elderly certainly, because many of them ( and no offense to you oldsters out there) just don’t have the technological savvy to know what the frack it’s all about. But rural folks? What the hell is that about? Is Obama saying people who choose to live outside the city limits are too poor to afford satellite, AND too stupid to understand the myriad of television commercials. Sheesh. I suppose, these are the same people who cling to their guns, and their religion (which, makes me think he believes to be a myth) because they’re bitter.
The thing is, if we postpone this vital transition, when will me move forward? When will the change Obama promises us, actually do something beneficial, instead of just changing plans, so we stand still?
A very wise man once told me, "Not all change is good, because not all movement is forward." Though, with this change, we’ll not be moving anyway, we’ll be standing still.
…one of the suggestions offered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) for regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act is to levy a tax on livestock.
Seriously? Taxing cows, and pigs because they cause green house emissions? Seriously? This is some kind of pre-pre-pre April Fool’s joke,…right?
The EPA has this to say about the evil and vile livestock:
“If GHG emissions from agricultural sources are regulated under the CAA, numerous farming operations that currently are not subject to the costly and time-consuming Title V permitting process would, for the first time, become covered entities. Even very small agricultural operations would meet a 100-tons-per-year emissions threshold. For example, dairy facilities with over 25 cows, beef cattle operations of over 50 cattle, swine operations with over 200 hogs, and farms with over 500 acres of corn may need to get a Title V permit. It is neither efficient nor practical to require permitting and reporting of GHG emissions from farms of this size. Excluding only the 200,000 largest commercial farms, our agricultural landscape is comprised of 1.9 million farms with an average value of production of $25,589 on 271 acres. These operations simply could not bear the regulatory compliance costs that would be involved.”
Sheesh…and you thought it would be better under Barak Hussein Obama.
Crescent of Betrayal Blogroll
Kansas Bloggers
Stumble it!
About
