by Alec Rawls
The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is a Saudi funded Wahabbist group. Its logo is in the shape of a mosque with a crescent topped minaret and a crescent topped dome. Here is the ISNA logo juxtaposed to a similarly shaped mosque from Uppsala Sweden:
Both configurations have upturned crescents. The difference is that the arms of the ISNA crescents are lifted symmetrically, while the Uppsala crescents have one arm above the other.
On actual minarets, the Uppsala configuration is the norm, seen also in this photo of the Abdul Gaffoor mosque in Singapore:
There seems to be only one example of an actual minaret that is to be built in the ISNA configuration. That is the Tower of Voices minaret from the planned Flight 93 memorial:
Two views of the Tower of Voices minaret, showing an Islamic-shaped crescent at the top, with its arms reaching symmetrically up into the sky. (Source images here and here, originally from the Memorial Project’s design competition website.)
The up-tower view shows the symbolic Islamic heavens projected against the sky while the symbolic lives of the 40 heroes literally dangle down below. Murdoch had to do this in order for his Crescent of Embrace design (centered around a giant Mecca-oriented crescent) to be a proper mosque. The 40 infidels could not actually be honored in the design. They had to be depicted as symbolically damned.
Murdoch actually repeats this theme in the central crescent, where the 4 extra translucent blocks (one for each hijacker) are all placed in the symbolic Islamic heavens (the crescent and star parts of the structure), while the 40 translucent blocks inscribed with the names of the 40 heroes are all placed outside of the symbolic Islamic heavens.
Do Wahabbists recognize the crescent as a symbol of Islam?
One of the two Muslim scholars who the Park Service tapped for expert opinion on whether claims of Islamic symbolism in the Flight 93 memorial should be taken seriously was a Paul Murdoch classmate named Nasser Rabbat. (Both recieved Masters degrees in architecture from UCLA in 1984.)
One of the excuses Rabbat offered the Park Service for not being concerned about all the Islamic-shaped crescents was to question whether the crescent really should be seen as a Muslim symbol at all:
The Crescent is a debatable Islamic universal symbol. Many groups do not use it. I know in fact of no militant group that uses it. [AHEM.] Islamic modern states have opted to use it, sometimes with the star, which is a modern symbol with no Islamic connotation.
He is right here that the most fanatical Islamic fundamentalists, the Salafists (who model themselves on the first three generations of violent Islamic conquest), are not keen on the crescent, since it was adopted as a Muslim symbol by the Ottomans, long after the time of Muhammad.
The official Saudi state religion of Wahabbism is Salafist. That is why the Saudi Arabian flag is one of the only Islamic flags not to feature the Ottoman crescent and star:
But the ISNA is a primary vehicle for the Saudi funded building of Wahabbist mosques in North America. How can this be? Is the crescent actually a universal enough Islamic symbol that even the Salafist Saudi Wahabbists acknowledge it?
Indeed, and for a very simple reason. The crescent is not just the shape of the Ottoman flag. It is also a reference to the Islamic lunar calendar, and it is the shape of the archetypical Islamic mihrab: the Mecca-direction indicator around which every mosque is built. Here are the two most famous mihrabs in the world, the mihrab at the Prophet’s mosque in Medina, and the mihrab of the Great Mosque in Cordoba, seen here in sequence with Barack Hussein Obama’s campaign logo:
Face into the crescent to face Mecca. For the contrast between Murdoch’s intentional use of Islamic symbol shapes and Obama’s unintentional use of Islamic symbol shapes, see our earlier blogburst on Obama’s crescent-topped logo.
So yes, the crescent actually is a universal Islamic symbol. The only people who even question it are the most extreme Salafists, which evidently includes Nasser Rabbat. How did this Paul Murdoch classmate ever get tapped by the Park Service in the first place, so that he could even be in a position to give them his blatantly dishonest excuses for not being concerned about the giant Mecca oriented crescent? Just one of the many things that Congress needs to investigate. (Petition here.)
ISNA big in Murdoch’s hometown of LA
Murdoch could be some kind of nihilistic leftist, but the most likely explanation for his attempt to stab a terrorist memorial mosque into the heartland of America is that he at some point converted to an aggressively hateful, violent and supremacist sect of Islam like Saudi Wahabbism and is acting today as a freelance jihadist.
Such a person would almost certainly be familiar with the ISNA. 80% of American mosques preach the Saudi poison, but often the Saudi funding is hidden. Not so in Los Angeles, where the city’s largest mosque, the King Fahd Mosque in Culver City, is openly funded by the Saudi Government.
We won’t learn Murdoch’s actual associations without a Congressional investigation, but the fact that he used a minaret configuration that is elsewhere seen only in the ISNA logo is mildly suggestive of a Wahabbist connection. For now, the only reason to bring up the Murdoch/ISNA likeness is to clarify that even Salafists accept the crescent as a component of mosque design.
ISNA President Ingrid Matteson spoke at the interfaith convocation of the 2008 Democratic Presidential Convention
They picked a Wahabbist as their representative of Islam? Why not invite bin Laden himself, who is a perfectly orthodox Wahabbist?
The ISNA was founded by the Saudi funded Muslim Students Association (MAS), which has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, the progenitor of all modern Sunni terrorist groups, including al Qaeda.
What else should we expect? After all, the mainstream left DID spend the last five years trying desperately to hand Iraq over to al Qaeda and Iran.
To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.