Fabio, that was very well said, and you have no need to apologize for anything. Since going to the WTC site will be impossible on 9/11, I hope you have the opportunity to go and pay your respects some other time.

The Associated Press has put out a "style guide" for journalists relating to 9/11. They are very sensitive to, and often highlight, terms that can be considered offensive. They said that ground zero is acceptable.

http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/08/the...1-anniversary/

The memorial service may be a public event in that it is televised - but attendance is limited for security reasons - and to people with a specific reason for being there. This is not a parade or a celebration and attendance haas been limited by the authorities - so no, everyone who want to attend simply can't.

As for the Associated Press - well they may have a style guide for their journalists. The Times used to have a style guide that called for second and later mentions of a person in an article being called Mr or Ms. They thus ended up with a concert review in which the performer was called Mr Loaf (Meat Loaf). Obviously they can have whatever standard they want - it doesn't make then correct. See note about racists comments - New Yorkers get to decide what is correct and many feel Ground Zero is very disrespectful and offensive. If one decides to offend a lot of people, that is obviously their choice.

As a former New Yorker, I am shocked by the rudeness that some of you have expressed on this board to Fabio. I understand that it not possible that he could get close to the site on 9/11, but some of your responses were totally inappropriate.

"See note about racists comments - New Yorkers get to decide what is correct and many feel Ground Zero is very disrespectful and offensive."

I question the "many" and whether New Yorkers get to decide. There's very little evidence that "many" New Yorkers are offended and find it disrespectful.

New Yorker here. Have never met anyone who thought the term "ground zero" applied to the World Trade Center site offensive. In fact until this thread, I never imagined such a possibility. As such, I think it may be safely relegated to the category which includes such bizarre injunctions as those against eating smelly foods on aircraft and other Oprah-inspired nonsense.

Honest New Yorkers will remember that we originally despised the Towers. We referred to them as "the boxes the Empire State and Chrysler buildings came in."

The tragedy changed all that of course, and it may be that the new incarnation earns its own shorthand to represent a rejuvenated city center. For now, I won't correct anyone who asks directions to ground zero.

The buildings at the Trade Center were monstrosities that severed West Street from the rest of downtown and created severe wind currents even at street level. And on the day before 9/11 I went to a free concert by Mitch Ryder where the acoustics were good as the trucks on Broadway. The elevators rattled on windy days.

Originally, they were not supposed to rent to any governmental agency but when no one moved in the MTA and NYS opened offices that long remained.

Conde Nast has already committed to many floors as has NYC.

But we are not discussing aesthetics or civics.

>>> The memorial service may be a public event in that it is televised - but attendance is limited for security reasons - and to people with a specific reason for being there. This is not a parade or a celebration and attendance haas been limited by the authorities - so no, everyone who want to attend simply can't.
>>>>

It is a public event in that people who want to be there can go and stay in the areas designated for the general public. I think that is implicit in what people have been saying, and anyone who has watched the service year after year is familiar with the drill.

No one has suggested that the general public can go into the area reserved for the families and dignitaries, and I think it is clear that the OP did not expect to do that, as he specifically asked about a "public and official event".

The bottom line is that it is perfectly appropriate for anyone to want to attend without being considered an intruder -- even tho', as has been made very clear, it is probably best to avoid the area that day.

>>> "See note about racists comments - New Yorkers get to decide what is correct and many feel Ground Zero is very disrespectful and offensive." >>

>>> I question the "many" and whether New Yorkers get to decide. There's very little evidence that "many" New Yorkers are offended and find it disrespectful. >>>

I agree, on all counts.

Let me clarify: I agree, on all counts, with the last statement by MikeT.

I am really surprised how much I have learnt from you on these posts ! Thanks again to all of you. As I said, I thought that being there to pay respect on 09/11 could make me feel even more involved than the last time I was there in December 2008.
Logistics makes it almost impossible, therefore I will come another time ! But I have another little question for you. It would be nice to know the reason why this year on 09/11 more and more people are expected at the WTC site compared to all previous years. I mean, the number of relatives and friends of those who died is supposed to be more or less always the same every year. Is it maybe because of the presence of both Obama and Bush this time ? Or maybe just the fact that the 10th anniversary has a stronger meaning than any other anniversary ? Hope not this second option !

The memorial plaza is opening for the first time this year (on the 10-year anniversary) and both President Obama and former president George W. Bush will be at the ceremony. So it's a bigger deal this year than it normally is. But to be honest, I don't think it's ever going to be very logistically likely for someone who's not involved in the private ceremony to visit the site on 9/11 of any year. The families are given priority on this day and will likely be given priority for many many years to come.

Fabio, I do think it's the 10th anniversary part of it that makes it more notable than usual, and the death of Osama Bin Laden this year may also be a factor. Both may be why Obama is attending this year, which then adds to the security issues when having a current president present. It doesn't mean more people are attending events (I would guess the first anniversary had the most) but that it is a little more complicated, even more security conscious that it usually is.

I'm not sure I understand your comment: "Or maybe just the fact that the 10th anniversary has a stronger meaning than any other anniversary ? Hope not this second option !"

People measure time, and round numbers like this one naturally have an impact. There was always a push to have certain things ready by this anniversary. Unfortunately the buildings are not yet finished, but there has been more progress done in the past year as agencies basically said "let's solve this in time for the 10th anniversary". Who knows how long the memorial site access would have taken if not for an "important" anniversary coming up?

Fabio, here is a link to information about observances around the city on and around September 11, 2011.

http://manhattan.about.com/od/fallev...er-11-2001.htm

ok I see.... You all brought good points. I am glad I made this post. You helped me to take a better decision.

I am a native New Yorker. I found this thread as part of a Google search and signed up just so I could reply. There are so many things I find offensive about this thread.

First of all, I have never considered, nor have I heard anyone else say, that "Ground Zero" is offensive. In fact, my Red Cross ID from 2001 says "Full Access - Ground Zero." Perhaps it is time to now refer to it as the WTC again, since it is not the ruins of the former buildings anymore. To equate the term with racism, though, is outrageous.

I agree that the event being help downtown is NOT a public event. There are no areas "designated for the general public." Only relatives of the people killed on 9/11/01 are permitted to attend. Televised events do not equate public access. The analogy to a funeral is perfect. Many of these families do not even have a body to bury, and they are still identifying remains: http://news.yahoo.com/remains-found-...001149585.html

If you were not directly impacted by the events (as in, you were in NYC or the Pentagon on 9/11/01 or lost a loved one that day), the best tribute would be to sign up to volunteer on the Day of Service (9/11/11). There is no way to feel "closer" to the events. Spend some time remembering and reflecting. Think about how you can make the world a better place.

New York is a great place to visit any time of the year, and the city needs tourists. It doesn't need visitors to crowd Manhattan on 9/11/11 just so they can say "I was there."

I do not think that Fabio wanted to go just so he could say "I was there." He specifically said he was very traumatized by the attacks, went in Dec '08, and wants to again pay respects now that he will be there on 9/11. But to say he "does not belong there" is not only rude, but wrong.

NYC does not "own" the events of 9/11. They were not the only victims of these events. It affected all Americans (wars in Afganistan, Iraq, even the way we fly on airplanes are proof of that).

Six thousand miles away in Hawaii, we waited anxiously to hear from our friends and loved ones in NYC at that time, and cried when we heard that several had died.

This attack took place in NYC, but it was an attack on all the United states. You did not have to smell the smoke to deserve the right to go there.

BTW, I do like the idea of doing volunteer work on 9/11.

Agree with lcuy 100%!!!

It is not the same as suffering long-term health effects, including post-traumatic stress syndrome. I stand by my comments.