Hey, I want to apologize; you're right that my wording carried a hefty implication, and my thoughts clearly didn't translate to the written word properly. But it's what I wrote and it's wrong, so, do know that I am sorry.
That being said, I guess the point that I *think* I was trying to make would be better made with a contemporary analogy: Colin Kaepernick's protest during the National Anthem. To a large extent, people who were against his message would argue that it's disrespectful to the flag - whether or not that is true, which I don't believe it is, it turned the discussion away from what Kap was highlighting. It's my personal feeling that in that specific situation, many were not arguing in good faith, and would have had a problem with however Kap choose to spread his message. To broaden this analogy to the current discussion, I often see people pointing out actions by a very small minority of the protestors as if that invalidates the root cause of the protest - without the first thought as to why these incidents occurred.
Perhaps this isn't applicable to the Shard, but thats where I was coming from. Thanks for the reply.