Wednesday, September 08, 2010

A Dangerous Willful Blindness

The totally legitimate objections and protests against the Ground Zero mosque will be on display for the nation to see at the 9/11 site in New York City this September 11, 2010. Participants are encouraged to bring American flags. But readers, were you also aware of the objections to the design of the Flight 93 memorial? Please read the following blogburst post and become a member of this effort to stop the first horribly-designed "memorial" that is being planned to be built at the Shanksville, Pennsyvania area where the heroes - you know - the GENUINE AMERICAN HEROES who prevented the terrorists on that day from crashing the plane into either the White House or Congressional building in Washington D.C.

Enough with the ignorance! Enough with the political correctness! The majority of Americans OBJECT to both the crescent of betrayal in Shanksville, and the Ground Zero mosque!

Please consider joining in the fight against allowing radical muslims and their enablers here in the United States from erecting huge "memorials" of victory to the terrorists!!

Christine

P.S. Were you also aware that the Flight 93 "memorial" is scheduled to open on September 11, 2011 - the same day as the Ground Zero mosque? Coincidence? I don't think so!!

Educate yourself and see how throughout history, radical Islam has built mosques in areas of the world where they conquered the "infidels." People...if you are not angry or alarmed yet, then you are as Dr. Alan Keyes is quoted as saying, living in "a dangerous willful blindness!"

*******

Blogburst article:

Alan Keyes against the Flight 93 memorial


Blogburst logo, petitionAlan Keyes, logo-size

Conservative hero Alan Keyes is asking whether there is a pattern of submission surrounding the nation's 9/11 sites. Apparently he has seen our video expose of Islamic and terrorist memorializing features in the crescent memorial to Flight 93 (now called a broken circle). Like any straight-thinker, he doesn't like what he sees. The Flight 93 crash site is no place for a giant Islamic-shaped crescent, no matter what it is called.

On this point, Keyes cites Colorado Representative Tom Tancredo's 2005 objection to the newly unveiled Crescent of Embrace design:
Back in 2005, then-Rep. Tom Tancredo was reported to have sent a letter to the National Park Service "asking the Interior Department to reconsider the crescent-shaped design of the memorial to those aboard a plane hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001, because some may think it honors the terrorists." Tancredo quite sensibly argues that "regardless of whether 'the invocation of a Muslim Symbol' was intentional, 'it seems that such a symbol is unsuitable for paying appropriate tribute to the heroes of Flight 93 or the ensuing American struggle against radical Islam.'"
Keyes notes our claim that the design is still replete with terrorist memorializing features and he seems to find it credible. Why shouldn't he? The damning features are all right there in architect Paul Murdoch's design drawings. Thank you Doctor Keyes!


"It’s not just embarrassing. It is a dangerous willful blindness, spurning the woken vigilance of Flight 93."

That's the last line of the full-page advertisement that Tom Burnett Senior and Alec Rawls will be running in the Somerset Daily American this Friday and Saturday (when the two first ladies will be in town for the 9/11 anniversary):

It_was-terrible_9-11-10_x250px
Click for legible image. Full ad-copy PDF here (large file warning).

We are hoping that visitors will hold onto our ad, maybe even tape it to their car windows, and most especially, show it to any press people they come across. Hey, if the Park Service can use 9/11 to plant the world's largest mosque on the Flight 93 crash site, we can use 9/11 to object.


To join our blogburst against the crescent mosque, just send your blog's url.

14 comments:

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
Have you heard anything about the guy who is a major investor in News Corp. who is behind the building of the Islamic education center? I haven't heard too much about him from the conservative side.
Here is the link to the NPR report:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129584557

Christinewjc said...

Kevin,

The money isn't only coming from one person or place. Rauf has terrorist ties and some of the money is coming from terrorist organizations that support Hamas and who knows what other muslim extremist group.

BTW, did you miss this post?

So, what's your point?

Did you read my previous post where you will find a link to a pdf paper that translated the muslim brotherhood plans for America that is translated from Arabic to English?

If not...then you aren't seeing the big picture. Hope you wake up soon, Kevin. Come on out of the pro-Islamic closet. It's dark in there.

stevex09 said...

Hey Christine! I like the right-on title to your post. You can bet those that are willfully blind to the approaching storm will wake up only when it's too late.
It's like Custer ignoring his scout at the Little Big Horn when he was saying, "Hey man, I see alot of indians out there!" Or shunning the guy on the Titanic saying, "Hey, there's water coming over the sides of the boat!"
I tried to send in my blog url but it didn't work for some reason.
Oh, I finally got around to answering Don. I think I'm just going to make that the last one though.

Kevin said...

Hi Christine, Yes, I read your post, but not your 30 or so blogs you also posted. My point is that the money for this Islamic center is coming from a person who controls a massive chunk of News Corp., which runs Fox News.
Don't you find that interesting? Especially since Fox hasn't really talked about this aspect of the Islamic Center? I would bet that Murdoch told Fox News to stop discussing the Center because of one of his biggest financial backers supports it. Sounds like a great conspiracy, if you ask me. Don't you at least wonder why Fox News hasn't really reported on its ties with this Muslim prince and his supporters? That was my point.

This is the United States of America, which was founded on religious freedom--ALL religions. When this country, or its people, start demanding that certain religions be banned, then we are all in trouble. That is my opinion. I don't see anything wrong with an Islamic Center near the 9/11 site. It isn't going to be built right on the site of the Towers, so what is the big deal? I think this is a great opportunity for Muslims to show they are not violent and that they reject the tiny fundamentalist minority. I am not 'pro-Muslim'--I am pro-American who believes in the founding principles of this country. That is also my point.

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
By the way, I did NOT read the pdf in that link. I am reading it now, but I see that it was written in 1991.

Gary Baker said...

Hi Kevin,

"I am not 'pro-Muslim'--I am pro-American who believes in the founding principles of this country. That is also my point."

Well, a great many of your posts indicate that you do not believe in the founding principles of this country (private property, personal liberty, due process, etc.), but that's another matter. What confuses me is why you are associating this with a founding principle (freedom of religion) when no one's religious freedom has been curtailed. To the best of my knowledge, all that has happened is that some groups are objecting to a mosque location. If the group desiring to build the mosque is prevented by law from building on private property within the same building codes and zoning laws that everyone else lives with, then I would agree that a violation of freedom of religion has occurred. As it is right now, my understanding is simply that people are utilizing their right of free expression to say they don't want it.

Kevin said...

Hi Gary,
"that's another matter..." Well, not really. I never said I don't believe in private property, personal liberty, due process. Again, you are confusing me with someone else. Let me give you an example--I believe that I have a right to marry (my personal liberty). Prop. 8 was passed, and now it went to the courts. I am happy that it is now in the hands of the court (due process). Therefore I believe in personal liberty and due process. I don't need to repeat again that I believe in private property, since I own a few of those myself.
The problem is that you BELIEVE that I do not like private property, personal liberty and due process. That is a totally different kettle of fish.

About religious freedom--many of the same people who don't want the Islamic Center built are the very same people that do not want Islam practiced in America. Surely you can't deny this. All you have to do is read some of Christine'w own comments (like the one where she accused me of being 'pro-Islamic' as if that is a bad thing). That is the connection to the Islamic Center uproar and religious freedom. Sorry--Islam is a legitimate religion and those who practice it have every right to do so, just like people who practice Christianity or Judaism or the millions of other beliefs out there.

Christinewjc said...

Kevin,

Know what I think? I think that you just like to hear yourself talk...er...I mean...see yourself type.

It's just a feeling I've had about you lately.

;-)

Kevin said...

Hi Christine,
You said: "Know what I think? I think that you just like to hear yourself talk...er...I mean...see yourself type." Very funny today! And with that last sentence I surely enjoyed hearing my keyboard when I typed that. ;)

In the meantime...Your post today on "The Evil Effects of...Islamism" just proves me right in what I said to Gary. :)

Gary Baker said...

Kevin,


"The problem is that you BELIEVE that I do not like private property, personal liberty and due process. That is a totally different kettle of fish. "

Let's see: You seem to support actions taken by politicians that take property away from people who own and earn it provided that they favor your opinions. You support unions which work to restrict liberty of both business owners and employees who wish to be able to work without having to join a union. You favored the health care initiative that will result in forcing people to buy a product whether they want to or not. You favor government taking funds from earners. Doesn't sound much like you favor those things to me. Yes, I know many liberals who own property, and they scream like stuck pigs when someone threatens their ownership. It's what belongs to other people they have no respect for.

And as is typical for liberals, you have no sense whatsoever as to what constitutes liberty. By definition, legal marriage requires an act of government. Therefore you cannot exercise the act without government and it cannot be a matter of liberty. If that were the case, then every time a government office was closed, you would be deprived of liberty, which of course is ridiculous as are most of your arguments.

"About religious freedom--many of the same people who don't want the Islamic Center built are the very same people that do not want Islam practiced in America. Surely you can't deny this."

How many? Show me some evidence of this assumption. And my denial is not relevant. It doesn't matter what the people who do not want the center built do or do not want with regard to Islam. What matters is whether or not the religious freedoms are being violated. To the best of my knowledge, they are not. So the rest of your smoke about Islam being legitimate blah, blah, blah, is just that: Smoke. If you are really worked up about it, though, I think you should go out to NY and march with the people supporting the mosque. Be sure to wear something identifying you as a gay male. I'm sure the people pulling for the mosque will be gratified to know that their cause reaches across all boundaries. They might even stone you last!

Gary Baker said...

Christine,

It says a lot about the liberal mentality when they can define the ability to dictate that their perversion should become an acceptable social norm, subsidized by everyone, and taught as socially correct in schools to all children regardless of affiliation, as a matter of "personal liberty."

The founding fathers thought of liberty as the ability to act free of government interference. It's pathetic how far some have fallen and still try to claim they support the same ideals.

Christinewjc said...

Yeah Kevin. I'm a regular riot. It was my lame attempt to say that once again, we are just continuing to talk past each other.

Christinewjc said...

Yes Gary. It's called twisting the truth to suit the liberal.

Christinewjc said...

P.S. - Gary. It's more accurately labeled as licentiousness.