Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Model comment in favor of No Action Alternative for Flight 93 memorial
The Flight 93 Memorial Project is calling for certain guidelines to be followed when leaving feedback in favor of either the barely modified Crescent of Embrace design or the No Action Alternative. I have fashioned the following comment to reference the relevant comment criteria. Feel free to cut and paste. (You will have to leave personal information to comment.)
Salt to taste:
Comment on Flight 93 Memorial, in favor of the No Action alternative
“Information that is missing but should be included in the Final GMP/EIS in order for the agency to make a better informed decision”
Given that one of the “Key Decisions” to be made is whether the proposed Preferred Design Alternative satisfies the Mission Statement of the Project (to honor the heroes of Flight 93), the Final GMP/EIS should include the voluminous factual evidence that the Preferred Design Alternative is actually the blueprint for a terrorist memorial mosque. This missing information includes the following facts:
1. A person facing directly into the original Crescent of Embrace would be facing almost exactly towards Mecca.
2. A crescent that people face into to face Mecca is called a “mihrab,” and is the central feature around which every mosque is built.
3. The giant Mecca-oriented crescent is still present in the barely altered Bowl of Embrace redesign (the Preferred Design Alternative), now slated to be called simply The Flight 93 Memorial.
4. The Crescent/Bowl design contains numerous other mosque features, such as the hundred foot tall Tower of Voices minaret, formed in the shape of an extruded crescent.
5. The Crescent/Bowl of Embrace contains numerous other terrorist-memorializing elements, such as the 44 glass blocks emplaced along the flight path to ground. Flight 93 carried 40 passengers and 4 hijackers.
Graphical proof of the Mecca-orientation of the original Crescent, along with proof of its continued presence in the Preferred Design Alternative, and links to mathematical proofs of Mecca orientation, and to proofs of other untoward features, can be found at: http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2006/07/comment-period-now-open-for-flight-93.html
Many commentators who have viewed the information at this Error Theory website have been and will be leaving comments with the Memorial Project. The Project is hereby called upon to acknowledge that all commentary related to the Islamic and jihadist elements of the Preferred Design Alternative is commentary about information that is missing from the GMP/EIS when it should be included. By pointing out this missing information, these comments must all be recognized to “focus on the technical accuracy of the information presented in the document,” as per the comment guidelines.
Sincerely,
Salt to taste:
Comment on Flight 93 Memorial, in favor of the No Action alternative
“Information that is missing but should be included in the Final GMP/EIS in order for the agency to make a better informed decision”
Given that one of the “Key Decisions” to be made is whether the proposed Preferred Design Alternative satisfies the Mission Statement of the Project (to honor the heroes of Flight 93), the Final GMP/EIS should include the voluminous factual evidence that the Preferred Design Alternative is actually the blueprint for a terrorist memorial mosque. This missing information includes the following facts:
1. A person facing directly into the original Crescent of Embrace would be facing almost exactly towards Mecca.
2. A crescent that people face into to face Mecca is called a “mihrab,” and is the central feature around which every mosque is built.
3. The giant Mecca-oriented crescent is still present in the barely altered Bowl of Embrace redesign (the Preferred Design Alternative), now slated to be called simply The Flight 93 Memorial.
4. The Crescent/Bowl design contains numerous other mosque features, such as the hundred foot tall Tower of Voices minaret, formed in the shape of an extruded crescent.
5. The Crescent/Bowl of Embrace contains numerous other terrorist-memorializing elements, such as the 44 glass blocks emplaced along the flight path to ground. Flight 93 carried 40 passengers and 4 hijackers.
Graphical proof of the Mecca-orientation of the original Crescent, along with proof of its continued presence in the Preferred Design Alternative, and links to mathematical proofs of Mecca orientation, and to proofs of other untoward features, can be found at: http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2006/07/comment-period-now-open-for-flight-93.html
Many commentators who have viewed the information at this Error Theory website have been and will be leaving comments with the Memorial Project. The Project is hereby called upon to acknowledge that all commentary related to the Islamic and jihadist elements of the Preferred Design Alternative is commentary about information that is missing from the GMP/EIS when it should be included. By pointing out this missing information, these comments must all be recognized to “focus on the technical accuracy of the information presented in the document,” as per the comment guidelines.
Sincerely,
Comments:
<< Home
Bah... you didn't add the 'praying man' to the design complaints (the two pools... one head shaped pool on top of the other body... which is kneeling and the bowing).
The praying man is facing Mecca in this farce of a design!
The praying man is facing Mecca in this farce of a design!
# posted by 
: 9:43 PM
: 9:43 PM
Alec,
I really like your comment, finding it superior to my own. I'll reproduce it, though, to add to your point: They are materially out of compliance with their oown directives.
"I'm writing in support of Alternative One: No Action.
I'd like to point out that the Appendix is materially incomplete. There is a key letter from Secretary Norton, directing a partial redesign to remove highly offensive Islamic symbology.
Further, Paul Murdoch is materially out of compliance with that directive, as no major alterations have been made.
[SNIP: six links removed]
Again, NO major change has been made. Mr. Murdoch is out of compliance with his directive. Therefore, the project cannot go forward, as designed.
The Management Plan is incomplete, because it doesn't take into account lengthy delays that are certain to to be generated by legal and Congressional challenges to this fundamentally flawed, deeply offensive design.
The review meeting, scheduled for July 20th, could turn into a raucous affair, indeed."
I really like your comment, finding it superior to my own. I'll reproduce it, though, to add to your point: They are materially out of compliance with their oown directives.
"I'm writing in support of Alternative One: No Action.
I'd like to point out that the Appendix is materially incomplete. There is a key letter from Secretary Norton, directing a partial redesign to remove highly offensive Islamic symbology.
Further, Paul Murdoch is materially out of compliance with that directive, as no major alterations have been made.
[SNIP: six links removed]
Again, NO major change has been made. Mr. Murdoch is out of compliance with his directive. Therefore, the project cannot go forward, as designed.
The Management Plan is incomplete, because it doesn't take into account lengthy delays that are certain to to be generated by legal and Congressional challenges to this fundamentally flawed, deeply offensive design.
The review meeting, scheduled for July 20th, could turn into a raucous affair, indeed."
I posted some pictures of using Google Earth to check the paths of the Crescent to Mecca and the White House. See the bottom of this blog post.
http://hounddoghangout.blogspot.com/
http://hounddoghangout.blogspot.com/
My comment to the National Park Service re the Flight 93 "memorial":
Has the National Park Service considered the most likely effect of building a "memorial" that is nothing more than a mosque? Instead of being a place to honor our dead heroes, it will become a gathering place for Islamic radicals to celebrate the suicide killers in what they see as one victory in the jihad against us. Each September 11, instead of seeing people giving prayerful thanks for those Americans who died to save other Americans, we can look forward to pictures of islamists as they face into the crescent (the mihrab) toward mecca giving thanks for the terrorists who died to kill Americans. How can you possibly be even considering this disastrous design? Please start over and build a Memorial that honors our dead and not their killers.
Has the National Park Service considered the most likely effect of building a "memorial" that is nothing more than a mosque? Instead of being a place to honor our dead heroes, it will become a gathering place for Islamic radicals to celebrate the suicide killers in what they see as one victory in the jihad against us. Each September 11, instead of seeing people giving prayerful thanks for those Americans who died to save other Americans, we can look forward to pictures of islamists as they face into the crescent (the mihrab) toward mecca giving thanks for the terrorists who died to kill Americans. How can you possibly be even considering this disastrous design? Please start over and build a Memorial that honors our dead and not their killers.
# posted by : 2:27 AM
: 2:27 AM
I lie the article. The article is very interesting for me. Looking forward to some more interesting articles.Thanks.
________________________________
Best Fashion Info
http://bestfashioninfo.com
Post a Comment
________________________________
Best Fashion Info
http://bestfashioninfo.com
<< Home
