rebuilding The towers of The World Trade Center

from msnbc

Rebuild them! (Keith Olbermann)

SECAUCUS - They were just a few feet tall and not even as solidly constructed as the old architectural models my father would sometimes bring home from the office for me when I was a kid - but they affected me in a way I never would have imagined.

The towers of The World Trade Center.

They were in our studios yesterday, plastic recreations of the originals, dragged in by groups who are taking advantage of the security concerns about the planned “Freedom Tower” to push the simple idea that the best way to memorialize the victims and restore the community is to re-build the towers exactly as they stood until three and a half years ago.

They’re absolutely right - with one minor caveat. One of the towers should be exactly 229 feet, four inches shorter than the other. I’ll explain why in a bit.

Before that, I have a confession to make. My first job in television was in the lobby of WTC #1 (as they used to call it; I never heard “North Tower” or “South Tower” until the day of the attacks). That’s where CNN’s New York bureau was located until 1984 - behind a two-story thick glass wall that, when we put the studio lights on, made us look like a very cheap high school science experiment.

I hated the place. I mean, if you work in the city’s tallest building and you’re stuck in the lobby, you develop a mean streak about it. The place was comically understaffed (the first two years, we didn’t have a receptionist - whoever was closest to the front door opened it, for staffers, visitors, and bag ladies alike). The commute - from almost anywhere else in the city - was wearying. The mall beneath the towers was a desert, and the neighborhood a wasteland (the dilapidated old West Side Highway still stood - kinda - out the doors to West Street, and the only amusements were those days when big hunks of it would crash to the roadway below). Worst of all, the air conditioning used to go out on an almost regular basis. You’ve never known heat until you’ve worked in a television studio without ventilation. Suits pressed while you wear them.

As I hinted above, my father’s an architect, so I had inherited the typical aesthetic condescension of his profession. What the heck was this Trade Center design supposed to be? The world’s largest salute to Oblong, perhaps - with the faux-gothic grillwork on the outside tacked on in a fruitless attempt to class up the joint.

I went in there to clean out my desk on the afternoon of Saturday, March 31, 1984. I would not return until September 11, 2001.

Suddenly, of course, the sense of drudgery that only a disliked workplace can represent had been transformed into the terrible meaning we all now intuit. And that gaudy grillwork - the only remains standing - stuck out against the smoking pyre of the place with the starkness, and the sudden antiquity, of the Roman Colloseum. The feelings, I needn’t tell you. 40 days as a street reporter in and around the scene of the catastrophe managed to reshape even my memories of the buildings I once dismissed as merely a great deal of weight sitting on top of the place I did my sportscasts.

And as the searing pain of those first few weeks gradually gave way to sadness and thoughts of what, if anything, should be placed on this most hallowed ground, the only thing, the only thing that seemed to make sense, was the towers recreated, as originally designed, oblong boxiness and all - with that one minor caveat about the 229 feet and four inches. I wasn’t among the voices insisting that only rebuilding it as it was would show we hadn’t been “beaten” - merely that all other forms of construction there would offend the sensibility, and diminish, not enhance, the remembrance.

I hadn’t thought much of it lately. The process of healing is a regretful one in a way. We’re designed to forget - not forget the whole, but merely the sharp edges. I hadn’t forgotten the Trade Center, nor my three years in it. Nor had I forgotten the fact that some creatures had managed to use two planes that each contained a friend of mine (Ace Bailey, the former hockey player and executive, was on one, and Tom Pecorelli, who had been one of the studio cameramen for my shows at Fox Sports, was on the other), to kill so many innocents in the buildings, including two college classmates of mine (Mike Tanner and Eamon McEneaney, who happened also to have been the quarterback and the receiver for Cornell University in the first sporting event I ever actually got paid to cover).

Those things hadn’t passed, and they won’t. Nor will the simple reality that it all happened - a reality that will still of a morning unexpectedly punch me in the stomach, or make me wonder for a moment if something so horrible could’ve actually occurred, or if I must have imagined it in a consummate moment in a dream from an endless night.

But I’d forgotten about the rightness of putting the Trade Center back where it stood. Forgotten it, until I saw that model yesterday, and it all came back to me.

The “Freedom Tower” design wasn’t somebody trying to be disrespectful; it was just the unavoidable project of an architectural trend in which everything must look like somebody just built it with a kid’s erector set. The Hearst/Conde Nast building is just getting finished not far from my home, and it’s that same style: Attach Beam A to Side Support B, Tap Support B with a pen to make sure it sounds as tinny as it looks.

But it was wrong.

The best way - the only way - to further soothe the pain is, as the proponents including Donald Trump are suggesting, to rebuild it as it was. Which brings me to my caveat.

I’d use the original blueprints and design the “new” Trade Center exactly as it had been. But I’d insist that one of the towers be exactly 229 feet, four inches shorter than the other. It’s an uncomplicated gimmick to guarantee remembrance. Because, as long as these new towers would stand, someone unaware would ask, “why is one of them shorter than the other?” Whereupon an old-timer could explain, solemnly, that the difference between the heights of the towers is intentional - it’s exactly 2,752 inches.

One inch for each of the victims.

It’s all the memorial we really need.

E-mail: [email protected]

Watch Keith each weeknight at 8 p.m. ET as he Counts down the best, the worst, and the oddest news stories of the day.

where's the 3,000 inch memorial for the victims in Bohpal, India that died from a chemical plant explosion because Dow Chemical, a US based company, thanks to the policies of the World Trade Organisation, doesn't have to follow any safety regulations overseas?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

where's the 3,000 inch memorial for the victims in Bohpal, India that died from a chemical plant explosion because Dow Chemical, a US based company, thanks to the policies of the World Trade Organisation, doesn't have to follow any safety regulations overseas?

---

what is wrong with you that you could respond to that article with this?

what wrong with me? what's wrong with people that they don't give a shit about things like this that happen every single day, but when God's Blessed America gets a tenth of it back, then it's a historic world tragedy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

what wrong with me? what's wrong with people that they don't give a shit about things like this that happen every single day, but when God's Blessed America gets a tenth of it back, then it's a historic world tragedy.

---

Keith Olbermann is American and worked in the towers and wrote a personal and moving at least to me article about what the memorial should be. if you feel like finding an eloquent article about a something in india then go ahead and share the information. i don't think you care about india. i think you just think it is cool to hate your country and it does not make cool to hate your country.

or how about the 150,000 people that died from the Tsunamis this year, which could have been prevented if the rich nations of the world were willing to drop the cash to outfit (poor) areas that are known to be along oceanic fault lines with the technology that's available that could warn them of upcoming shifts?
how long did people cry over that, a week or two?

They should rebuild the Towers as they were. It sends a powerful message. Dow Chemical should foot the bill in India. I don't see their misdeeds as an argument for or against the Twin Towers.

OEC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneEyedCat

They should rebuild the Towers as they were. It sends a powerful message. Dow Chemical should foot the bill in India. I don't see their misdeeds as an argument for or against the Twin Towers.

OEC

---

i agree with everything you wrote here. you have also brought up other issues of world politics on these boards in an interesting and informative way because you do care.

americans don't even give a shit about americans, evey year ten to a hundred times the number of WT victims die from guns and cars and alchohol. they only care when it's politcally convinient enough to justify economic advancement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

americans don't even give a shit about americans, evey year ten to a hundred times the number of WT victims die from guns and cars and alchohol. they only care when it's politcally convinient enough to justify economic advancement.

---

just because you don't care about anyone or anything doesn't mean that other people are all like you.

have you ever even worked an honest day in your life? i'm pretty sure the answer is no because you would have said before now if you ever had a job.

you talk about the poor but you have no sense of charity. when you talk about giving you mean other people giving because you are just a greedy child.

an honest work day in my life? No, not ever because the two years that I worked were for a greedy corporation. In that time I spent most of my money on food and on my freinds that didn't have jobs. the rest of the money I made I saved so that I can get by today without having to work. whenever I do buy anything which is rare, I usually give my change to charities like MS foundation and other child services. I guess I am not a perfect person, because unlike you apparently, I don't volunterr all my time and give all my money away to helping people. Since you are critisizing me for giving to the best of my ability, I assume that this is what you do, other wise you'd be an asshole and have no place to talk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by karyn

i agree with everything you wrote here. you have also brought up other issues of world politics on these boards in an interesting and informative way because you do care.

---

Thanks. I believe we all have areas of influence in which we will be most effective in promoting the causes of liberty and justice.

OEC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by karyn

just because you don't care about anyone or anything doesn't mean that other people are all like you.

have you ever even worked an honest day in your life? i'm pretty sure the answer is no because you would have said before now if you ever had a job.

you talk about the poor but you have no sense of charity. when you talk about giving you mean other people giving because you are just a greedy child.

---

wow...you just love to take cheap shots don't you...

i think if they built hotels on ground zero i'd crash there when i visit...ok seriously though i think they should just leave it be what it is..or build a parking lot with vendors selling trade towers stuff and give the money to the families..cause thats the american way...profit from whats hot (or in the news) today and take a little off the top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

or how about the 150,000 people that died from the Tsunamis this year, which could have been prevented if the rich nations of the world were willing to drop the cash to outfit (poor) areas that are known to be along oceanic fault lines with the technology that's available that could warn them of upcoming shifts?
how long did people cry over that, a week or two?

---

So now it's the responsibility of the rich nations to look after the poor ones in every possible way including acts of Nature? The waves were far to high and far too strong for any current technology to warn people of this event....the tech you describe does not exist at a level that is reliable. Look at the "earthquake" warning systems in the U.S. and Japan...You can't blame those deaths on rich nations...many of the deaths were not even so much due to lack of warning but total lack of understanding what was going on. Look at all those who went BACK to the shorelines after the first waves, look at the buildings that It's safe to say where not designed for such events or possibly up to code, and keep in mind that this event was not all that expected as the focus is on more active areas like the ring of fire wich is HEAVILY active and all the sensors, technology, and money have not been able to predict...I should know...like others I've been on the losing end of that stick through earthquakes and heavy storms.

Plus you also totally disregarded the fact wealthy nations make up those nations economies by and large through tourists. Many nations are also doniting money, time, and tech needed to prevent such deaths again...the reality of humanity is that we learn from events AFTER they happen not before...you can't prevent for soemthing fully if you don't know what to expect.

Plus if you're that broken up about it join the many "rich westerners" (many who are college students) headed over this summer to help rebuild areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

americans don't even give a shit about americans, evey year ten to a hundred times the number of WT victims die from guns and cars and alchohol. they only care when it's politcally convinient enough to justify economic advancement.

---

So because other tragedies occur it's ok and we shouldn't make a big deal out of it? Look you can feel however you want about the WTC attacks...but at least respect the freedoms and actions of those DIRECTLY associated with it and let them do what they need to get past the trauma or simple remembrance. Not eveyone in those buildings was there as some idealist vision...they were there cause that was their job...just another day at the office..another day of work. That's it.

Getting drunk and being in a car crash or getting stabbed and mugged...is not on the same level. Street crime and car crashes are regular daily occurences...planes crashing into office buildings because fanatical fucks see it as symbols of western evils is not. It makes more of an impact...and the fact so many died who were just average joes makes it even tougher. Plus I dunno about you but my closest friend lost HER closest friend as a result of those attacks and to see the impact such a loss has on a person is sobering. Each nations deals with it's tragedies in diffrent ways. Just cause you see no point in it does not make you correct or even enlightned...it's selfish and narrow minded...it's not about YOU and YOUR feelings...it's about theirs.

Many in this and other nations could care less about the Dow Chemical disaster in India...but only a few would say "oh well". People see it as a tragedy and go on with their lives as they see fit...some would take it to heart more than others due to the fact it would have to IMPACT them directly. Do I feel sad about it? Not really, I think it sucks but knowing what I do about India I know it's not a one sided deal. More so I don't know anyone associated with it so instincually I won't feel as bad...The Tsunami, WTC, Iraq War...I do...because I know people DIRECTLY involved.

People do care about others...but not ALL others...we can't. It's too broad a way of thinking to love and care for EVERYONE EVERYWHERE...Am I suppose to care about YOU as much as I do my family and friends? Do I respect your lives and right to live equally? Of course not...you and most here could die for all I care if it means a friend of mine or family member would live. I know that sounds cold but that's where I draw the line IF pushed to do so. If possible it'd choose the live and let live method.

But if I gotta love and care for people...then it will go in so far as Family, Friends, countrymen, etc. Whether we like it or not we prioratize how we feel about people...100 americans getting killed will but me more than 10,000 hungarians...yet at the same time those 10,000 hungarians would but me more than 1 american...It's all in flux depending on how it goes. If 10,000 hungarian jews are executed by Nazi's...it will leave a mark (and it has) in how I feel about people...but the LAPD offing a gang member of my own ethnicity will not...yet if it's an innocent member of my own ethnicity, then yeah I'd have an issue with it...much more so than if say those 10,000 hungarian jews were killed in an industrial accident. It's hard NOT to be even brutally contradictory in such situations...

The most you can ask is simple respect for those who are affected by such deaths and let them do what they need to deal with the grief...telling people who are directly effecred by the WTC attacks to "get over it...it happens every day in some form" liek so have said is cruel and pathetic...especially when they ask for others to CARE about what they see as tragic. Let people deal with the grief of it as needed and keep out of it...I wouldn;t tell those families in India to "get over it, mining accidents are historically worse" or "Get over it already it was like YEARS ago"....yet many do because they see OTHER tragedies be them daily or dramatic ones as somehow cancelling the other out. In the end that's far worse a mentality than not caring at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneEyedCat

They should rebuild the Towers as they were.

OEC

---

So they can be attacked the same way and be as vulnerable? I like the plan they have now...bigger, better, flashier, and slicker. Sends a better message about humanities ability to grow stronger after a tragedy...plus it's just a smarter move to make something better and LESS weak than it was.

The editorial is the personal feelings of someone who lost friends in the WTC. To a point it is a touching editorial, but I still don't like the WTC attacks becoming this holy site. The attacks are going beyond tragedy for those who lost friends and loved ones to a religion. I was really bothered by this quote,

Quote:

---

And as the searing pain of those first few weeks gradually gave way to sadness and thoughts of what, if anything, should be placed on this most hallowed ground

---

Wow, hallowed ground. That is stunning. This ground is no longer the sight of a mass murder, but sacred ground. The people who died there have been loosing thier status as people every day since the attack, they are slowly becoming nameless icons.

I don't expect the people of New York, or the friends and families of the victims to forget any time soon. It is the sort of moment that should scar for life. But is a few years the rest of the nation will remember Sept 11 like the remember Dec 7 and April 19. So to me it should first be the land owner's descition what gets built there and how to show respect for the dead there, which if I recall is currently the port authority. As touching as parts of the article are, to say that one man can speak for the friends and families of the over 2000 people killed and the people who watched the skyline of thier city change is beond arrogant. For every person who believes that the only proper way to pay respect is to rebuilt the same towers, there is one who would consider that spiting on the graves of those who died there. Grief is a personal thing, and no answer is going to be right for everyone. To say that the only fitting tribute is to replace the towers is ignoring the people who don't want to go back to what it was. It is turning a blind eye to the people who say we will forget sooner if we just make it the way it was. Also it is spitting in the face of the architect who designed it and the people who picked it with the assumption that there loss and tribute is not as valid as the writers.

My opinion is that going backwards is a waste. The old towers were destroyed. You don't rebuild them you move forward. You don't make the city the same you make it better. You don't wallow in the past but improve the future. The best tribute you can give the dead and the city is improvement, which the freedom tower may not be but replacing the old towers definately is not. But my opinions don't suit every one. They may not be the best answer, they are just my answer. The writer assumes his is the best answer and contributes to the church of 9-11. That is why the article does not touch me. AS sincere as his words may be, they are also very selfish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cafe_Post_Mortem

The editorial is the personal feelings of someone who lost friends in the WTC. To a point it is a touching editorial, but I still don't like the WTC attacks becoming this holy site. The attacks are going beyond tragedy for those who lost friends and loved ones to a religion. I was really bothered by this quote,



Wow, hallowed ground. That is stunning. This ground is no longer the sight of a mass murder, but sacred ground. The people who died there have been loosing thier status as people every day since the attack, they are slowly becoming nameless icons.

I don't expect the people of New York, or the friends and families of the victims to forget any time soon. It is the sort of moment that should scar for life. But is a few years the rest of the nation will remember Sept 11 like the remember Dec 7 and April 19. So to me it should first be the land owner's descition what gets built there and how to show respect for the dead there, which if I recall is currently the port authority. As touching as parts of the article are, to say that one man can speak for the friends and families of the over 2000 people killed and the people who watched the skyline of thier city change is beond arrogant. For every person who believes that the only proper way to pay respect is to rebuilt the same towers, there is one who would consider that spiting on the graves of those who died there. Grief is a personal thing, and no answer is going to be right for everyone. To say that the only fitting tribute is to replace the towers is ignoring the people who don't want to go back to what it was. It is turning a blind eye to the people who say we will forget sooner if we just make it the way it was. Also it is spitting in the face of the architect who designed it and the people who picked it with the assumption that there loss and tribute is not as valid as the writers.

My opinion is that going backwards is a waste. The old towers were destroyed. You don't rebuild them you move forward. You don't make the city the same you make it better. You don't wallow in the past but improve the future. The best tribute you can give the dead and the city is improvement, which the freedom tower may not be but replacing the old towers definately is not. But my opinions don't suit every one. They may not be the best answer, they are just my answer. The writer assumes his is the best answer and contributes to the church of 9-11. That is why the article does not touch me. AS sincere as his words may be, they are also very selfish.

---

too true.
people were comming up with ways to make money off 9/11 by 9/12. and dont forget its real estate. those buildings are owned by someone. so who ever owns the property will do whatever is going to make them the most money anyways.

To adress your points, tequila, Yes I think it is the responsibility of the wealthy nations to take care of the poor ones. if you really believe that someone doesn't have the right to live and that people who can give them that right don't have any obligation to because of where they happen to live geographically then you are really fucked up and there's no point in listening to anything you have to say.

The fact is that we do have the technology to warn about these things, we knew that the tsunmais were going to hit before the people that were hit by them did. the problem was that we lacked the technology to warn them about it. if they had that same technology, then it would have been a lot easier for them to warn their own people about it. the reason that those people went back to the beach after the first wave hit wasn't because they were ignorant of ecological conditions, but because they didn't know it was a tsunami and thought that it was just a rising tidal wave which happens frequently and sometimes does cause flooding.

As far as saying that the people who worked in the WTC were just doing there jobs... you really think i'm going to be sympathetic for someone that chooses to make a living from an organisation that commits genocide? and to say that the terrorists motivation for picking that as a target was irrational and unfounded is only a small step behind the bullshit propaghanda such as "terrorists want to bomb us because they hate our freedom", and you seem to be a lot smarter than to believe that.
also on the subject of people that were just doing there jobs, how about the nazis? are we supposed to feel sorry for those one's that got killed? oh yeah, that's right, according to you we aren't even supposed to care about 10 million people exterminated during the holocaust, because none of those people were my freinds and family members, and it really doesn't effect me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

To adress your points, tequila, Yes I think it is the responsibility of the wealthy nations to take care of the poor ones. if you really believe that someone doesn't have the right to live and that people who can give them that right don't have any obligation to because of where they happen to live geographically then you are really fucked up and there's no point in listening to anything you have to say.

---

The problem with this thinking is that it is focused far too much on money being the absolute solution to the problems of weaker nations. Never say they had no right to live, but I don't agree every other "rich" nation should have to take care of poor ones. It never works as the people IN those nations pretty much end up resenting those taking care of them. Sending aid and care when needed is one thing...being an unending caregiver is just asking for problems. Plus it makes these nations seem weaker than they really are...of course they are poor compared to rich nations but if its people are use to that lifestyle who's to tell them otherwise? They're not kids, if they want to put all their money into tourism over inferstructure or don't have enough money in general...well...such is life. Rich nations have enough problems without adding entire nations and its people to the list...a nation is to take care of its people first and foremost. They can LIVE all they want...but they should not expect the rich to help them live well or even survive. It's just not the nature of man to take care of more than it's "own".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

The fact is that we do have the technology to warn about these things, we knew that the tsunmais were going to hit before the people that were hit by them did. the problem was that we lacked the technology to warn them about it. if they had that same technology, then it would have been a lot easier for them to warn their own people about it. the reason that those people went back to the beach after the first wave hit wasn't because they were ignorant of ecological conditions, but because they didn't know it was a tsunami and thought that it was just a rising tidal wave which happens frequently and sometimes does cause flooding.

---

A warning wouldn't have stopped the disaster though, it was far too strong a force for even the most modern of nations to deal with. While the technology does exist it's not full proof and is often ignored due to being inaccurate. To say they technology used in say the Pacific would have prevented so many deaths in innacurate...it's not the fault of wealthy nations that this happened...again, none of the people in the effected nations are meant to be hand held into the modern world...their governments, intellectuals, leaders, and even themselves have the responsibility to protect one another before the entire world does. Obviously in this case funding or seeking funding for such a warning system was not a priority...I'm sure it is now though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

As far as saying that the people who worked in the WTC were just doing there jobs... you really think i'm going to be sympathetic for someone that chooses to make a living from an organisation that commits genocide?

---

That's just being farr to dramatic and dismissive...world trade and the companies involved in it may not be saints but they are not systematicly modivated to wipe out entire peoples. If you buy into that then it's clear you would rather fall into a more extremists view of this organizations and their modivations. Are people hurt by world trade laws and agreements? Yes, but are they killed on a mass scale to warrent the term genocide? no. The people in those buildings were just doing the jobs they scored...most had no more power than a secretary or copyboy...to have this insane world view they were evil because of it and deserved what they got is pathetic. Are peopel to be so idealistic that they must live extreme lives only in what other extremists feel is "good"? Should they all have worked for non-profit organizations and lived in comunes? What about those jsut having breakfast in the area? Should they have died for supporting the evil food conglomorates? You preach on about how to see that some people should not live is fuked up yet you've found it quite easy to dismiss these deaths because it conflicts with your worldview, ethics, and morality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

and to say that the terrorists motivation for picking that as a target was irrational and unfounded is only a small step behind the bullshit propaghanda such as "terrorists want to bomb us because they hate our freedom", and you seem to be a lot smarter than to believe that.

---

If wiping out an office building has become rational in the terrorist view of the world...then maybe...just maybe...they are the ones fucked up and not me. Last I checked my record I didn't start a war, kill thousands of people in the name of god, or assassinated peoples freedom to live with an airplane used as giant bomb. They do hate our freedoms...not in the patriotic rah rah go america kind of way but in the sense that the will of so many could deny them their fundementalist vision of a world they control through murder, religion, and lack of basic freedoms. In case you forget the nations they HAVE controled are not exactly ones that care for civil rights. If I'm a fucking idiot not to buy into their "reasons" then so be it. Cause without question they'd pop a 7.62 happily in my head. I don't underestimate them or think them fools...I just don't agree with anything they buy into, sell, or do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

also on the subject of people that were just doing there jobs, how about the nazis? are we supposed to feel sorry for those one's that got killed?

---

Lets see...guy hired to work in an office and make copies for a law firm vs. armed thug ordered to wipe out entire russian villages.

It's not about feeling "sorry" for anybody...it's about understanding the ability to balance emotions with judgement. In this case It's pretty clear workers of the WTC towers and a Nazi thug in the vast Russian landscape just MAY be diffrent enough to warrent a more in depth judgement on how to feel. Personally they are night and day but that's my view on it. If you want to lump them in with average joe's that you're call.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

oh yeah, that's right, according to you we aren't even supposed to care about 10 million people exterminated during the holocaust, because none of those people were my freinds and family members, and it really doesn't effect me.

---

Well...it's clear where you stopped reading my comments and started to respond...I adressed this already and how it was all subjective based on personal views and emotions. Would I feel bad if you were killed? Probably not as much as if it was someone I knew. Yet I would feel worse about say 10,000 executed than I would some poor soul killed by a drunk driver...yet I would probably feel worse if that person killed by the drunk driver was someone I loved. It's all emotion and it goes up and down in terms of intensity based on how close you are. If I knew some of the 10,000 killed I would probably feel MORE intense about it than having known none. We simply react depending on how it effects us...I don't see that as a fault. Also you've said nothing in this or any other thread that would make one honestly think you'd so much as give a fuck if any of the thousands dead mentioned did die. You've already shown that you value the dead based only on your worldview.

Do I feel bad about the millions of german soldiers killed? Yes I do because the war that caused it was started on truly evil intentions. Yet I don't feel so bad that I mourn them because far too many commited acts of utter barbarity. I respect the fallen of that war but the emotions that drive me keep their memory alive is varied and quite complex...to remember the heroes one must remember the villians as well. Would it drive me to put wreaths on the graves of axis soldiers like I do allied ones? right now no...but who knows in time I could, after all may who were directly fighting one another have meet and exhcnaged greetings and praise for making it out of the war alive. I don't allow my political views, ideals, morals, and ethics to cloud and run EVERY part of my life or the events in it. I judge it and deal with it as it is presented to me...I could feel much diffrent if I was standing in a Wehrmacht cemetary than I would sitting in a research hall. Yet at the same time in that era I would have been shot at and maybe killed by those I would be paying my respects too...life is not above handing out moments where you often have to look beyond how you feel or can even make sense of be it because of hypocrasy or matters of respect.

Shame on you, Morning Glory. The World Trade Organization and the World Trade Center are not the same. I hope your points were brought up from misunderstanding WTO vs. WTC.

Whatever one feels should replace the towers, that was a very well-written and moving article. I personally do agree with Cafe_Post_Mortem that we should build greater structures in their place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

an honest work day in my life? No, not ever because the two years that I worked were for a greedy corporation. In that time I spent most of my money on food and on my freinds that didn't have jobs. the rest of the money I made I saved so that I can get by today without having to work. whenever I do buy anything which is rare, I usually give my change to charities like MS foundation and other child services. I guess I am not a perfect person, because unlike you apparently, I don't volunterr all my time and give all my money away to helping people. Since you are critisizing me for giving to the best of my ability, I assume that this is what you do, other wise you'd be an asshole and have no place to talk.

---

you are independently wealthy enough to never have to work. work a crappy job for a short time before your trust fund kicked in and you think you know about the plight of the working man

i work for a living and i don't give everything to charity but i do give and not just change at the convenience store. if you believe 1/10th of what you post here you have a moral obligation to work to better the world. not goof off at home all day telling other people they should give more care to people a world away while you give no care to anyone.

so typical that you push charity but only when it means other people giving and not you.

that made no sense. I am not independently wealthy. I'm pretty poor actually. you really don't know anything about my private life, so you might as well stop talking about me. although it is pretty amusing, I must admit. it's pretty pathetic of you to say that you are a better person than I am because you are richer, "i work for a living and i don't give everything to charity but i do give and not just change at the convenience store."
do you just like listening to yourself talk? it seems like it because you must really believe your own bullshit to make some of the statments that you do, like repeatedly saying that I never give to anyone, when I've clearly demonstarted that that is what I spend the majority of my time and assests doing. why don't you grow up and take some responisilbity for your own life? Although it is flattering that you seem to think I have the sole ability to make the world a better place, I don't. if you really think that i'm such a bad person, then why don't you go out there and do something to make it better instead of just trying to call me out and wage a personal war on me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tequila Zaire

So they can be attacked the same way and be as vulnerable? I like the plan they have now...bigger, better, flashier, and slicker. Sends a better message about humanities ability to grow stronger after a tragedy...plus it's just a smarter move to make something better and LESS weak than it was.

---

I'd reinforce it considerably. To me, though, it would be a mindfuck to terrorists to see the same NYC skyline that they sought to destroy. I honestly don't care which they decide on personally.

OEC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneEyedCat

I'd reinforce it considerably. To me, though, it would be a mindfuck to terrorists to see the same NYC skyline that they sought to destroy. I honestly don't care which they decide on personally.

OEC

---

i was thinking the same thing,that be pretty damn funny.......

I've said what I need to say about this issue, and now it's just getting ridiculously off topic. I really do believe in the dream of democracy which is meant to be the greatest good for the most people, if not for everyone, which should be the next goal. If you don't believe in this aim then go back to your office jobs and have fun doing whatever it is that is best for you. I may not support it, but I don't support people that want to blow up civilians in the name of god, because they just want to replace a thousand years of western oppression with thier own. It's not a matter of us versus them, because people that just want to not have to suffer to get by daily and would glady do what they could to help people out are by far in the majority of the world's population. It's a few bad apples that are ruining it for everyone, and I think we should stand up to them instead of just letting them walk all over us. I think we can all agree on that. If you don't, then that's fine, but I don't have anything else to say on the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morning Glory

I've said what I need to say about this issue, and now it's just getting ridiculously off topic. I really do believe in the dream of democracy which is meant to be the greatest good for the most people, if not for everyone, which should be the next goal. If you don't believe in this aim then go back to your office jobs and have fun doing whatever it is that is best for you. I may not support it, but I don't support people that want to blow up civilians in the name of god, because they just want to replace a thousand years of western oppression with thier own. It's not a matter of us versus them, because people that just want to not have to suffer to get by daily and would glady do what they could to help people out are by far in the majority of the world's population. It's a few bad apples that are ruining it for everyone, and I think we should stand up to them instead of just letting them walk all over us. I think we can all agree on that. If you don't, then that's fine, but I don't have anything else to say on the subject.

---

are you actually making fun of people here who work hard at office jobs? other than that this post would sound pretty reasonable except for the fact that you are the one who made the first offtopic post in this thread with the first reply.

guess you don't like being busted as the hypocrite you are choosing a life of liesure when you could be helping people all the while telling other people they are not giving enough.

Morning Glory -- I admit that I am also a bit appalled by your initial response to this post. Not sure whether you intended this, but what you posted came across coldhearted. Are you aware that the WTO is located in Geneva and not New York City and didn't have a whole hell of a lot to do with the World Trade Center? That said, is karyn posting personal information she has about you? I couldn't tell from this thread if she was guessing or blurting. Just so everyone remembers, it is a violation of Blue Blood TOS to post personal information about other members. You can all choose to post what you please about yourselves.

karyn -- Do not post personal information about other members. Do not call people names. You can say you think an opinion does not make sense for x and so reason, but you may not call someone an idiot.

I can see that my point came off as me not caring about the victims of the the WTC, that wasn't my intention, I adressed that in another thread, but I can understand the confusion. The point was kind of the inverse, that people do care about those victims, but not about other innocent victims, and I think that that is something that should be adressed, and to constantly be reminded of this loss seems to be to place it as one that's greater/more important than other people's losses. Some people may think so, but I disagree, that was my point. I suppose that it was initially off topic, but I felt that it was important to say so, so sorry about that. reguardless, I don't think that it warrants childishness and petty personal feuds. Thanks Amelia for keeping things civil, and I know that sometimes I too am a bit rash and you do a good job of keeping a clear head.

wow..never seen such a dramatic/political? debate on this forum.. how about everybody call a truce..we can't change what happened! end of story..we can change what might happen in the future! hands across america anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VoldtaEngler

wow..never seen such a dramatic/political? debate on this forum.. how about everybody call a truce..we can't change what happened! end of story..we can change what might happen in the future! hands across america anyone?

---

this used to happen all the time......it got real bad for a while.....and yea it does suck.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VoldtaEngler

wow..never seen such a dramatic/political? debate on this forum.. how about everybody call a truce..we can't change what happened! end of story..we can change what might happen in the future! hands across america anyone?

---

It pops up every so often. It's not as bad as it was a few months ago where EVERY thread got filled with some sort of political view. For the most part it's pretty civil though even "personal attacks" are never meant to be outright insulting. What's good about everyone here is that you don't have that mentality where you want a person kicked off the board or intimidated off it. We're all diffrent enough to strongly disagree or happily discuss something we enjoy...

Look at the week that's past...it's the only place I know of where you can have a thread about The Adventures of Pete and Pete, Sex with Strap ons, latest pictures of people in their BB shirt, and heated political talk without it looking out of place.

Fun times eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tequila Zaire

Look at the week that's past...it's the only place I know of where you can have a thread about The Adventures of Pete and Pete, Sex with Strap ons, latest pictures of people in their BB shirt, and heated political talk without it looking out of place.

Fun times eh?

---

certainly is a cool place huh, the only place i can tolorate typing away in....cheers!! to Blue blood,and us blue blooders......

Adventures of pete and pete...strap ons....WTC...um..anybody else see a conspiracy here??
http://jadeddreads.com/pete.jpg

Hahhahahhahahahhaahahahahahaahahhhahahahaahahahhaa !!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VoldtaEngler

Adventures of pete and pete...strap ons....WTC...um..anybody else see a conspiracy here??
http://jadeddreads.com/pete.jpg

---

You might be onto something :1orglaugh

Glad to be of service everyone. :)

it makes sense though doesnt it? the iraqi's on "you cant do that on television"..it was all a sign...

i'm sorry i was being a jerk morning glory. Blue Blood is great and i strive to interact right with everyone here. just sometimes have to tell me when i go off the wrong way.