I had my head down most of the weekend, dealing with the sever move (not an easy task with a blog that has as many entries as this one) so I didn’t get to comment on much that was going on. In particular, I didn’t have a chance to comment on the unfolding controversy around the design of the flight 93 memorial.
It goes something like this.
There’s a growing outcry that one element of the newly chosen Flight 93 National Memorial represents Islam and is a slap in the face to the passengers and crew members who died on the hijacked plane four years ago.
The winning design, announced Wednesday in Washington, D.C., includes what is called the "Crescent of Embrace." That element of the project calls for two rows of red maple trees to be planted around a bowl-shaped piece of land adjacent to the crash site. The trees, according to the architects, are there to create a physical edge to the landscape and accentuate the topography.
Almost immediately upon seeing the design, online bloggers suggested that it is inappropriate to use a red crescent in the memorial.
To many, that shape represents Islam, and the symbol is used on the flags of several Muslim countries, including Turkey, Pakistan and Uzbekistan.
The four men who hijacked United Airlines Flight 93 on its way from Newark, N.J., to San Francisco were Muslim.
Having taken in the whole thing, I’m now wrestling with one question. Does it make sense to nominate an entire group of people — henceforth known as "the crescent kooks" — for a mass Asshat award?