It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Freedom (Tower) is Insecure

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 04:12 PM
The New York City Police Department has issued a list of security concerns regarding the Freedom Tower, which is the central feature in the renovation plans for ground zero. They believe the current plans are not secure against attack, and need to be reworked. Three separate security firms have been contracted by various entities to identify concerns and suggest revisions to the proposed plans. The Police Department has been assured their concerns will be addressed before construction proceeds. (Must Register)

Security concerns outlined last month by the New York Police Department have set off a serious reassessment of plans for the former World Trade Center site. People involved in the rebuilding effort say that the revisions that need to be made to the site's most prominent feature, the Freedom Tower, could delay the start of construction from several months to a year.

As a result, the lead developer at the site, Larry Silverstein, has proposed seeking public financing - possibly hundreds of millions of dollars - to pay for addressing the Police Department's security concerns. Such a development would be a significant shift for a project that has relied largely on private insurance money.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Three lists of concerns were presented. One contracted by the Port Authority, one by the Lower Manahattan Development Council, and one by the Police Department. According to this New York Times article, the only one that raised serious concerns was the police department report. Perhaps they are being over-cautious? Or, on the other hand, perhaps the Port Authority is anxious to start seeing revenue from Ground Zero again, and is willing to cut corners to make that happen?

In any case, I am totally against any construction on the site. I believe it should be covered with dirt, and turned into a memorial garden. It's a gravesite now, not an office park. The unrecovered dead number in the thousands, it's for that reason the ground should be treated as cemetery ground. I made my feelings known when they asked New Yorkers what should be done about the land, but respect for the dead simply can't compete with the potential for revenue. I, for one, hope the bickering of bureaucrats keeps that land barren until the end of time.

[edit on 30-4-2005 by RANT]

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 04:44 PM
I would be interested in seeing what concerns they have. Are they worried about another attack?

I would agree also that the area should be treated with the due respect, but part of me also would like to see the completion off the Freedom Tower. It would be a symbol to our enemies that we will overcome, and they have not diminished our spirit.

[edit on 4/30/2005 by Hal9000]

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 04:55 PM

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:02 PM
I think they should build the two towers again, exactly the same only higher and stronger. Does anyone else share this opinion? I am not a fan of the freedom tower. I think any other design is inappropriate. *shrugs* owell

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:04 PM
I agree Event Horizon. I think it would send a message that we can get knocked down, but we'll only stand up higher and stronger. I think any deviation from this mentality shows that the terrorists can change us.

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:09 PM
Event, Jamuhn
Doesn't the thought of building a commerical property on the bones and ashes of more than a thousand un-reclaimed murder victims bother you?

I understand wanting to prove our resiliency, and I can understand wanting to rebuild the towers just to spite them, but the place is a graveyard for heaven's sake.

If I was a developer, I wouldn't touch that site with a ten foot pole.

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:17 PM
It is a perplexing question. One the one hand, we want to remember our fallen in that day, but on the other, we want to have the ability to move on. I guess the Freedom Tower is supposed to be the resolution between the two. Honestly though, while I feel saddened by that day, who they are is not the bundle of bones lying in that spot. They are our memories and their souls are unbounded in the universe. So, that is why I feel the way I do about that site.

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 07:06 PM
I understand what you mean Jamuhn, but I still think a certain amount of reverence and serenity is called for, due to the level of destruction, and the symbolic impact on our country.

All it really is currently is a feeding frenzy for contractors.

And that saddens me deeply.

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 07:48 PM
As a New Yorker who lost friends and colleagues in the attack, I would like the towers to be rebuilt. The only way for me to get on with my life is to move forward and not relive the event every time I have to go about my business downtown--especially in light of the circus that the WTC site has now become. I know many other New Yorkers that feel this way.

I live a few blocks from the site and it is total BS to call this place "hallowed ground." Droves of moronic tourists come and visit the big hole every day. I have never seen anyone shed a tear. Most people come here to buy crap--unlicensed NYPD & FDNY t-shirts, WTC replica statuettes, and calendars with a different glossy picture of WTC horror for every month of the year. Sometimes they stand there and take pictures in front of...nothing. It is the most assinine spectacle I have ever seen. Double-decker buses of gawkers crane their necks as they pass by, hoping to see the indentations in the street that the tour guide yelling into a megaphone informs everyone that were left when people jumped to their death.

These people don't belong here--they can buy their crystal-laser carved WTC memorial paperweights online and stay home.

And NOBODY wants this kind of element here. If it were turned into a memorial park, it would just get worse. The dump trucks carted away any remaining "bones and ashes" with the the scrap long ago. The busloads of t-shirt seeking tourists trampled over any meaning that this place had.

For those of us who were personally affected by 9/11, a memorial to remind us of what happened is unneccessary. It's time to move on and rebuild our lives. I'd rather have buildings fill this space that are reminiscent of the ones where I had my first big date, my senior prom, my first real job on the floor of NYMEX, where my Dad worked for 11 years (and escaped the first WTC bombing), where I took the subway everyday, where I had hundreds of meetings, where my two best friends worked, where I was proposed to, and where I was the maid of honor at my best friends wedding.... than have it infested with tourists that are just looking for something to buy.

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 10:07 PM
Make the lobby a wonderful memorial garden, with the tower built up.
You can reinforce both the messages of remembrance and resilience.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 01:39 AM
I like the new look of the trade center.

WyrdeOne - You obviously have strong believes that it should be a grave yard. But the fact is its Prime real-estate. Also the picture below shows what it will look like, and the original 2 towers footprints are not built upon, they will be pools, probably with some sort of small waterfall or fountain, and on the ground there will be a lot of trees, because they look good, provide a little privacy, and help block out traffic noise. I believe the site will also have a sort of a memorial, listing everyones name who died in the collapse.

lmgnyc - You see the other side...You would prefer that they hurry up the building and finish it so its not "topic #1", which makes sense, and you get mad when people come to visit New York and take pictures of "nothing" (ground zero), I see where your coming from however you dont understand the scale of its magnitude. The terrorists hit America, and the world, not just a couple buildings. All major events have being remembered in a major way, the last time that many Americans died at once was Pearl Harbor...which now has its own day on our callender (Dec. 7), when that many people cant just cover it up and move need to have it take some time to heal, and have it be remembered.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 05:51 AM
I agree that the spectacle caused by the tourists is sickening. The fact that the remains of the dead were carted away in dump trucks is even more upsetting. I sided with the firemen in their confrontation with the police, and I maintain that it was wrong to stop the recovery efforts when they did. I don't want to get into the ramifications of that, this is neither the time nor the place for a rant.

I too lost a good friend, a police officer, in the collapse. I almost lost my mother, she came home crying hysterically and covered with dust, she worked in the Amex building next door to Wall St. I have as much a right as any New Yorker to cast my vote, and I did so, I made my feelings known to the development board, and the mayors office. But I don't own New York, so I have to be content with simply having an opinion. It should be mentioned though, many, if not most, of the people I talked to thought a memorial garden was more fitting than a new office tower. I guess you and I talked to different people.

Anyway, my feelings are what they are. I make no apologies for them, nor do I hate people for their opinions on what to do with the land. The only people I detest in this equation are the contractors who are scrambling over the memory of the dead to get their piece of the action.

The tourists are disrespectful, I completely agree, but you have to remember, they saw the events on television. They have no real sense of the impact. It was like a movie for them, so they act as though they're visiting the set. I can't hate them for it, but their behavior makes me sick to my stomach, literally queasy.

I couldn't stand the way they laughed and smiled while taking pictures. It just seemed so alien to me. People were doing the same thing the very afternoon after the tragedy. It was so surreal..words can't describe the sinking feeling. The bums hawking souvenirs, the bums stealing cameras, the vacant expressions of the's just business as usual in New York. Nothing changed. Some people think that's a good thing. I disagree.

I've heard the prime real-estate argument many times. It has never managed to sway my opinion, because , many cemeteries are prime real estate, but that doesn't mean they can be developed and built up. Most major cities sacrifice a good portion of their land so that the dead can have a resting place.

[edit on 1-5-2005 by WyrdeOne]

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:01 AM
My wild guess is Mr. Silverstein is milking the twin towers job for all he can get.
There is nothing these guys won't stop at. Some people rob houses to pay for their fix others use mass murder to maintain theirs.
I bet the police fund will get a big donation this year.

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:15 AM
I was going to name this article, Larry Silverstein Needs More of Your Money.

But I thought it crass.

Seriously though.. The guy had an insurance policy on the towers, and he got it paid out twice despite common sense and the spirit of the law. Then, as though that's not enough, he says he doesn't have enough money to build a secure site despite the fact that construction costs were pegged at less than 1/3 of the original cost of the towers.

And on top of that, the biggest blindside of them all, the guy was losing tons of money on the trade center every year, because as far as I've been able to tell, he never rented out more than half of the office space available. The same thing happened to the Empire State building. It's unavoidable, when you build huge, gigantic buildings and charge exhorbitant rent, people are going to go elsewhere to find their real estate. The guy was likely leaping for joy when the towers fell, because he was relieved of an enormous financial burden.

Poor Larry Silverstein..the world cries for your tender soul.

Just another New York reptile, IMO. And I don't mean literally, just figuratively, as in predatory, cold blooded, fanged, venomous, yaknow...

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 03:01 PM
(going longwinded here)

Everything we are made of, every atom comes from the deaths of stars.

An anti abotionist in Spain was speaking and 3 times mistakenly used the word "we were once all feces" " . . . feces" " . . . feces" instead of fetus.

The funniest thing of all, I bet he was correct.

After 3.5 billion years of life we are built out of atoms that were once [many times] corpses & feces [and trees, birds and flowers too]. A good portion of the CO2 may have cycled through the Earth's crust with the magma.

We should have reverence for those who have passed before us,
But we should keep in the back of our minds just how trival we and they also are,
It helps us keep a healthy amount of humility.

Life is in many regards a 3D passion drama. It is both real and unreal.

I cannot heal the void in your soul left by passing loved ones. i can only hope time will heal that for you.

We are transitory forms in an infinite transition.
Find joy where you can.

In private moments talk to your lost friends and associates and tell them how you feel and why you are doing what you are. If they are there somewhere they may hear, if they are not it may help you deal with their loss better.

I hope they build something [attractive] there. And we all have some empathy for those still living who have suffered immediate loss there.

[the freedom tower is attractive. those periferal towers are pretty uninteresting boxes]

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 03:08 PM
I don't dispute the origins of life...

I would like to add something though.

Death feeds life, it always has. Wouldn't it then be more appropriate to seed life on the site as a memorial? To show what comes from rampant destruction is nothing but life? To show that nobody can destroy those who understand the nature of death?

I see this as a meaningful tribute. Trees, flowers, grass, animals, water, stone.

Towers of steel and glass are not beautiful to me. I understand that opinion isn't popular in modern society, but that's where I stand.

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 05:14 AM
It may be likely now that the entire new design will be thrown out in favor of rebuilding the old towers, perhaps just higher than the old design. I've always supported that, and now many people are coming out in favor of rebuilding, including Donald Trump.

[edit on 5/6/2005 by djohnsto77]

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 07:31 AM
Let the land be hallowed to those who lost loved ones.

Building better, stronger buildings, is to me asking for some kind of retaliation.
Revenue will only benefit the Government. I say stuff the Government and their shallow feelings to wards the people that died.
If the attack on the trade centers was as we are lead to believe, then the government would leave the land as it is. a memorial

Lets remember those that that died innocently, and keep the piece of land sacred for ever.

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 04:23 PM

Originally posted by Bikereddie

Building better, stronger buildings, is to me asking for some kind of retaliation.
Revenue will only benefit the Government. I say stuff the Government and their shallow feelings to wards the people that died.
If the attack on the trade centers was as we are lead to believe, then the government would leave the land as it is. a memorial

People wanted a tall new building there, for a statement. "knock us down, and we'll get back up".

An example is the the Murrah Federal Building, which was bombed in 1995, you probably know it simply as the Oklahoma bombing. Where terrorist blew up a bomb it a truck and took down half the building, it has since being cleaned up and a new better stronger more bomb resistent biulding was put in its place. The new building sits 2 blocks away from the original. There is now a memorial site where the building once stood, the same will go for WTC, The footprints of the old building will be a memorial.


posted on May, 6 2005 @ 04:59 PM
I hate to go off tracker here,but something I just dont understand.
I quote:
"Doesn't the thought of building a commerical property on the bones and ashes of more than a thousand un-reclaimed murder victims bother you?

I understand wanting to prove our resiliency, and I can understand wanting to rebuild the towers just to spite them, but the place is a graveyard for heaven's sake."

For decades we have done this on places called Indian Reservations.
Do you know how much land is developed on on Indian land,on their graveyards?Doesnt seem to bother people then,why now?
I myself have lived on 2 Idian burial grounds.Did the devolopers or residents care then?

I know what happened was terrible.But it seems people get more pro-active in todays world than they did years ago and decide to change their thoughts on certain events.If it effects them,they have a voice.If it didnt,they could care less.
We murdered many and took their land only to give back a small portion.We then built our luxury homes and big businesses on top of their loved ones.

Sorry to threadcap here,but people need to think about the past sometimes before making strong arguments such as this issue.

Just my $0.02

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in