The Maple Tree Issue
Dean
Michelle Malkin makes the case that Sissy Willis and I am wrong about the "crescent of embrace."
I'll grant this much: as Virginia Postrel would say, style is no small thing. It absolutely matters, especially in a matter like this. That said, I continue to think that if they'd called it the "arc of embrace" we simply would not be having this conversation. I also think conservatives need to be aware of the style they're evincing here: it's a grove of maple trees, guys.
As to the notion that I'm a "conservative blogger": we classical liberals get lumped in with that group quite a lot. In some ways that is nice, but in other ways it saddens us a bit.
Related Posts (on one page):
- The Maple Tree Issue
- Perpetual Indignance As Political Expression
Muslims did not copyright the crescent. Get over it, people.
Of course, even if it is meant to be Islamic imagery, its likely to be seen as an insulting "in-your-face" attempt to co-opt their symbolism, at least in the eyes of the Al Qaeda types. It can be seen as pointing the finger of blame directly at Islam, rather than just the radicals.
This thing is tainted by the controversy. Best to alter it slightly so no one has a problem with it.
I was going to donate to the monument, but now I won't do so until they either change the design and the name, or someone convinces me that this thing is really ok. So far, I'm not convinced, and I don't donate to any project that I have reservations about.
And by the way, as to the Discovery TV program -- did anyone else pick up on the apparent attempt to suggest some girl led the attack on the hijackers? My husband said we should allow the grieving families their illusions, but my word, let's not start assigning heroism to people just because they were there, and make feminist statements out of everything.
Now the NYC 911 memorial/rebuilding plans, that's a real issue. It's unfortunate that Malkin and others are wasting their time and squandering their credibility on the Crescent.
But as things stand at this moment, I just can't support the memorial wholeheartedly.
These idiots are tripping over themselves trying to find a way to blame 9/11 on the US and not lay blame where is belongs lest they appear bigotted or insensitive.
You don't have to be a conspiracy nut to see that this is about a dishonest artist who got caught.
Tall Dave:
"Muslims did not copyright the crescent. Get over it, people."
This is a ridiculous argument. You're saying symbolism doesn't matter. It is crazy. You don't put a Christian cross on the front door of a school room and say "the cross hasn't been copyrighted by Christians, people, get over it." Nor do you do that with any one of a hundreds of othe well recognized symbols.
John Irving:
The answer is YES it does. Check out the Belmont Club for a good post about it. Wretchard tries to recreate the original claimant's proof, and does. He then goes on to see if the layout of the memorial topography might be responsible, whether or not the architect just likes to use crescents generally, and figures out that there is a 1 in 9 chance that any crescent will point toward Kabaa, and so on and so on.
Cheers!
I'm at the opposite extreme here. I'm conservative, reactionary: elitist, egoist, dogmatist, intolerant, stringent, absolutist, intentionalist, hard-line, warlike, imperialist.
A grove of trees? Just found there by accident? Or deliberately planted by somebody's intention? The World Trade Center: did it accidently grow like a tree? Or did somebody plan it and build it by intention? And did those planes fly into it by accident? Or by somebody's intention? I, for one, believe in intention, design, plan, purpose, mind, will. This, by the way, ties in with the continuing controversy over evolution (accidentalism) vs. Divine creation (intelligent design).
If that spells "conspiracy", then so be it. If that makes me a paranoid crackpot McCarthyite Birchite Extreme Right Wing gun nut and kook, then so be it.
Therefore, no, I don't believe this is just a mere coincidence. I agree with Sarah W., Michelle Malkin, Little Green Footballs, and the other Extreme Right bloggers and blogresses who have identified this blasphemy for what it is. I believe that it was intended to send a signal to our Muslim enemies that we are surrendering to them, willing to make peace with them. I'm against that.
This monument is not about peace, healing, reconciliation, co-existence, appeasement, accomodation, softness. This monument to the brave men and women of Flight 93 is and must be about war, heroism, struggle, opposition, resistance, defiance, freedom -- victory. Nothing less will do.
Sure. No problem. The Memorial is fine. Just fine. Really.
Move along, nothing to see here.
And remember, "Smile, the Computer is your friend." Paint that happy, shiny face on.
But there really has to be something in the middle with the list of passenger names. (All of them: we don't have a complete list of which passengers participated, and we must honor them all). I'm with SMA: you can have too much yin. This situation requires a little yang.
Muslims did not copyright the crescent. Get over it, people.
Would you have us "get over" 9/11 as well? Because that's what we're dealing with here. As long as it seems like someone is trying to get me to "get over it", I'm going to oppose every lame-brained idea they have, no matter how innocuous, irrelevant, and innocent it might seem to you.
For a lot of people (some of whom seem to be posting comments here), 9/11 was just a memory of a terrible day in the nation's history. Put up a few nice trees where you can pretend we'll have world peace someday and you'll feel better. For me, it's personal. It will never be over for me, and I'll teach my children never to forget.
We shouldn't wish ill on any muslim, but we also shouldn't sit around waiting for someone to point out the "Kick me" sign he's taped to our backs while he stands laughing at us. The only thing more disgusting than this travesty is the carefree way some people want me to ignore it.
Ask yourself: "Is this a memorial to people who died in a tragic airplane accident?"
Excellent. And I, too, will not "get over it".
Mark Steyn has it exactly right here
Thank you! Good to see you here! (As you're Attila, can I be the Witch Doctor?)
As I wrote here:
[....]
Back to Flight 93, 9/11/2001, and the War Against the Terror Masters: If we allow the enemy to win this War, then there will be no question of homosexual marriage or even of "sodomy" laws. Homosexuals will simply be put to death, along with "uppity" women, Polytheists, atheists, Jews, Christians, and anybody else, even any Muslim, who dares to deviate from the "New Order".
Symbols are all-important. They are the means by which we communicate. The very words I'm typing are symbols, and so is the money with which you buy your food. If our symbols send weak or mixed signals to the enemy, then we will lose this War. If our symbols as well as our actions convey strength and the will to win, then we will win and stay free.