CS, were you born without a funny bone? Because I think you can get one surgically implanted these days.
So much for freedom of the press, are there any other rights of the citizens of this country you would like to deny, in your feeble attempt to defend the actions of the LMDC?Originally Posted by davestanke
Ps: I thought you were a journalist? Shame on you for suggesting it.
CS, were you born without a funny bone? Because I think you can get one surgically implanted these days.
The New York Times has revealed that the LMDC has been in possession of a letter from Governor Pataki's senior advisor for counterterrorism that concluded that the design of the memorial leaves it vulnerable to a terrorist attack. This letter was sent to Stefan Pryor and John Cahill on 3/3. In a perfect example of what the LMDC perceives as its open and democratic process this letter was not even shared with the WTC Memorial Foundation until over a month later on 4/5.
This letter raises many of the same safety and security issues that we have been highlighting over the past few months. The letter also calls on the architects to consider revising several critical aspects of the memorial.
Even though we are concerned with the content of this letter we are even more concerned about what the LMDC did with this information.
Even though Mr. Pryor had this letter in his possession he never mentioned it when questioned at the 3/29 City Council Hearing about all safety and security issues.
Even when the senior executives of the WTC Memorial Foundation received the letter on 4/5 they did not let the public or the families know. So much for the open process!
Not only was this information withheld from the public and the families but it was withheld from the City Council.
Just a few weeks ago the LMDC withheld information about the first of the remains found at 130 Liberty for 5 days.
Our request to know where the debris from the Deutche Bank building is being sent has also been unanswered.
Our inquiry as to how the LMDC can continue to proceed when they appear to be in violation of the Urban Development Corporation Act 174/68 has also gone unanswered.
The LMDC continues to make its own rules and operates behind closed doors, keeping the public and the families out of important decisions.
We cannot allow this to continue.
Our elected officials should not allow them to continue because they are being kept in the dark as well.
I find the fact that the LMDC has screwed up every aspect of the rebuilding and the memorial not to be funny at all.
I also find that the LMDC's continuing to hide, mislead, deny, and outright lie about everything, in violation of the law, to be anything but funny.
What I do find funny, is that Pataki, in his incredible need for speed to rebuild at any cost, and showing a total lack of leadership, will be seeking nomination for President of the United States.
I do have a question or two that is deserving of an answer:
Who's opinion regarding the rebuilding, and the memorial should be taken seriously, and why?
I can't take the opinion of any person or group that has any official connection to the memorial seroiusly, because none of them can or will say what obviously needs to be said about the memorial.
I understand funny bones will not be permitted at the memorial site, but there will be a place to check them in.
Actually Zip, for some reason they keep setting off the metal detectors they have planned to install there.
I used the wrong icon to express my sentiment. It was actually meant as a criticism of going after the press for publishing leaks. The first part of the message was about the context of the note, which I believe it is important to understand and for the journalist to explain. The issue for the public is "Does the leak reflect an action to protect the public or is it simply an act of inter/intra agency fighting?" My sense is that it is the latter.Originally Posted by Cityslob
The last part was a shot at government efforts to control the press on bigger issues in the United States. I am very much against going after the press to trace down leaks, since I'm extremely suspect of governments use of power. I hope that clarifies my comments on the freedom of the press.
My apologies Davestanke
Such operations must freak the hell of local residents. I mean what would they think?!Originally Posted by lofter1
It sure as heck freaks me out sometimes.
Today I had another freakout: I was in a little whop on E. 4th between Lafayette and Bowery and HUGE explosion went off -- I mean LOUD and LONG. The whole building rumbled. Turns out that it was part of the blasting for for the new Water Tunnel (there is a shaftway for construction of the tunnel in an ex-parking lot across the street from the shop, next to the Old Merchants House). The shop owner said she's had to hear the blasts for months and despite warnings (whistles etc. prior to blast) it continues to freak her out each and every time.
For about 10 seconds I was sure that the horror show had returned.
The police processions used to line up on Church Street daily, part of a practice drill. The noise along Church and Bway is picking up. I've actually stopped reacting. I think I'd rather be feeling something, even a hint of alertness, than live with the determined numbness that has set in.
Lone Lawmaker Blocks Flight 93 Monument in Pa.
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 25, 2006; Page A01
For emotional wallop, there are few rivals to the windswept, grassy field outside of Shanksville, Pa., where United Airlines Flight 93 crashed on Sept. 11, 2001.
But for three years, that field has made do with a makeshift monument while one member of Congress, Rep. Charles H. Taylor (R-N.C.), has blocked a $10 million request to buy the land for a permanent memorial to the 40 passengers and crew members who overpowered hijackers bent on crashing their jet into the Capitol or the White House.
The families of the Flight 93 passengers and crew will be in Washington tomorrow, this time intent on challenging the chairman of the House Interior Appropriations subcommittee, who oversees funding for federal acquisition of property. With a major motion picture on the doomed flight premiering tonight, a showdown on the issue is the last clash that embattled Republicans want.
"We need to build a memorial for these people," said Rep. William Shuster (R-Pa.), whose district includes Shanksville. "These 40 people were the first counterattack of the war on terror, and they were victorious. We owe them a great debt of gratitude."
For Taylor, a large landowner in the mountains of western Carolina, the issue comes down to principle: The federal government is already the largest landowner in the country, and he believes that no additional tax dollars should go to more land buying for this or any other memorial. Beyond that, the families have committed to raising half the $60 million needed to build the memorial but so far have raised $7.5 million. Taylor is concerned that the federal government will be left holding the bag.
Neither Taylor nor his press secretary returned phone calls and e-mails yesterday. His chief of staff, Sean Dalton, would not comment.
GOP aides familiar with the issue said Taylor's resolute stance made sense shortly after passage in 2002 of an act authorizing the memorial. The original designs were expansive, the acreage perhaps excessive, and there were real questions about how many tourists would visit the remote site in Somerset County. Taylor infuriated some Flight 93 family members by suggesting a more fitting tribute would be a scholarship fund.
"We believe the land speaks to anyone who goes there and sees the site," said Patrick White, whose cousin Louis Joseph Nacke II died on Flight 93. "It is very moving."
Family members say they can show why about 1,200 acres are needed for access to the site and to show the drama of an airplane slamming into the earth at more then 500 mph. As for fundraising, Universal Pictures has promised to donate 10 percent of the gross receipts that its film, "United 93," garners this opening weekend.
House Republicans worry that Taylor is not doing himself any favors, standing against the memorial fund in the midst of a tough reelection campaign against former Washington Redskins quarterback Heath Shuler.
And the White House has joined the fray. This year, the request -- for the first $5 million installment -- came from President Bush and the National Park Service. Former White House chief of staff Andrew H. Card Jr. has leaned on Taylor, as has his successor, Joshua B. Bolten. On Thursday, Shuster wrote a "Dear Colleague" letter to House members to ratchet up the pressure, offering up a form letter addressed to Taylor.
All that pressure will come to a head early next month, when Taylor's subcommittee drafts the spending bill that will fund the Interior Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Forest Service for $26 billion for the fiscal year that begins in October. Republican aides are confident that a fight over 0.02 percent of that total will be resolved in favor of the memorial.
"We're going to have to prevail on our member from North Carolina to come to the right position on this," said one senior House Republican aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to counter a lawmaker's position. "This is not worth this fight."
"We're optimistic and hopeful this time around," White said.
9/11 kin ripped on lawsuit
BY PAUL D. COLFORD
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
A leading downtown business association and several community groups have taken a public swipe at the Coalition of 9/11 Families, contending the group has stalled redevelopment in the area.
They charge that the coalition, which is suing to stop work on the World Trade Center Memorial because of historic preservation concerns, would "bring the rebuilding process to a grinding halt."
The Alliance for Downtown New York, the West St. Coalition, Battery Park City United, the Tribeca Organization and six area residents add that the coalition would "leave lower Manhattan with an unhealed wound at its center for years to come and ... deny the memorial to all those who desire to see it built as soon as possible."
"I don't think there's any great love for the final memorial design," West St. Coalition Chairman John Dellaportas told the Daily News. "But we in the community really just want to get on with it."
The downtowners made the contention this week in a friend-of-the-court brief against the Coalition of 9/11 Families' lawsuit.
The coalition's suit says the work on the memorial that began last month will permanently alter the concrete slab where the north tower stood. The group, which has a consulting role on memorial design, also charges that the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. is in violation of state law requiring a review of design alternatives.
The planned memorial, called Reflecting Absence, calls for two sunken pools where the twin towers once stood. The design, which was the result of an open competition, was selected in January 2004. The coalition and seven of its outspoken members are suing the Port Authority, which owns the WTC site, the LMDC and the state Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. The downtowners' brief echoes the LMDC's contention that plans for the memorial never called for the slab to be totally void of construction. The case resumes before Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Shirley Kornreich today.
Originally published on April 27, 2006
Well, let's do this by deduction. We can dismiss the opinions of people who are still focused on the process leading up to the selection of this design, because it is "one note" and has not really evolved with the process. There is plenty to complain about, but the memorial (and I hate it myself) has evolved. As for it being a susceptible to a terrorist threat, everything in New York is susceptible. But, this is the Memorial. The competition is over. Pataki will be gone very soon and the dead are dead. Let's just get this hole filled up and put the community back together in some manner that improves on past mistakes.Originally Posted by Cityslob
The infrastructuure and foundations can at least be started, regardless of the struggles that face this thing going forward. What we can't do is dither away this time in a tug of war with people and officials who have tied off their end of the rope onto a tree and walked away. The reality is that the "coalition of families" still want to argue and mill about with no real vision.
I am glad to see these community organization's asserting pressure through a united front. I think that, with the memorial design for the most part complete (horrible and bombastic as it is), it is time forthe community to wringing out concessions from this project. I don't live down town, but I would prefer the landscaped area above ground to function as a "park", allowing people to experience the fun and joy of life as opposed to perpetuating the mental image of scar and disaster site we have now. It seems there will be plentiful room underground for reflection, mourning and silence.
Last edited by BrooklynRider; April 28th, 2006 at 11:42 AM.
Quote: It seems there will be plentiful room underground for reflection, mourning and silence.
I respectfully disagree, it is quite doubtful there will be enough room down there to change your mind, and given the waterfalls, voices, and pumps, the underground will be anything but quiet.
I think it would be more appropriate to say that it will be hell.
Then again there will be the empty symbolic vessel, how wonderful.