It was not unreasonable to conclude that the use was intentional, considering their views. Also, they didn’t seem to rush to change it, let alone apologize.https://twitter.com/rothschildmd/status/1366992190170304514 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @IDoubtIt
Not unreasonable at all. Personally, I didn't think that CPAC leadership was aware, but I did wonder if someone had punked them with the design. I also considered the possibility that it might have been an accident, but, damn, the resemblance to the rune was incredible.
2 replies 1 retweet 14 likes -
I also note that those of us with a long history of combatting Holocaust denial and who are therefore very familiar with white supremacist and fascist iconography couldn't help but take notice, given how strong the resemblance was.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Personally, I find the explanation that the resemblance was an unintentional and unfortunate (for CPAC) accident to be far more satisfying than if they'd done it on purpose. It almost makes me believe in karma, the universe having its joke on the white supremacists at
#CPAC2021.1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Here's the article...https://forward.com/fast-forward/465136/design-firm-takes-responsibility-for-cpac-stage-controversy/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
OTOH... "Ian Walters, director of communications for the ACU and CPAC, told the Forward on Tuesday that the design firm 'provided several options for us to choose from and what we ended up with was the most workable of the options they submitted.'" Subconscious choice, maybe?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.