Posted by Alec Rawls on 5 December, 2007 at 5:30 pm. 10 comments already!

Sample8.jpg

TBogg deleted evidence of cover up at the Flight 93
Memorial

TBogg has edited a comment thread to remove an important piece of evidence
about the Memorial Project’s cover up of Islamic and terrorist memorializing
features in the planned Flight 93 memorial. A historically important comment
left by a consultant to the Memorial Project has been deleted.

In January 2006, Alec Rawls baited the
TBogg leftists for insisting that it is perfectly okay to plant a giant Mecca
oriented crescent
on the Flight 93 crash site. TBogg’s comment thread
swelled to epic proportions and eventually yielded something more than the usual
litany of moonbat excuses for not thinking straight. At the end of the thread,
posted sometime in March or April of 2006, there appeared an extended
comment
, about 600 words long, posted anonymously, and written as a
semi-formal evaluation of Rawls’ January 2006 report to the Memorial
Project.

Mr. Rawls would later find out that this anonymous comment was the sole piece
of written feedback on which the Memorial Project was basing its denial of
Islamic features in the winning design. (Crescent of Betrayal, download
3
, pp. 149-50.)

The Project only communicated snippets of the TBogg comment, so the fact that
the whole thing had been posted online caught them by surprise, undermining
their ability to control the story. In particular, the TBogg comment did not
deny the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent. On the contrary, it
acknowledged that the crescent at the center of the memorial is geometrically
similar to a traditional mihrab (the
Mecca-direction indicator around which every mosque is built), and offered a
variety of excuses for why people should not be concerned about this similarity.
(e.g. “[J]ust because something is ‘similar to’ something else, does not make it
the ‘same’.”)

Dr. Kevin Jaques

Only in the last couple of weeks has the identity of the anonymous scholar
who wrote the TBogg comment been learned. Last week’s blogburst about the Park Service’s fraudlent
internal investigation discusses a Memorial Project “White Paper” that
identifies the TBogg commentator as Dr. Kevin
Jaques
, an Islamicist (a scholar of Islam), at the University of
Indiana.

One of Dr. Jaques excuses for not being concerned about the half-mile wide
Mecca-oriented crescent is that it is so much bigger than any other mihrab:

Thirdly, most mihrabs are small, rarely larger than the figure of a man,
although some of the more ornamental ones can be larger, but nothing as large at
the crescent found in the site design. It is unlikely that most Muslims would
walk into the area of the circle/crescent and see a mihrab because it is well
beyond their limit of experience. Again, just because it is similar does not
make it the same.

You might recognize it as a giant crescent from an airplane like Flight 93
flying over head, but from the ground? Pshaw.

MockUpandCrescentBorderedWithCaptio.jpg

It’s too big to recognize!

TBogg deleted the Kevin Jaques comment from his comment
thread

For most of 2007, the original TBogg comment thread has not been available,
but TBogg now has it reposted, with one glaring omission: Dr. Jaques comment has
been removed.

If you want to see what TBogg is posting now, the url for his 2006
“Lunacy abounds” post is http://tbogg.blogspot.com/2006/01/lunacy-abounds-nuts.html.

For posterity, here are copies of the original
comment thread
, as of 5/29/2006, with Dr. Jaques’ comment intact at the end,
and the comment thread repost,
as of 12/3/2007, with Dr. Jaques’ comment deleted.

A full discussion of what TBogg properly calls “the infamous comment thread”
can be found in Chapter Eight of Alec’s Crescent of Betrayal book (download
3
, pp 131-).

The question now for Mr. TBogg is why he deleted Kevin Jaques’ comment. Did
he do it on his own, or did he do it at someone’s request? Did Dr. Jaques ask
him to delete the comment? Did architect Paul Murdoch ask? Did someone in the
Park Service ask?

Whether TBogg acted on his own or was prompted, it is obvious that he
understood that he was deleting an important piece of evidence. Just the fact
that he singled it out for deletion shows a conscious act of cover-up. Maybe he
did not realize the full import of having the comment remain publicly available
via an original source, but he certainly knew he was covering up
something important. What kind of blogger deletes a piece of evidence
that he knows to be central to a high profile controversy? (Republican
presidential candidate Tom Tancredo (R-CO) sent the Park Service a letter last month
asking that crescent design be scrapped entirely.) This is very bad
behavior.

Was TBogg’s comment thread originally removed in order to hide Jaques
comment?

It was odd enough when the “infamous comment thread” first disappeared from
TBogg’s blog. What blogger removes anything famous from their blog? But at that
time, there was no publicly available information that could have alerted TBogg
to the significance of that last anonymous comment. The most likely explanation
for the disappearance of the comment thread seemed to be that TBogg simply had a
coding glitch, or maybe he is cheap enough to have been worried about bandwidth.

Now that the comment thread has been restored without the Jaques comment, it
seems likely that the reason the comment thread came down in the first place was
to hide the Jaques comment. The interesting thing about this scenario is that at
the time the comment thread was removed (sometime between June 2006 and June
2007) the only way TBogg could have learned the importance of that last
anonymous comment would have been through the internal investigation conducted
by the Park Service in the spring and summer of 2006. No one else knew that the
comment came from an advisor to the Memorial Project until July 2007 when Alec
Rawls released the downloadable “Director’s Cut” version of his Crescent of
Betrayal
book. (Given the urgent public need to know, World Ahead
Publishing graciously allowed Alec to make his then final draft available for free
download
until the print edition–still being updated–comes out in the first
quarter of 2008.)

The TBogg comment thread was removed before the Director’s Cut
release. (Noted in Crescent of Betrayal, download
3
, at p. 131.) Chief Ranger Jill Hawk, who was conducting the investigation,
would not tell Alec who wrote the anonymous TBogg comment, but Alec warned her
to be suspicious. Given the overtly dishonest nature of its excuse making, he
urged her to double check its provenance. She answered back that she had been
able to get email confirmation of authorship.

This email communication with Jaques might well have alerted him to the
faux pas he committed by posting his comment on the TBogg thread. Did
he then contact TBogg and ask for the comment to be removed?

That would seem to be the most likely scenario. Others who were privy to the
internal investigation could have also contacted TBogg, but there is no evidence
for any other such route of transmission.

It is disturbing to think that TBogg would have acceded to any
request to remove evidence about a possible enemy plot. He is fully aware of
what Rawls is claiming: that an al Qaeda sympathizing architect entered our open
design competition with a plan to build a terrorist memorial mosque and won.
Kevin Jaques’ TBogg comment is crucial for understanding how such a plot could
succeed, revealing the utter fraudulence of the internal investigation that
should have detected any such plot. As the lone consultant to the Memorial
Project on the crescent design, Jaques engaged in overtly dishonest
excuse-making. And TBogg is willing to help him cover it up?

If TBogg has some other explanation for his deletions, the rest of us would
sure like to hear it.

The fraudulent internal investigation

For more of Kevin Jaques’ dishonest excuse-making, see last week’s blogburst
on the fraudulent internal
investigation
. Before the Park Service was done, it managed to round up two
more academic frauds in addition to Kevin Jaques. There is Dr. Daniel
Griffith
, who claims there is no
such thing
as the direction to Mecca, and a third Mosqueteer still to be
discussed. (Saving the worst for last.)

But Jaques is the central fraud, being the Project’s sole source of feedback
during a crucial period when its dismissive posture was set in stone. In
addition to being an expert on sharia law, Jaques has also proved to be an
expert at taqiyya.

—————-
If you want to join the blogroll/blogburst for the Crescent of
Betrayal blogburst, email Cao at caoilfhionn1 at gmail dot com, with your blog’s
url address. The blogburst will be sent out once a week to the participants, for
simultaneous publication on this issue on Wednesdays.

>