Question about Changing Meaning of 9/11 Memorial

Daily Collegian (University of Massachusetts), 10/6/2010

http://dailycollegian.com/2010/10/06/43123/

Dear Editor,

Last week, I attended a talk by Michael Arad, the designer of the World Trade Center’s September 11 Memorial called “Reflecting Absence.” This talk was sponsored by the Architecture and Design program at the University of Massachusetts and it touched on many aspects of the design evolution from conceptualization through the nuts and bolts of construction and on to which trees would provide the best canopy for pedestrians.

He related his belief in the power and appropriateness of his design during the competition even though the odds against it selection had been daunting. He related the frustrations and triumphs in working with other stakeholders to achieve a design that would be meaningful, enduring and most important, meet the building codes and public safety requirements.

He talked about concepts he had learned from his professors and how he had synthesized them. He emphasized that everything needed to be addressed in the design stage, because once it is finalized, you can’t be told, for example, that it needs a railing, because that would change the perspective of the entire memorial.

After the formal talk, he asked for questions and I took the opportunity to pose one that intrigues me. I began my question stating that “the meaning of memorials change as the understanding of the event evolves over time. The event that this memorial recalls is the death of thousands of people after planes hit the building, creating fires that led to their complete and catastrophic collapse down into their basements.” I identified myself as a registered professional engineer and one of over 1300 architects and engineers that believe that the evidence is overwhelming that the three skyscrapers were, in fact, destroyed by controlled demolition using pre-planted explosives. I continued, “How will the meaning of this memorial change as those irrefutable facts become more well-known?” Arad declined to answer that question stating his disagreement with my premise.

While disappointed with his response, I sat half-listening to other questions while I silently recounted my own evolving experiences with another memorial – the Vietnam Memorial. My first visit was in 1985 shortly after its completion. At that time it was a place to remember individuals; to touch the small voids in the wall that spelled their names; to reflect on the void that their sacrifices left in their world. It was a place to remember individual losses and sacrifices. Over the years as I learned more about the Vietnam War including the deceit behind the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the meaning of the memorial shifted to the immensity of the tragedy. In recent years as I have advocated for veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and learned that if the wall were to be expanded to include veterans that committed suicide upon their return, it would need to be two to six times larger. So now, to me, the meaning of that memorial has become a symbol that calls out for peace, truth and justice so that such a senseless war never occurs again.

As I reflect on the design that Michael Arad has brought forth, I believe that because of its focus on loss and remembrance it will be an enduring design whose meaning can grow and adapt as our understanding of the events of that day in 2001 evolve. I look forward to experiencing it once it is open to the public.

Wayne H. Coste, P.E.
Tariffville, CT
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

Original URL: http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/letters/article_0e2db71b-23e4-5442-b319-44827428dc93.html

Hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers thought they saw a third light beam emanating from Ground Zero on Sept. 11, 2010. Two light beams have shown skyward on the 9/11 anniversary for several previous years, memorializing the lives lost in the Twin Towers. But this year, thousands were astounded to see a third beam. Many called their local media, asking about it. They generally were told it stood for the third building that collapsed, Building 7.

A news release was issued to the New York City metro area by "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth" through PRNewswire on Sept. 11, 2010. The explanation stated the third beam was to shine light "on the fact that the official story of what happened at Ground Zero simply cannot be true and that a new, truly independent investigation is needed. This new investigation is needed both as a matter of national security and as the key to real justice for the victims of the Twin Towers" (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/1280-architects-and-engineers-launch-third-light-beam-into-nyc-night-skyline-on-9th-anniversary-of-september-11th-102706039.html).

PRNewswire reported later this news release received the second highest number of viewers on their website that day. Yet mainstream media said not a word about this the next day. If the media didn't report it, does that mean it didn't happen?

Dwain Deets

Encinitas

Expert could help a 9/11 study

Ed: Published in "The Daily Progress" of Charlotttesville, Virginia, Sep. 7, 2010. Available at http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2010/sep/04/expert-could-help-911-study-ar-488256/

Thanks to The Daily Progress for Bryan McKenzie’s excellent article about the lecture Dr. Philip Zelikow gave at the University of Virginia Miller Center on Aug 31 (“Professor encourages local nation-building). I attended Dr. Zelikow’s lecture, and I was impressed with his ability to apply his expertise to the difficult topic of nation-building.

As noted in the article and at the lecture, Dr. Zelikow is the former executive director of the 9/11 Commission. He is often commended at UVa for that work.

But now, new information about 9/11 has been uncovered. For example, more than 1,200 professional architects and engineers are presenting new evidence indicating that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by controlled demolition (AE911truth.org). One piece of evidence they cite is the discovery by a team of U.S. and international scientists that the explosive nano-thermite was present in the buildings before they collapsed. Residue of exploded nano-thermite was found in the dust from the collapse of the Towers.

In polls, nearly half of Americans want a new investigation of 9/11. While Dr. Zelikow may have done an excellent job as the director of the 9/11 Commission, now we know new details about 9/11. His work needs to be informed by this new evidence. Having Dr. Zelikow right here at UVa is an opportunity for our community to openly discuss the old and new evidence regarding 9/11. As Thomas Jefferson said, “We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.”

Dr. Thomas P. Hansen
Albemarle County

How many skyscrapers fell on 9/11?

North County Times, May 10, 2010

Almost every non-9/11 truther to whom I pose the question "How many skyscrapers fell on 9/11?" thinks that there were only two, when in fact, there were three. Building 7, a 47-story building, was not hit by a plane, but fell at free-fall speed for one-third of its seven-second symmetrical collapse.

When are we going to have a real investigation to figure out what happened on 9/11, which has led to never-ending war, torture and the use of depleted uranium, phosphorus, cluster bombs and bunker buster bombs that kill indiscriminately? Nine-11 truth ends the wars.

Steve Fahrney
San Diego