Should we be satisfied with one beautiful tower

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Mikes2pads, Sep 2, 2013.

  1. Mikes2pads macrumors regular

    Mar 24, 2012
    Ground zero is now respectfully and usefully beautiful. A great job was done by all who had a hand in its rebuild BUT, I for one see a missing piece of the beauty. 2 towers would have brought the physical aspect of the whole thing around full circle.
    These snakes focus on " two minus one = a degree of victory. Almost 3000 of us are missing but we had control over what went back up. These are idiots who decide these things. You can't tell me different. Americans , real Americans do better when we could pound our chests yelling no matter what the situation. iMO , This missing piece that we took big casualties on is not represented,therefore lost. I think it limits our healing...
    Yes the footprint pools are beautiful and do a beautifully respectful acknowledgement of the real estate once there. Everything was done top knotch by great people. It's a beautiful place now. Sacred ground but installing only one tower was a huge mistake. I mostly try to avoid looking to it.
    I get many who agree and quite a bit who are indifferent of the missing tower.
    With Sept 11 coming I wonder what people think. I for one never forget.
  2. obeygiant macrumors 68040


    Jan 14, 2002
    totally cool
    One tower will be fine I think.

    Here's a tour of 1 World Trade Center right now..
  3. AhmedFaisal, Sep 2, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 14, 2013
  4. rdowns macrumors Penryn


    Jul 11, 2003
    Stopped reading when I got to this tripe.
  5. MacNut macrumors Core


    Jan 4, 2002
    I don't think anything should have been built there other than a memorial. This was only done because of greed and money.
  6. wgnoyes macrumors 6502

    Jul 20, 2011
    What's wrong with money? Avarita bona est. I would like to have seen the twin towers restored, but I'll take this one.
  7. velocityg4 macrumors 601


    Dec 19, 2004
    I thought this was going to be a complaint thread about the new Mac Pro.

    As for whatever building goes up. I was going to say it is nobody's business but the property owner and investors. Then I was deeply disturbed to find out that it is owned by the New York Port Authority and being rebuilt by the city and Federal government.

    Frankly it should be left empty and all the area sold off to the highest bidders. As the government has zero business owning property that has to do with trade and commerce. Then those private entities should build whatever they want to build. With zero input from the public or city (besides meeting building codes).
  8. wgnoyes macrumors 6502

    Jul 20, 2011
    .... damn forum is changing my :D to a :d when I list it by itself...
  9. Dr McKay macrumors 68040

    Dr McKay

    Aug 11, 2010
    Yup, surely "Real Americans" do what they damn well like because its a free Country :cool:
  10. mobilehaathi macrumors G3


    Aug 19, 2008
    The Anthropocene
    Some restrictions apply; void where prohibited.
  11. Gasu E. macrumors 601

    Gasu E.

    Mar 20, 2004
    Not far from Boston, MA.
    I agree. We lost 3,000 people; we should mourn the 3,000 people, not some building. Rebuild the building and move on. Otherwise, it can remain a symbol-- of the success of the terrorists on 9/11. Let's not let them win by obsessing on the wrong thing. We had real tragic, losses that day.
  12. Menel macrumors 603


    Aug 4, 2011
    They didn't. The towers were left demolished, ground zero. In the place of the footprint of both towers are reflection pools monuments, one for each tower, with the names of each of the victims inscribed in the side of the pools.

    The new tower is at another location.
  13. Thraun macrumors regular


    Dec 18, 2008
    Abbotsford, BC
    What I'd like to see is a memorial for the far greater than 3000 Afghani and Iraqi innocent civilians that were murdered in the ensuing 'War on Terror'. I have a feeling I'm in the minority there though...
  14. mobilehaathi macrumors G3


    Aug 19, 2008
    The Anthropocene
    They are not mutually exclusive.
  15. eatrains, Sep 7, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013

    eatrains macrumors regular

    Mar 11, 2006
  16. smirking macrumors 65816


    Aug 31, 2003
    Silicon Valley
    You and me both. I have no patience for people who have a criteria for who's a real human being and who's a fake human being.

    He's a robot to me.
  17. snberk103, Sep 7, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013

    snberk103 macrumors 603

    Oct 22, 2007
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    Hoping to get to NYC this winter. Perhaps I'll drop by and see what is there now. Spent some time exploring the old WTC complex a long time ago (not just the two iconic towers) and once had dinner in the dinner way up high. Though it was cloudy that night, so not much of a view. Is there a restaurant in the new tower?


    That will be probably happen too, once the new MP is released. :)
    So, the "owners and investors" don't have a say in this case because it is the Port Authority? Ok....
    Port Authority in NY/NJ owns what is considered to be a 'public utility' - that is the facilities where the public accesses bridges, buses, ships, airplanes, and (in this case) trains, etc. The retail space that goes along with these facilities earns revenue that the Port Authority uses in the upkeep of these very expensive facilities. The fees it charges and the retail space revenue means the Port Authority is financial self-sustaining - that is to say - no tax-payer subsidies for operations.

    The general experience is that transportation hubs work best when owned by public or quasi-public entities (like the Port Authority) because - frankly - private owners screw it up too often. The general public (that is you and me) have demanded over and again that governments take over these vital transportation hubs after we get tired of bad service and exorbitant fees when owned by a private entity. imho only of course...
  18. MacCruiskeen macrumors 6502

    Nov 9, 2011
    I guess it depends on what you mean by "full circle." I mean, the WTC wasn't even there for very long in a historical context; maybe it would have been better to restore the neighborhood that was plowed under to make way for that to be built.

    Or to put it another way, rebuilding the towers as a kind of museum piece doesn't really make much sense. Better that whatever goes up suit some real need of the city in the future.
  19. phrehdd macrumors 68040


    Oct 25, 2008
    There should be at ground zero - a bbq restaurant with PORK ribs and such along with an open bar, and then maybe a gay disco with lots of booze. All things these scum jihadis hate. Please feel free to add to the list. For some you might want to throw in a Unitarian Church or a Jewish Temple and then some.
  20. DisMyMac macrumors 65816


    Sep 30, 2009
    Europe had the same dilemma rebuilding after WW2. A city can either pretend like nothing happened, or it can "move on" with a new look... Both plans seem like letting the bad guys win.
  21. zioxide macrumors 603


    Dec 11, 2006
    But they're not. Letting the bad guys win would be not rebuilding at all. Rebuilding, whether it's the same as the old design or a new design, isn't letting them win.
  22. yg17 macrumors G5


    Aug 1, 2004
    St. Louis, MO
    Yeah, the BBQ restaurant will go real well with the Jewish temple :rolleyes:
  23. decafjava macrumors 68030


    Feb 7, 2011
    Facepalm.jpg :rolleyes:

Share This Page