| Kevin |
03-11-2004 12:47 AM |
Quote:
Originally posted by russellwarshay
Its not just about the scale. The WTC is the final resting place for several hundred innocent victims. Part of that site, but not all of it, is being treated as such.
There will be no buildings on the footprint of the twin towers. There is controversy about site infrastructure that lies below, and that is one area of compromise where function won over sentiment. The WTC site is huge, by Manhattan standards, so there is enough space to preserve the footprint of the twin towers, and still replace every square foot of lost commercial space in a way that is dignified and architectually compelling.
There are other reasons why the WTC site received more attention than the bombing in Oklahoma City. The fires at the WTC site burned, at about 1,000º, for about 4 months. It lasted long enough for then Mayor Giuliani to get the majority of the members of Congress to visit the site while it looked, smelled, and tasted like hell on earth. Don't underestimate that visceral experience. Many national, and world leaders commented that they didn't understand the horror of what happened until they visited the site while it was still burning.
Also, the Oklahoma City tragedy did not have the constituency that the WTC site did. Just about every state lost someone. And many of the people who did die, or who are relatives of friends of those who did, are very rich and very powerful.
The media coverage was also very different. New York is the media capital of the entire world. The resources to fully cover the event was in place. Every prominent journalist knew someone who suffered as a result.
A final difference was that the WTC attack was done by foreigners, who declared war against America. As we figured out what happend after 9-11, we realized that there is much more behind the 19 hijackers. What happened in Oklahoma City was a domestic tragedy, without a network that was willing, and able to execute similar tragedies.
So besides the scale, there are the differences that one place is a final resting place for many, congressional sympathy, congressional influence, media influence, and a newly recognized threat (to the public) that is ongoing.
If New York's influence does not seem fair, the consider this. All nations need a financial center, a business center, as well as a media center. New York is all these, and more. Also, New York happens to be the global center of these things too, and that brings benefit to all of America. 9-11 wasn't an attack on a place. It was a symbolic atempt at the decapitation of America. That means that wherever this place should be, it will have the resources to lobby for extra aid.
But there is one more thing that, in my opinion, makes New York worthy of every bit of Federal assistance. New York, for many decades, has given far more money to the Federal government than we have received in return. We have a greater disparity than most, if not all, other states. This disparity has existed to help fund the development of poorer parts of the country, and we never complained. The money that federal government receives is also to pay for national security. The WTC was bombed in 1993 by Al Qaeda. The Federal government had over 8 years to plan, and prevent, and did not do their job. The US government failed us. The least that they can do is help us rebuild.
|
None of this justifies to me why 9-11 victims deserve cash handouts while OKC bombing victims do not. |
