Freedom from the Patriot Act, I guess. [/b][/quote] Ah yes! The act that preserves and protects our freedoms by violating them and taking them away. But that's the definition of a government, isn't it? Ant, you're right. It's blatantly obvious that the name is a cheap attempt to boost the average American's sense of nationalism.
As a lifelong American, I think life was easier, more care free, and overall better before 9/11 and Operation:Iraqi "Freedom". Now they're making a bigger tower that holds more people to die and more equipment to pay for, and they're naming it "The Freedom Tower". I think the world should just end right here because once we get another attack, we get another war, more fear, more bullshit. What is with Freedom? Operation:Iraqi "Freedom". Does anyone see anything wrong with that name? Some people just love to think we're invincible. GiriosXeni is right. We should have a monument with walls of names of people who died, not a tower that screams "You can't do shit to us 'cause we're free!" Oh, Canada...
Wow, the building is even going to emit a huge beam of light from the spire at the top of it, for those terrorists who prefer to work at night! *ba-dum tsh*
Because Freedom Fries never took off? [/b][/quote] "Freedom Fries" and all those other "Freedom" crap names were the worst thing America could have possibly done at the time, and I think everyone realizes this in retrospect... but "Freedom Tower" is a suiting name for the tower, I see no problem with it. If the word hadn't have been overused already I don't think anyone would be having a problem with it.
Our point exactly. I don't think "freedom" symbolizes the current United States of America. All they're try to be is resilient with the name. It's totally transparent and creates a fake sense of security.
I agree w/ ya. Funds that will be used to build the Freedom Tower could be used much better. It would be cool if they build a memorial at Ground Zero, but constructing a new building doesn't do much to remember/honor those who died.
So when a plane is flown into this one, what will they call it's replacement? "Freedom Tower II"? "The Lookwereidiotsforbuildingareplacementfortheworldtradecenter Building?"
Alrighty, I've been reading how all of you think that the tower shouldn't be replaced, and I just have to reply to that now... Yes, it would be cool if they could just make a nice, small memorial to the people that died there, yet an effective one. But, you have to remember that New York land is so freaking inflated in price that you'll never be able to recreate a lot of the revenues that the city once had with the WTC if you don't create a new building. Secondly, I'm just wondering how we're "idiots" for building a new structure in it's place. You all keep saying it's another target for terrorists, but what large structure isn't? So should we have stopped fixing the Pentagon and not done anything with that at all, either? How about if the downed aircraft got to the White House -- just not rebuild that, either? The White House was burned down by the British in the War of 1812 (as long as my history isn't failing me, which it may be ), but we rebuilt that. In fact, a lot of national structures were burned to the ground in the war of 1812, but we rebuilt them. Should we have been afraid and wetting our panties that the British would do such a thing again? I really don't think so. So, yes, it's always "just more of an opportunity for terrorists to knock them down," but say they keep doing it to other buildings... do we not rebuild any of them? And it's not like they're building the exact twin towers again... now that would be an insult. There's going to be a memorial in the exact footprint where the two old structures were, so why is everyone complaining? Their space will never be occupied by commercial buildings ever again. pyropaul: they ARE creating a memorial at ground zero. 7/8th (or something like that) of the land is going to the memorial, and 1/8th is going to the "Freedom Tower."
Well, the British colonized Canada and it was British soldiers trained in Upper Canada (being Ontario), who burnt down the White House, so we'd like to take a little credit for that. Happy Canada Day, everyone.
I was about to say that. But I'm sure it would be nearly impossible. Ant, I agree with you. If all tall buildings are targets for terrorists, should we take down the Sears Tower ourselves? How about the Empire State Building? Should we unbuild that too? Should we tear down every tall building in the country so the terrorists have nothing to crash their planes into? I think not.
Well, the British colonized Canada and it was British soldiers trained in Upper Canada (being Ontario), who burnt down the White House, so we'd like to take a little credit for that. Happy Canada Day, everyone. [/b][/quote] haha Anyways, all I'm trying to say is that we're going to put something in at least some of the space the twin towers took up, so we might as well use as little space as possible to build a new skyscraper of massive proportions... I mean, it does two things: it creates far more jobs and office space in New York (bolstering their economy), and it gives the most amount of space we can pretty much afford to give to the memorial. I don't have a problem with that, personally.
Nah, not in NYC. My sister has lived there for 4 years (she moved up there about 2 weeks before 9/11 and lived a block from the WTC) and said that there isn't a Wal Mart in NYC or any of the other bouroughs. Its a very liberal city and the people who live there do not want a Wal-mart there and have gotten the city to block previous requests by Wally World to build one there.
Now that, I will whole heartedly agree with, Ant. To give up and quit and not try to gain new capital and replace the building would be utterly foolish. Why don't we just stop living, because they have the capabilities to take our lives away?
My thoughts exactly. They're making a memorial onsite; it's going to be the first part to be constructed. Good points in your second and third paragraphs. Hey, if it's Canada Day, why the hell are you guys inside? Oh yeah, the Muchmusic Countdown's today. Go outside.
Nah, not in NYC. My sister has lived there for 4 years (she moved up there about 2 weeks before 9/11 and lived a block from the WTC) and said that there isn't a Wal Mart in NYC or any of the other bouroughs. Its a very liberal city and the people who live there do not want a Wal-mart there and have gotten the city to block previous requests by Wally World to build one there. [/b][/quote] wow, i did not know that. well at least i just leaned something. go new york city.
Well, the British colonized Canada and it was British soldiers trained in Upper Canada (being Ontario), who burnt down the White House, so we'd like to take a little credit for that. Happy Canada Day, everyone. [/b][/quote] Haha, yeah. After that, we came back and a keg or six. Per person. Beer was cheap back then.
Nah, not in NYC. My sister has lived there for 4 years (she moved up there about 2 weeks before 9/11 and lived a block from the WTC) and said that there isn't a Wal Mart in NYC or any of the other bouroughs. Its a very liberal city and the people who live there do not want a Wal-mart there and have gotten the city to block previous requests by Wally World to build one there. [/b][/quote] Hah, I had no idea they banned Walmarts from coming into the city. I thought that SF was the only one. I guess we're not alone in the US!