When we read the NY Times article about how Pataki's "senior adviser for counterterrorism" James Kallstrom voiced concerns about the World Trade Center Memorial's safety, Gothamist threw up our arms. Kallstrom sent a memo to the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation - a confidential letter that was sent anonymously to the NY Times (NYT: "There was no way to assess the sender's motives.") - that basically says the current design has not addressed "vulnerabilities from a security perspective." Or, at the article put it, "the threat of bombs or a chemical release on the ramps or in the two immense open-air voids at the heart of the memorial." And now there's speculation whether or not the memorial will have to be redesigned once again... Now, Gothamist wants to say one thing: Like it or not, whatever is built at Ground Zero will sadly always be a target. And the memorial seems like it would be a less a target than a huge skyscraper proclaiming freedom, but that's just our thinking. Would it be safer to have a park there? Maybe a park with lots of bombsniffing dogs, chemical detectors, and police. Who knows - everything is about hindsight. We're just cranky because the hubbub and debate (all necessary) has gone on for so long and looks like it'll continue until the project is over, which will be in about ten years.
Friday's Sigh Over Ground Zero Doings
Recent in News
Featured in News
"It puts more of a burden on New York — puts more of a burden on 49 other states."
Read More In: