Should the orginal WTC towers be rebuilt?

[Nutmegger]

Poll question: Should the orginal WTC towers be rebuilt?

http://www.rebuild-the-towers.org/main.html

From the Mission Statement: We pledge to do all in our power to bring clarity to the rebuilding debate. We will use every ounce of imagination and resolve we can muster to amplify the will of the people. We will be unrelenting in our efforts to expose any individual or group that would bring a dishonest or self-serving agenda to Ground Zero. We promise to persevere until the voice of the people is honored and our skyline is restored.

Other site of interest: http://www.twintowersalliance.com
_____

The Freedom Tower will be a lasting memorial to the victims of the September 11 attacks as well as an iconic building. SOM are following the proposals outlined in Daniel Libeskind's memory foundations master plan to create the structure.

Incorporating the highest standards of design, safety, engineering and building technology, Freedom Tower will re-establish New York City as the epicentre of high-rise skyscraper design and serve as a symbol of the revitalisation of lower Manhattan.

At 1,776ft, Freedom Tower will be over 400ft taller than the twin towers and over 100ft taller than Taipei 101 in Taiwan, currently the world's tallest building.

http://www.designbuild-network.com/projects/freedom-tower-ny/

[valerief]

1. No towers. Plain old office buildings will be just fine. n/t

[Radio_Lady]

6. Four towers are supposedly going up, according to news last

week. All different designs.



http://writenow.wordpress.com/2006/09/08/new-towers-at-ground-zero/

[ellenfl]

2. yes, but they should be built better than the old ones. eom

[mwooldri]

3. Why not the Freedom Tower? (nt)

[Warpy]

11. How about because it's a big ugly thing sticking way up

above its neighbors, as completely out of scale as the original WTC towers were? How about because another monstrosity like that is going to have a big fat target on it?

Surely they can do lower buildings with a bigger footprint, a memorial at the center.

I sure as hell wouldn't want to work in another overtall monstrosity like that. It's just too appealing a target, and it's only a matter of time before somebody else takss a shot at it.

[Ignacio Upton]

18. ...And so is everything else in NYC

The Empire State Building, Chrysler Building, Rockefeller Center, Times Square, the subway system, Yankee Stadium, Shea Stadium, Grand Central Terminal, and just about every highrise.
I don't want to live in fear whenever I go to New York. New York has been a city of tall buildings and skyscrapers...since building skyscrapers became possible from an engineering standpoint.
I know that what I'm about to say sounds Freeper-esque in rhetoric, but I have been saying it ever since 9/12/01, long before this term became perverted by the BushBots: to leave that site empty with nothing but a necropolis is to give a victory to those who committed this act of mass murder.
Despite the fact that what I said has been perverted by Bush, I still believe it. I want to repair the skyline for the same reason that I oppose enroachment into my civil liberties through the Patriot Act and the FISA-violating wiretapping program.

[Warpy]

28. Uh, what did you not understand about a larger footprint

and lower building? NYC doesn't need another damn phallus sticking up where those towers once stood.

Like I said, I'd never work in it. It's a raised finger to the rest of the world, and the rest of the world would know it.

I think the people who were murdered there deserve better.

[AnnieBW]

4. No - the TT were kinda fugly

If you ask me, they had no archetectural value. If they weren't so tall, they'd just be two more office buildings. I don't particularly care for "Freedom Tower", but it's at least distinctive.

[Ignacio Upton]

5. I used to follow the whole rebuilding process obsessively...

...Until about the second or third Freedom Tower redesign when I realized that things were going too slow and that there were too many cooks in the kitchen, so I became less interested and somewhat apathetic. I have always been a supporter of building something tall on the site again, be it replicas or something new but tall. The Freedom Tower wouldn't have been so bad were it not given such a jingoistic name by Pataki. Also, I think that the smaller building surrounding it (the new 2 WTC and new 3 WTC) look better, architecturally-speaking than the FT does. Richard Rogers' building (3 WTC) is my favorite.

[Radio_Lady]

8. Here's a rendering of the southern tip of Manhattan with the new buldings.

[Ignacio Upton]

23. BTW, THREE of those towers will be taller than the Empire State Building

Scroll down a bit to see a height comparison.
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=115054

[uppityperson]

7. No towers, just buildings, with a memorial park

"Freedom Tower" name is too political, too propagandish since destroying the original towers brought us less freedom, thank you bushites. It reminds me of 1984, all talk, no substance, your chocolate ration has been increased.

Edited to add, or how about a health care fund for people who helped and got exposed to bad stuff, or help businesses that were hurt there?

[Ignacio Upton]

10. OKC is a good example of how NOT to do a memorial

It spawned this whole culture of "every site of a murder is unlivable" as if the ground had been wasted by a nuclear bomb and thus permantely unlivable. The memorial/family groups in the OKC rebuilding debate went too far in demanding that not only the Murrah Building not be rebuilt, but that the ADJACENT STREET be shut off due to the scared ground premise. This "literalism" over the sites of people's death's is an extremely grandiose way of planning and completely irrational. We don't see Israelis, Palestinians, Lebanese or Iraqis doing any of this whenever their countrymen are killed in attacks by opposing sides. Why should we leave a big hole in the ground for that reason?
I'm with the 9/11 Family Groups on almost everything else (especially the Jersey Girls on the 9/11 Commission and support for medical issues regarding that toxic air the EPA lied to us about) but on the issue of the memorial, the activist groups have gone too far and have made unreasonable demands for use of the site. For example, the whole "sacred ground, down to bedrock" concept and the idea of limiting the rebuilding of underground infarstructure. The memorial's price tag went up astronomically last year in part because of some of the demands the memorial activists made.

[uppityperson]

16. I haven't been there, haven't seen it in person, just heard some

So I guess I should not compare. Thank you for your insight about it. Changed my previous post since I don't know enough to make the comparison.

I wish they would just rebuild something useful, and make a memorial park of some sort, small is fine. If they have extra money, make a health care fund, or something. Make it meaningful, but useful. I am tired of lack of substance, the "look" being more important than what it is. If that makes sense.

[Ignacio Upton]

21. There's a right way, and a wrong way to memorialize

The right way is to make something poignant and simple...something that sums up and conveys our thoughts, like the Vietnam Vets Memorial and the basic reflecting pools that will outline the towers' footprints.
The wrong is to create a "memorial package" with various symbols and various locations. Our culture has become so grief-obsessed over the last generation or two, that we have trended in this direction more. The OKC memorial had all sort of symbols, from reflecting pools, to a "survivor tree" to arches showing the minutes right before, and right after the blasts. As well as a private area for the families and a preservation of the chain-link fence that surrounded the Murrach site.
The WTC Site appears to be heading in a similar direction. The families got their own private grieving area (which makes no sense, because will their great-grandchildren or great-great-grandchildren really feel anymore attached to the victims than we already are? What about in 200 years from now? There will be so many descendents that it will be impractical...assuming that the WTC Site doesn't get submerged by Global Warming.) And in addition to seeing the outlines of the towers' footprints in reflective pools, there's talk of preserving a concrete staircase nearby what was once 5 WTC. And you'll also be able to go underground a view the freakin' BEDROCK and slurry-wall that propped up the towers. Nobody even gave a shit about either of those until Daniel Libeskind came along in December 2002 and unveiled them in his plan. Then suddenly, allowing the public to view that retaining wall became a top priority.
...Can't we just have the two reflecting pools without the "memorial package?" Visitors in a generation from now will want to see something simple, and something that conveys a direct message, not some amorphic collection of symbols that mean so much yet so little.

[Dem2theMax]

41. Comment inside:

"We don't see Israelis, Palestinians, Lebanese or Iraqis doing any of this whenever their countrymen are killed in attacks by opposing sides. Why should we leave a big hole in the ground for that reason?"


Maybe because, sadly, the Israelis, Palestinians, Lebanese and Iraqis are having their land, buildings and most of all, their people, blown to bits every day. It hasn't happened to us very many times and maybe we WANT to remember.

OKC is a beautiful memorial. I don't know how anyone could say otherwise. Maybe the families didn't handle all of the decisions/demands in a perfect way, but who is to say (I know, YOU) what the perfect way is? WE didn't lose loved ones. THEY did. Their voices should be heard over ours. Period.

[Ignacio Upton]

49. Tell that to the residents of the nearby neighborhoods

David Stanke is an example. His apartment across the WTC Site on Liberty Steet, was completely damaged, and it took him TWO YEARS before he could finally move back into his apartment. I agree with his sentiment regarding the memorial debate:
http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_117/talking%20point.html

The memorial activist groups have gotten plenty of the issue of the memorial. If you leave sites of the attacks to family members, they will exert their grief in the wrong ways. Keeping a 16 arce hole and necropolis in Lower Manhattan filled with all sorts of semi-meaningful symbols, will not make up for their loses. Rebuilding and making a positive memorial will help, but so will carrying out the victim's memories on this Earth. That means campaigning for better emergency responses systems (like getting better radios for firefighters.) That means getting more Homeland Security funding for places in danger. And that mean finding out the truth of 9/11, and helping the rescue workers who were lied to. Collectively, doing those things will do more to honor the victims of 9/11 than a memorial package will (see one of my previous posts for the my term "memorial package.")

(I may sound a bit passionate in responding to your response post, to use a euphemism, but I've been following the rebuilding debate zealously since 9/11/01. I'm pretty opinionated on this issue.)

[democrank]

9. It`s a graveyard.

A simple, tasteful memorial is all that should be erected.

[leftofthedial]

12. Yes! But get this . . .

completely underground.

[Bonobo]

13. Yes. Fugly or not. And it should have started 5 years ago.

It would have been:

The best way to show that we were unconquered, brave and optimistic.

The best way to say "Nice try, bub" to the murdering bastards, whoever they were.

The best way to start to feel whole again, for NYC and for all of America.

We could have accepted all the beautiful outpourings of sympathy and love from the rest of the world.

We could have shown that we were better than them.

But we didn't.

We became insane murderers ourselves and destroyed ourselves and the best part of America the Dream.

[jayctravis]

14. I liked the idea someone wrote about rebuilding them except...

making one tower one inch shorter for every victim.

[Cameron27]

15. I'd love to see a concept

from an architect like Maya Lin who designed the Vietnam Wall Memorial.

A commercial building along with a memorial can co-exist beautifully, if the right designer is chosen.

[aikoaiko]

17. vulgar, I know, but it still makes me chuckle

no offense to this serious thread

[ChazII]

25. It makes me chuckle

as well.

[slackmaster]

55. Me three

It would be inappropriate of course, but it is funny.

[BattyDem]

19. Rebuild

Make all the necessary improvements for strength, security, etc. and make each tower one floor taller than the old ones. It would show the world that we're not afraid and we're not going to let anyone take away what is ours. It would be like saying, "You knocked them down? Fuck you! We're putting them back and we're making them better than ever!"

[flaminbats]

58. we can still defeat those terrorists

rebuilding those towers would make those attacks another meaningless footnote in history. Nothing would do more to honor those who died on 9/11, while also demonstrating the unbeatable spirit of our people.

[Liberal Veteran]

20. I would love to see a more inspired building though.

In a real way, the former towers defined the cityscape of New York through a good portion of our lives.
However, they weren't really the most inventive looking buildings and if it had only been one tower I don't know that it would have made the statement a pair did.

This new design sorta blends in. I don't really like it. I'd like to see a really bold design that will give the city another icon that people will identify with NYC.

[Blue_In_AK]

22. And create a new target?

Please...

[Ignacio Upton]

24. NYC subways are more of a target than skyscrapers

It take a lot less effort to blow up a subways a la the London Bombings, than it does to pull off anothe r 9/11. And hopefully by the time these towers are complete we'll have a competent President again.

[Blue_In_AK]

30. Still, I think something a little less obvious

might be more appropriate than monster towers -- but I'm just a hick Alaskan, so what do I know? :shrug:

[USA_1]

26. NO TOWERS AT ALL!

Donald Trump has already gotten millions in subsidies.

Let's just build a memorial there. Nothing else.

Let Trump earn his money rather than getting subsidized all the goddamn time.

[Ignacio Upton]

31. Trump doesn't have anything to do with the project

His only REMOTE connection to the broader rebuilding process was that he came out last year in favor of building a near-replica of the Twin Towers. Larry Silverstein is the developer and lease-holder of the site, and he will rebuild.

[tomreedtoon]

27. Leave a big freaking hole in the ground!

There should be no change to the site as it exists. It should be kept in perpetuity, for the same reason that Germany has to keep concentration camps in the same condition.

The Pit, as I like to think of it, should represent the results of entrusting the government to conservatives, big business and jingoists. The only addition would be signs around The Pit showing Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, Ashcroft, the Torture Guy, Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Hannity. And probably the Pink Tutu Democrats who supported them like Kerry and Lieberman, who supported the Republicans by refusing to fight them (unless they were whoring for votes).

The people should look at the devastation of The Pit, look at the signs and say, "Never again."

[Ignacio Upton]

32. So every time we get attacked we should just leave ruins?

Germany rebuilt most of its areas, especially places like Dresden and Berlin. It is possible to have both a memorial and buildings.

[Cleita]

34. According to you, there is going to be an

"every time we get attacked"? I hope not.

[Ignacio Upton]

36. God Forbid of course

But I fail to see the reason for quarantining off 16 acres because the attack. The idea of land quantity=quality in honoring the dead is a fallacy.

[Cleita]

37. Yes, but to rebuild it for commercial purposes is crass.

Some land needs to lie fallow.

[Ignacio Upton]

40. I disagree

To make the entire site a necroplis sends the message "we didn't rebuilt because we chose to focus on how the victims died, and not how they lived." I see rebuilding as healing in of itself, in addition to building a memorial to remember those who died.

[tomreedtoon]

43. YES! Leave Ruins! Here's why!

If it hasn't occurred to you, the fact that nothing has been built on the Ground Zero site, five years after, is an indication that there SHOULD be nothing left there but a big freaking hole.

The proposed buildings look hideous, will be an economic boondoggle like every construction in New York City, will create a wonderful new target for the next generation of terrorists (the ones that Bush is helping to create right now) and will benefit the people of New York not one bit. Just more Trump-priced real estate to rip people off. Yes, I'd like to have an office located at the place where some poor terrified woman leaped sixty stories to her death. Sign me up for that.

The proposed memorial park will be nothing but a celebration of Bushism. A place for Repubican photo-ops for the next several Republican Presidents, and a place for Democrats to be easily embarassed and frightened into silence (which is why the next several Presidents will be Republicans).

But a hole...a hole is natural. In Orlando, we had a number of sinkholes that destroyed car dealerships and a municipal swimming pool several years ago. Those places are now lakes. They bring wildlife (not likely in New York, unless you count floating murder victim bodies as wild life, but at least it's better than leaving them on land). There being so much that isn't natural in New York, it might be a blessing.

And when some little kid asks, "Daddy, why is there a big hole there?" Daddy can point to the signs I mentioned, showing pictures of Bush (one of his most idiotic photos if possible) and he will say, "Because I was stupid and voted for somebody more stupid than I was. And I promise to you that I will never vote that way again."

[TexasProgresive]

29. A memorial built over the footprints of 1 & 2

And move the UN to the site. This is not my original idea. It was the father of one of those who died that came up with that idea. It just struck me as so right on.

No commercial use in the complex.

[Cleita]

33. The place needs to be made into a memorial.

There is too much tragedy imprinted on the site. To turn it back into a commercial enterprise will only cause more tragedy. Every building going up will have accidents and deaths. It will take centuries to dissipate the energy. Okay, I know I'm talking like a nutjob now, but making a memorial out of it is the only way to dissipate the energy faster by honoring those who died there first.

[Ignacio Upton]

35. Almost half of the site is already being set aside for the memorial

Rebuilding and remembering are not mutually exclusive.

[Cleita]

38. Rebuilding for commercial purposes will be a mistake.

Rebuilding can be done but not for profit, not for many decades. Any rebuilding for those purposes will be met with a lot of accidents and setbacks.

[razors edge]

39. take the money and build a homless shelter

on the spot. use the leftovers for education and relocation.

[Selatius]

42. Anything that is HIGHER than surrounding office towers WILL BE TARGETED

OK, some religious nutjobs knock down your office tower because it's the biggest, most visible thing in the sky. You're going to respond by spending even more amounts of money to make an even bigger target?

[Nutmegger]

44. Kick...

:kick:

[lumpy]

45. Area should be a public park as a reminder.

Too soon it will be forgotten otherwise.

[Monk06]

46. Yes they should be rebuilt but Larry Silverstein should not be allowed

to buy them and insure them against terrorist
attacks and Marvin P. Bush should not be allowed
to handle security.

[Ignacio Upton]

48. I call bullshit on the Loose Change account of that

Marvin (who's still a scumbag through association in the Bush family) left that security company's board of directors in June of 2000. And If Silverstein had really committed insurance fraud, why did he rebuild 7 WTC? And why is he planning on building new towers on the main 16 acre site? If he was really trying to profit off of the attacks he would have taken the money and ran.

[Monk06]

50. I'm not going by Loose Change. Silverstein tried to claim close to

$7 Billion in insurance but got pushed back to $3 Billion
when he was taped saying he allowed the NYFD to "pull"
the building. That was a MSM story NYT and Bloomberg IIRC.

As far as Marvin goes there are other sources re his activities
outside the tin foil Loose Change loop,

http://www.democracyrising.us/content/view/57/81/

Marvin Bush is also an adviser at HCC Insurance, formerly called the Houston Casualty Company, one of the biggest insurance carriers for the World Trade Center. Bush was a director at HCC, which has benefited financially from the 9-11 insurance bailout legislation passed by Congress at the instigation of the White House. The departure of Marvin from the HCC board was announced the same day, November 22, 2002, as the passage of the bill.

[Ignacio Upton]

51. He claimed $7 billion because he wanted more money to rebuild

Rebuilding the complex will cost an awful lot of money. So much so that Silverstein was dependent on rebuilding with his insurance proceeds.

[Monk06]

53. Silverstein's only asset prior 911 was a $200 million lease and

an insurance policy underwritten by :


http://www.democracyrising.us/content/view/57/81 /

Marvin Bush is also an adviser at HCC Insurance, formerly called the Houston Casualty Company, one of the biggest insurance carriers for the World Trade Center. Bush was a director at HCC, which has benefited financially from the 9-11 insurance bailout legislation passed by Congress at the instigation of the White House. The departure of Marvin from the HCC board was announced the same day, November 22, 2002, as the passage of the bill.

Silverstein came out of it with $3+ billion cash

Plus he is on record saying that he gave the NYFD approval
to 'pull' WT7 meaning demolish the building.

How do you demolish a 60 story building in six hours when
out of 5 NYFD battalion chiefs one is missing, one is dead
and the other is on the phone buried in rubble asking for
help? Meanwhile 200 firefighters are dead.

You don't have to be a tin foil hatter to say something is
rotten in the state of Denmark

[aaronbees]

47. I think New Yorkers should decide....

9/11 occurred in their city, and they should decide what's best for them. I do, though, actually like the Freedom Towers, even if the name is a bit much. I also like the idea of a peace memorial. But I'd leave it up to the good folks of a great city who endured that tragedy to decide what's best as a way to remember and move forward.

[kybob]

52. no buildings

rebuilding on the site to me is akin to raising the USS Arizona. just doesn't seem right. use the space for a suitible Memorial Park, where people can go and reflect in peace.

[slackmaster]

54. Taller, stronger, with a giant hand flipping the bird toward Mecca

:nuke:

[negativenihil]

56. Other -

I think Trump has the right idea - the same basic buildings, just one floor taller!

[Nutmegger]

57. Kick for more votes...

:kick: