Something’s Wrong: A memorial to 9/11 hijackers in the U.S.

Investigative analysis of the Flight 93 memorial confirms author’s research

Special investigative report by Douglas J. Hagmann, Director

26 July 2007: It was during court testimony on August 25, 1995 in the capital murder trial of O.J. Simpson when forensics expert Dr. Henry Lee testified there was “something wrong” with the manner in which one part of the blood evidence was obtained. Dr. Lee uttered “something’s wrong, something’s very wrong here” when addressing that particular evidence during the most infamous televised criminal trial of the twentieth century. At issue in that instance were wet blood transfer stains inside the paper packaging holding supposedly dry blood samples, something that made no scientific or even practical sense. “Something, somebody . . . put the swatch in the (package to) cause such a transfer. Who did it? What happened? I don’t know,” said Lee, a renowned forensics expert. “Only opinion I can give you under these circumstances: Something’s wrong.”

As an investigator certified in the forensic science of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis, and having had the opportunity to study some of the bloodstain evidence collected during that trial while undergoing my certification, I can state with authority that I agree with Dr. Henry Lee’s assessment and also understand his perplexity.

Nonetheless, agreeing with Dr. Lee on that portion of the evidence does not suggest that I believe in O.J. Simpson’s innocence. On the contrary, in fact, but that does not make that specific piece of evidence disappear or become any less troublesome, leading me to state that I too believe that “something’s wrong” with that specific part of the evidence. Whether it was merely the result of evidence being mishandled given the enormity of the task, or something intentional and nefarious, like Dr. Lee, I don’t know. Nonetheless, it was present and it mattered.

Nearly everyone in the free world who watched the televised trial of the O.J. Simpson case had an opinion regarding his guilt or innocence. For a case that in reality had no direct impact on America or the Western world, the majority of North Americans followed nearly every step of the trial. In a sense, a vast majority of us became virtual jurors in that trial, viewing the trial or the daily recap of the events with great interest and weighing in with our opinions, despite knowing that our assessments could not make any difference whatsoever in the outcome of that trial - nor should they.

It is in that same spirit that I ask every person in North America and the West to become a juror in a case that not only could have an impact on you, but where your opinion, properly expressed, could indeed have an impact on the outcome of a “case.” It is the case of the United Flight 93 memorial planned for Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Sound boring and uninteresting? I promise you that it is neither. Flight 93, as you know, was hijacked by Muslim terrorists on 9/11, and all forty of the passengers and crew perished as a result. Their remains were spread over a large debris field in rural Shanksville PA, the location of the planned memorial for the 40 innocent souls who were murdered by the actions of the Islamic terrorists on that day.

To each reasonable person of normal sensibilities reading this - a “courtroom standard” to be a juror - I ask that you all become jurors in this matter, which is going to require you to carefully and thoughtfully look at the evidence being presented. For the purpose of this “case,” please allow me to introduce the evidence that will convince you, as a “juror,” that there is indeed “something wrong” with the design, its implementation and the shadowy process in which the Flight 93 memorial is being approved, either by ignorance or more diabolical, by design. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, to borrow a phrase used by Dr. Henry Lee, “there is something wrong” with the plans for the Flight 93 memorial - something terribly wrong.

Now, let me be clear on one thing: this is not my investigative work, it is the work of investigative author Alec Rawls, whose book, Crescent of Betrayal, is being introduced to you as a juror in this case, and as the primary exhibit and cornerstone of the case against the Flight 93 memorial as it is being presented. I merely spent several days performing my own due diligence investigation of the conclusions reached by Mr. Rawls before introducing it to you, to make certain I agreed with his investigative process and well as his findings. Based on my investigative experience, I state emphatically that I agree with both. You can view the evidence yourself, courtesy of Mr. Rawls, without even having to purchase his book. For a limited time, the “director’s cut” can be downloaded at this link. That alone should dispel any accusations of him trying to capitalize on the slaughter of innocent lives, an accusation I’m sure would eventually be raised by some.

It is the conclusion of Mr. Rawls that the memorial designed for the victims of Flight 93 contains numerous elements that actually memorialize the Islamic and terrorist elements within the design. Mr. Rawls has further concluded, based on his extensive research that those involved in creating and selecting the design have also gone to great lengths to cover up, or dismiss as Islamophobic hysteria, the Islamic references and the memorial to the hijackers themselves since he began his investigation in 2005. In essence, Flight 93 is being hijacked yet again, this time by the insidious tactics of those involved in the construction and approval of the memorial, and I agree.

At this point, I must publicly take issue with some so-called journalists in the media for shamefully attempting to discredit the incontrovertible findings of Mr. Rawls through the shallow and common accusations of religious bigotry and intolerance, instead of addressing or refuting the facts he has developed and published. It is an unforgivable tactic, and those responsible for making such accusations rather than answering the legitimate issues have no right, in my opinion, to call themselves journalists. The same principle applies to the political officials and those in the position of approving the final design of the memorial - a very costly shrine that will be a permanent fixture of our landscape for generations to come. You have even not looked at, let alone addressed, the key findings of Mr. Rawls’ investigation. Is it a matter of simple malaise on your part, or could it be something more? Perhaps an additional investigation should be conducted on that issue alone.

Elements of concern: Compelling evidence

The evidence as presented by Mr. Rawls is thorough and compelling, and cannot be dismissed lightly, if at all. One of the most egregious and insulting aspects of this design is that it memorializes not only the forty innocent and heroic victims of Flight 93 by assigning a glass block to each victim, but it serves to memorialize each of the four hijackers with four additional glass blocks. Even the most hardcore skeptic must question the inclusion and style and strategic placement of the four additional glass blocks, something that simply cannot be dismissed as fodder for “conspiracy junkies.” Any reasonable person is forced to conclude that the addition of the four glass blocks is by design. Memorializing four Muslim terrorists who were responsible for the slaughter of forty innocent men, women and children aboard Flight 93 extends well beyond bad taste and raises serious questions about the intellect if not the intent of the architects, planners, and those ultimately responsible for the approval of this Islamic shrine.

Yet another issue is the “orientation” of the proposed design, the primary element of which, according to careful calculations that have been checked and rechecked, points to Islam’s most holy place - Mecca, via the White House. Sound like a whacked-out conspiracy wing nut? After all, “everything points somewhere” is one excuse I heard and read. Indeed, but what are the odds?

A 100-foot tall “Tower of Voices,” (also shaped as a crescent in concrete cross-section) resembles another Islamic symbol, a minaret from which the Muslim faithful are called to prayer several times each day. Of course, people can interpret shapes and forms in varying ways, but that does not mean such shapes are created with the specific intent to be consistent with an Islamic shrine. When Mr. Rawls points out that the exact Mecca orientation is repeated in the crescents of trees that surround the Tower of Voices, one must ask, what are the odds of that being serendipitous rather than by design?

In my experience as an investigator, when each of the elements is presented one-by-one by Mr. Rawls to you as a juror, the weight of evidence shifts from the memorial being innocuous, to it being something much more inherently sinister. Numerous other pieces of evidence are presented by Mr. Rawls, far more than necessary to make his case that the Flight 93 memorial is a shrine to Islam, and a memorial to the murderous hijackers.

Impossible, you say? Consider that we live in an age where a “memorial stone” is placed to honor the memory of one-time Oklahoma University student Joel Henry HINRIHS III near the site where he was killed when his backpack filled with triacetone triperoxide (TATP), an explosive commonly used by Islamic terrorists in “homicide bombings,” detonated. Based on the investigation of the incident that I personally conducted, along with the information obtained from well-placed law enforcement sources close to this case, it was the intent of HINRICHS to detonate the explosive inside the stadium - with deadly consequences to some of the 84,000 fans in attendance.

The evidence as detailed by Mr. Rawls is extensive and cannot be covered in-depth here. If you accept your role as a juror, visit Mr. Rawls’ web site where the additional information can be found and considered.

Time is of the essence: on Saturday, July 28, 2007, the Memorial Project will announce whether it will proceed to build the Crescent/Bowl of Embrace design (now called simply The Flight 93 Memorial). A meeting will be held in Somerset, Pennsylvania.

To download the evidence and secure the information needed to be a juror, visit the following links:

Director’s cut of Alec Rawls’Book Brief overview of evidence Bill Steiner’s Discoveries