View Poll Results: Should the International Freedom Center be built on the WTC site?

Voters
43. You may not vote on this poll
  • It should be built right where its planned on the WTC site.

    17 39.53%
  • It should be built but off the WTC site.

    9 20.93%
  • It should be built in some other place of the WTC site.

    7 16.28%
  • It should not be built at all, anywhere.

    10 23.26%
Page 16 of 53 FirstFirst ... 612131415161718192026 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 240 of 789

Thread: WTC Memorial Pavilion - Visitors Center - by Snohetta

  1. #226
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
    ...The Freedom Center was an ill-defined concept...
    Actually, it wasn't. The president defined the attack as being perpetrated by "people who hate us for our freedoms." The people who commited the crimes believed they were patriots in the defense of their belief systems. Although the curatorial content can be debated, the relevance of this center and the relevance of questioning America's role in the world at the time of the attack is very appropriate. To show charred remains without context, is not so much ill-defined as it is propaganda. Although the severity of these attacks was shocking, the fact that we as a nation were on the receiving end of these attacks was not - especially under the George W. Bush and the professed neocon philosophy, which was a pronounced threat to other countries around the world.

    The Freedom Center was the only true "educational" aspect of this project as it proposed to engage visitors in critical thinking as opposed to weepy remembrance. Considering the process we are seeing, I imagine the next step will be to erect a wax museim where we can watch life-size replicas of people hanging out the windows of the recreated top floors of the towers and see them jump to an explosive death. What we are seeing is perverse and disgusting. It would be like forever keeping chalk outlines on the streets of New York for every person ever murdered over time.

    The loss of th Freedom Center is just terrible. It was the only thing that brought context and counterbalance to an event that is going to be rewritten as some patriotic American moment - which it was not.

  2. #227

    Default

    What you are describing is not a Freedom Center, but a 09/11 Interpretive Museum, a learning center for the event. That narrow scope would not require 275,000 sq ft. The museum broadened (and diluted) its scope to well, fill up the space. The Freedom Center could have been built anywhere.

    A 09/11 learning center should have been part of the memorial museum.

    What the memorial groups are objecting to is what they view as objectionable content; I am objecting to the museum's mission - the struggle for freedom.

    That's the history of humanity.

  3. #228
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    Hmmm. I guess I might be describing it that way, although I don't see it that way. In some ways I have come to expect the "9/11 Memorial & Museum" to be hijacked by the families as well to tell THEIR story as opposed to THE story. That would seem to be more of an "interpretive" center than anything else.

  4. #229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynRider
    Although the severity of these attacks was shocking, the fact that we as a nation were on the receiving end of these attacks was not - especially under the George W. Bush and the professed neocon philosophy, which was a pronounced threat to other countries around the world.
    No offense, but this is left wing crapola. First, as of 9/11/01, GWB had not yet invaded Iraq or Afghanistan yet; indeed, he ran for office on an isolationist philosophy that should have been comforting to all the Islamo-fascists out there. Second, the 9/11 tactics were in the planning stages for many years, years in which Bill Clinton was president, so if anyone's foreign policy is to blame, his is the one. Note also that the Clinton presidency was filled with ever-heightening attacks from Al Qaida -- Sudan, Yemen, Kenya, etc. Third, even blaming Clinton's foreign policy would be wrong. Clinton's two main military interventions -- Bosnia and Kosovo -- were interventions on the Muslim side, against the Christian side.

    In short, your blame America (or blame Bush) propaganda is just sad.

  5. #230

    Default

    Blame for 9/11 cannot be fully laid on any single or recent President, as US involvement (oil, war, regime changes) with the Middle East dates back 60 years and over several presidential administrations.

  6. #231

    Default

    We must have at the site a self-blaming viewpoint where the 9/11 attacks are seen as justified, reasonable and proportionate retribution for the collective foreign policy wrongs done in our name over the past 60 yrs. We the people have the blood of those 3000 citizens on our collective hands, we are all guilty.

    Does that sound about right?

    (Kind of a bummer message, huh? Have the terrorists won if this is the message of the memorial?)

  7. #232

    Default

    That's a bit dramatic. No one said that 9/11 is justifiable. Debating the cause and getting at the truth is different from justifying the event.

    At best we can learn from past mistakes. A truly enlightened people would look beyond killing the people who have the potential for such an act of violence. Instead learn from the past and stop the seed of motivation right where it begins.

  8. #233
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BPC
    ...In short, your blame America (or blame Bush) propaganda is just sad.
    Anyone remotely familar with PNAC and their manifesto knew that once the neocons got in office it was only a matter of time before the US would be sending troops to "install democracy". For our enemies, it was a matter of hit or get hit. They hit first.

    What happened under Clinton, happened under Clinton. As to your theories on what was planned regarding 9/11 and when, I guess we'll just have to wait for a trial by jury to determine the facts. However, the Downing Street memos, ignored in the US media, offered pretty strong evidence that, although we didn't invade Iraq or Afghanistan before 9/11, we had a plan of attack against Iraq all laid out - waiting for the opportune moment. You think it was all inevitable. Everything a shocking coincidence. I believe the Bush administration knew it was coming, allowed it to happen, and used it to advance a neocon agenda.

    What you believe is no more true than what I believe. Who you choose to believe are no more credible than who I choose to believe.

    When we restore law in this land and repeal the PATRIOT Act, maybe we'll have a trial or two to actually establish the facts. In the meantime, all of the "material witnesses" to what actually happened are being flown by this government to foreign soil for torture.

    "Left wing crapola" is what the folks in the red states are facing in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Bush and his team are really innocent, harmless pussycats? Tell it to the floating corpses in Louisiana and the body bags in Iraq.

    And, he was only able to do it by stealing an election - twice!

    Now, back to our topic.

  9. #234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynRider
    What you believe is no more true than what I believe. Who you choose to believe are no more credible than who I choose to believe.
    No, what I believe is based on the facts as reported by reputable historic, academic and journalistic sources. What you believe is based on conspiracy internet sites. They are not equivalent, just like evolution and "intelligent design" are not equivalent. You, of course, are free to believe what you want, but I am also free to call you on your BS. As someone who lived through one horrible terrorist attack that destroyed my community and my home and left me displaced, I can no longer laugh off idiotic Islamist propaganda and let it go unchallenged, because the militant Islamists threaten to undermine civilization and all that is good in the world, and turn us back to the dark ages. You don't like Bush, fine. I don't either. But the militant Islamists hit us under Clinton (several times), they hit us under Bush, and they surely will hit us under our next dozen presidents, whether you personally like those presidents' political affiliations or not. Unless we can separate ourselves from obnoxious partisan politics and get real about the enemy who is trying to destroy us, we are all going down the tubes.

    Which is actually (bring us back to our topic) one of the reasons why the 9/11 memorial is a bad idea. War memorials have always been built AFTER the war was over. Here, our war with the militant Islamists (not the war on "terrorism") -- or rather, there war with us -- has barely begun. It is as if we put up the Pearl Harbor memorial in January 1942. Of course, there were apologists for the NAZIs in WWII as well ...

  10. #235
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Public Input Dies With Freedom Center

    by Barry Owens and Etta Sanders
    Tuesday October 4, 2005

    http://www.tribecatrib.com/


    When Gov. George Pataki pulled the plug on the International Freedom Center at the World Trade Center site late last month, he brought an end to the tabloid sniping and angry protests by opponents of the institution.

    And, as it turned out, he shut the door on community input as well.

    Pataki's announcement, delivered at 5 p.m. on Sept. 28, came exactly an hour before a planned public meeting at P.S. 234 among the Freedom Center's organizers, Community Board 1 members, and interested local residents. The presentation by the International Freedom Center (IFC) would have been the first one for the public since the institution's concept was championed by Pataki in 2001.

    Luc Journe, 27, an urban planning student from Paris, arrived early. He read the sign that had been posted on the school's doors announcing the cancellation of the meeting, and shook his head.

    "They didn't want to discuss whether it was a good idea to build all that office space, either," he said, referring to the commercial buildings planned for the trade center site.

    For his post-graduate work Journe is studying the planning process for the site's redevelopment.

    "My thesis is that they are pretending to allow for participation, but they don't really want participation," he said. "I guess that is the messy part of democracy."

    When Harold Reed, chairman of the community board's Arts and Culture Committee, arrived, he, too, pronounced his disappointment.

    "I came with an open mind," he said. "I just wanted to hear both sides."

    The Freedom Center was originally discussed by the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC) as a living memorial where the story of Sept. 11 would be couched in the context of the global struggle for freedom.

    But critics of the IFC, notably some relatives of Sept. 11 victims, said that the six acres where the trade center towers had stood was no place for world politics, and that the only stories that should be told there are those of the day's victims and heroes.

    Earlier in the month, IFC executives presented a report detailing the programming they were planning for the museum. John Whitehead, the corporation's chairman, had warned in August that programs construed as offensive to family members would put the center's place at the site at risk.

    In his announcement evicting the IFC, Pataki said, "There remains too much opposition, too much controversy over the programming of the IFC and we must move forward with our first priority, the creation of an inspiring memorial to pay tribute to our lost loved ones and tell their stories to the world." He added that the LMDC would work with the IFC to find an alternate site.

    "We do not believe there is a viable alternative place for the IFC at the World Trade Center Site," the center's executives, Tom Bernstein, Peter Kunhardt and Richard Tofel, said in a statement released shortly after Pataki's announcement.

    During a public workshop on Sept. 19 on plans for a memorial museum separate from the cultural center, Diane Horning said her opposition to the IFC was not about content, but about its placement on the site. Calling the position "non negotiable," she expressed frustration that the LMDC had not acted sooner to nix the center or to solicit public views on the matter.

    "It's been very dictatorial," she said. "There hasn't been a good faith cooperative effort. They don't want our input."

    On the sidewalk outside P.S. 234 others expressed similar complaints, along with questions about the future of the cultural center, now that its two prospective tenants are out.

    The Drawing Center, a Soho-based art gallery, withdrew its plans to occupy the building in August. It, too, was forced out by suspicions that it may show work that is "anti-American."

    "If they decide not to build a cultural center on the site, we'd like it somewhere else in Lower Manhattan," said Paul Goldstein, Community Board 1's district manager, who chatted on the sidewalk with several board members in what on this day would have to pass for public discussion.

    "There's a ton of places Downtown, just not at the site," said board member Meyer Feig, who said he opposed the proposed content of the IFC.

    "I never thought it made sense for it to be there in the first place," said Paul Sipos, another board member. "It was the only sensible thing that Pataki could do."

    "A missed opportunity," said Reed, who pined for the New York City Opera on the site. The opera, with the 92nd Street Y, was originally favored by the board to be part of the site.

    "They really need to stop the politics on this thing and get it done," said Joel Kopel, arriving late. "Enough is enough, already."

  11. #236
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    N40 44' 53.977" W073 59' 10.812"
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BPC
    No, what I believe is based on the facts as reported by reputable historic, academic and journalistic sources. What you believe is based on conspiracy internet sites. They are not equivalent, just like evolution and "intelligent design" are not equivalent. ...
    BPC,
    Wasn't the "debate" on ultimate culpability for 9/11 already resolved on this forum? This is getting tiresome.

    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynRider, Posted May 25th, 2005, 07:31 PM
    There has not been a trial with regard to the World Trade Center attack. It has never been established in a court of law with substantiated evidence and cross examination that Muslims or extremists were responsible. Murderers certainly, but try to hold back on repeating unsubstantiated government press releases. Seven of the men whose pictures we saw and whose names we were given by the US Government as conspirators and hijackers have been proven to be alive and well and had no part in the attack. The only threat we face is the failure of our own government to respond - thus facilitating an attack as some argue happened on 9/11. ...

  12. #237

    Default

    Try to focus the political discussion on a relationship with the the Snohetta Museum. BPC brought up a good point:
    War memorials have always been built AFTER the war was over. Here, our war with the militant Islamists (not the war on "terrorism") -- or rather, there war with us -- has barely begun. It is as if we put up the Pearl Harbor memorial in January 1942. Of course, there were apologists for the NAZIs in WWII as well ...
    Since there is no chance the memorial itself will be altered, and given that there is political opposition to "extraneous" exhibits at the museum; maybe the cultural building should tell the story of the entire war (sorry, there is no adequate name for this war).

    The soldiers seem to be the forgotten people at the memorial; easy to do when they don't die in our midst, broadcast live by the networks. All they get is a 30 second blurb on CBS.

    I sense another email to CB1.

  13. #238
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default

    This wasn't intended to be a war memorial, it's a memorial to those who died on September 11, 2001, and a replacement for the destroyed memorial for those who died in the '93 attack. The Arizona memorial has the names of those who died on that ship and commemorates those who died in the attack on Pearl Harbor, not everyone who was killed in the war.

    From the USS Arizona Memorial website:
    Suggestions for the memorial started in 1943....it started as a wartime desire to establish some sort of memorial to honor those who died in the attack.

    The logical place for a war memorial in the future is probably the Mall in D.C. like the National WWII Memorial is.

    So the site deserves some sort of memorial for the event, and it doesn't necessarily have to honor everyone who died in the war. Maybe this will be the logical place to tell the story of the entire war in the future, and if so, this building could provide that space, hopefully despite protests by family members.

  14. #239

    Default

    One thing I think that is interesting about the whole Memorial/Freedom Center debate is how self-centered it all is.

    It is self-centered on the micro level from the stand point of the families and there unending demands.

    It is self-centered from the viewpoint of the symbolism being self-serving to the politicians.

    It is even self-centered on the macro level. So many americans seem to think the attack was all about the US, whether it be the "they hate us for our freedom" drivel from the right or the "they hate us for being asshole bullies" from the left. Both sides seem to think it is all about us and if we were just somehow different or behaved differently none of this would have happened.

    I disagree completely.

    My personal opinion is that the attacks, before, after and including 9/11 are a propaganda tool aimed at the muslim populace as a whole. Attacking the US is simply a means to an end. We are nothing more than a tool in Al Qaeda's battle for the hearts and minds of the muslim world in order to raise them to power in the promised muslim caliphate and onward to world domination by the islamic faith, the "one true" faith in their eyes.

    The best analogy I can come up with is a child being bullied by a classmate. The victim of the bully often reacts in a way that it is all his fault, if only he were just stronger, more popular, less nerdy, nicer or whatever he wouldn't be victimized. The truth is that the bully himself bullies for his own reasons, the specific victim is simply an after-thought in most cases beyond surving the bully's purposes.

    It is just this "self-centeredness" by familes, politicians and americans in general that I find most disturbing about the whole thing. It is parochial and arrogant in the worst sense of the words.

  15. #240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GLNY
    BPC,
    Wasn't the "debate" on ultimate culpability for 9/11 already resolved on this forum? This is getting tiresome.
    I wasn't the one who raised it again, dude. You seem to be directing your post to the wrong poster. But if you let a new lie just sit there unaddressed, eventually it becomes the "truth."

Similar Threads

  1. Winter Garden of World Financial Center - Recent pictures
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 166
    Last Post: August 31st, 2016, 12:04 PM
  2. Rockefeller Center Christmas Tree
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: December 21st, 2010, 09:17 PM
  3. Building Art at Rockefeller Center
    By ZippyTheChimp in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: June 26th, 2009, 02:40 PM
  4. Jazz at Lincoln Center - Time Warner Center
    By Edward in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 16th, 2007, 12:47 PM
  5. Harlem Health Center - Perkins Eastman Architects
    By Derek2k3 in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 25th, 2003, 08:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software