Replies

Oddly, I'm never impressed when somebody makes a remark about someone's "panties being in a bunch" (a personal retort to a firm assertion if ever there was one) then tries to run away from his own silly argument by claiming it's suddenly "gone personal."

Guess you've given up on the risible notion that you know more about the design of a memorial than the artist himself; smart move.

The "return your panties to the unwadded position" was intended to be light-hearted, as a reference to the "tables to their upright and locked position" line on airplanes, which always strikes me as funny. After all, one can never have too much uprightness. I guess the keep our own kids safe society is maybe as low on humor as it is on subtlety.

No, I haven't given up. I still don't think it's a crescent. I know what a crescent is. (Among other things, in some heraldic systems it is the emblem of the second son.) And I still think the argument (not its proponents) on your side is ridiculous and paranoid. I suppose it is good to make the architect aware of a possible interpretation of an unintended and inadvertent aspect of his design.

The character of the response to the statement of a dissenting view suggests to me that there something going on here of which I am not aware. I, personally, am not worried about crypto fifth column Islamofacist sympathizers tricking me or the nation into paying homage to the perverted heresiarch. I am suspicious of arguments which need their proponents to imply that they are just so much more on the ball and so much wiser even than the bereft who have a strong personal connection with the memorial that those who disagree with them can only be vicious or stupid.

I guess contempt for those who disagree with one is not confined to Islamofascists.