Sounds like the dingbats here in the US who are enraged because the memorial resembles a crescent.
"Sounds like the dingbats here in the US who are enraged because the memorial resembles a crescent."
That is so off the mark. A completely invalid comparison, a memorial to victims that includes a symbol commonly used by the attackers, versus a scribble on an ice cream container.
I hope that was sarcasm, otherwise, your observation is beyond stupid.
Sorry, but I don't see the moral equivalence. On the one hand, you have an abstract accident of happenstance, no more malignant than a set of well-placed skidmarks on the highway, or the chance configuration of a contrail of an airliner blown about by swirling winds.
On the other hand, you see an artiste who, for reasons of some imagined brotherhood-of-man reconciliation, insults the victims' loved-ones in memorializing the victims of islam by displaying one of its most revered symbols around the site of one of their perverted triumphs. Please forgive me if I'm missing something in your equation.
You know, if you can't reason any further than that....
Maybe you think the WW2 Memorial should have a rising sun on one of the walls? and that I'd be a dingbat for being enraged.
FYI, memorials honor the fallen, not the murderers.
You mean the Saint Louis Friendship Crescent over the Mississippi river?
Watch it!
I resemble that remark!
S. Dingbat