Cox & Forkum say it all:

***
Dimitri Vassilaros of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review says “Kill the crescent.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer calls critics “blind.”

The Johnstown Tribune Democrat supports altering the memorial and cites the second-stage jury’s own words:

“Consider the interpretation and impact of words within the context of this event,” the jury wrote in its report. “The ‘Crescent’ should be referred to as the ‘circle’ or ‘arc’ or other words that are not tied to specific religious iconography.”

Henry Cook, president of Somerset Trust Co. and a member of the second-stage jury, said: “We suggested the name be changed. Someone did point out that the crescent had certain religious overtones.”

It’s not too late to do the right thing…

…Let’s make sure that message of unity and sacrifice is not drowned out by a clamor over semantics and religious imagery.

Changing the name is a start. If the design must be tweaked, we should be willing to do that, too.

Architect Paul Murdoch is reportedly open to more “evolution” of the memorial design.

***
While we’re on the subject of murderous Islamists on planes, have your heard about Mahmoud Maawad? More at Rantburg and Large Bill.

***
Previous:

Flight 93 memorial: design will be altered
Flight 93 memorial: fighting back
(Dis)honoring the flight that fought back
Flight 93 memorial: Seeing is believing
Flight 93 memorial: controversy

comments (0)   trackbacks (9)