Dengl 31 Olympics Logo 2011

I have been alerted to a rumpus in Logistan - and it takes a form I had not suspected would arise ....

Zionism, or Nazism in symbols and the new Olympic Logo
A site offering anti-zionist sentiments suggests that the olympic logo evokes the word ZION;
the argument is ad hominem and if one prefers, racist, suggesting that the company which made this glaring error, Wolff Olins, is operated by Jews, who have hijacked the occasion.
I say that the logo offered (and which should have been turned down by the non-Jewish Lord Coe) more resembles the jagged SS emblem - in effect it is NAZI rather than zionist.
Whatever was in (what passes for) the minds of Wolff and Olins, they have certainly pulled a nasty, fast and costly one on the organisers;
but that is not because they are Jews - I suggest that had they been more centrally guided by Jewish principles they would NOT have offered this design - they have offered it because they are not sufficiently Jewish - ie prudent and conscientious. However, look at:

http://engforum.pravda.ru/index.php?/topic/178188-london-olympics-2012-or-zion-logo-controversy-explained/

and from a website based, I believe, in New Delhi ...

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/8331041-london-2012-olympics-logo-controversy

Psychological Conjectures on the Connotations of the 2012 Olympics Logo
When this logo was first aired, I thought this it was ripe for trouble.
I focused on the plenitude of CORNERS throughout the diagram and the corresponding banishment of CURVES =
and, I bore in mind notions I had had published long ago, suggesting that curves connect better with or even lead to a (musical) rhythmic structure of 3 x time - even engaging different parts of the brain than are engaged when the visual designation is jagged and conjures a musical rhythmic structure of 2 or of 4 time - and these are experienceable without engaging any "higher centres", with reference to the two-time body motions of breathing (in-out), walking (left right) and marching ....

in effect, a curvaceous logo aspires (neurologically, even) "higher" while a jagged logo operates below this level;

I am not in a position to generate survey data on the current Olympics logo (and or though it is noteworthy that a google search does not readily point to
data-based assessments of its "meaning").

It may not be too late, even close as we are to the event itself, to inform ourselves better as to how (and if possible, why) people perceive the logo in the way they do, and if and whether their perceptions of the Olympics themselves are coloured at all by the "flavour" of the logo. One might even hope that the designers themselves had even a modicum of empirical data to show that their logo was "creatively" perceived by those who see it.

(my experience in the story of the iTC logo (see the attachment) - also sold by Wolff Olins in the early 1990s - suggests that they can or do do without empirical underpinning of their design(s). I therefore guess that they may not have any such evidence on the Olympic design).

A new study might show that the logo is benign - even positive. One would then withdraw one's concerns, above.
I would be willing to bet on something less simply positive, however.