While I agree with almost everything he is saying, I do think it is a tad hasty to expect lower Manhattan to be fully rebuilt by now. According to the current plans this will happen by 2012. I guess he was trying to use it as a metaphor, in that case it makes more sense.
[snapback]31254[/snapback]
Would you not expect something - a small memorial stone at least - after five years?
I cannot say that I would not.
-Elessar
Would you not expect something - a small memorial stone at least - after five years?
I cannot say that I would not.
-Elessar
[snapback]31258[/snapback]
There is a little something in terms of a memorial. The foundation stone of the Freedom tower has been there for some time now. The stone commemorates the victims. Anyway the purpose of a memorial is to serve as a commemoration for future generations who have not experienced the events first hand. Hence the name memorial, so as to not forget. There was an international competition to produce the most fiting memorial for the site, that process took some time, but the process has been on going for years and the final design is in place and will be completed on a time table. So wether or not there is a memorial errected immediately or in the few years that follow isn't important. What is important in this situation was the actions that were taken in the aftermath and it was these actions that the author was very upset about. He amounts them as basically doing nothing at all, and used the fact that there is still nothing physically completed at ground zero as a metaphor for this.