International Freedom Center facts for kids

The International Freedom Center (IFC) was a museum that was planned to be built next to the Ground Zero area in New York City, USA. This is where the original World Trade Center towers stood before they were destroyed. The IFC was chosen in 2004 to be a "cultural space" near the memorial for the victims of the September 11 attacks. This memorial is called Reflecting Absence.

However, many people disagreed with the IFC's plans. They felt that showing exhibits about different historical events, like genocides and other terrible acts against people, was not right for a place that many considered sacred. They believed these topics would take away from the memory of the 9/11 victims. On September 28, 2005, New York Governor George Pataki stopped the IFC from being built at the World Trade Center site.

Some people who supported the IFC included George Soros and Eric Foner. After being told they couldn't build at the site, the IFC museum announced it was closing down. They did not try to find a new location. Their leaders said they didn't think there was another good spot for the IFC at the World Trade Center site. They felt their work had come to an end.

Why People Disagreed with the IFC

The idea for the International Freedom Center caused many complaints. Some families of the 9/11 victims were very upset. In August 2005, officials said the Center would need to address these concerns before it could move forward.

Concerns from 9/11 Families

Many relatives of the 9/11 victims felt the IFC plan was disrespectful. They believed it would make the 2,749 people who died at the World Trade Center seem less important. They thought the museum's focus on broader ideas of freedom would overshadow the specific tragedy of 9/11. Families, police, and firefighters said that using the sacred land at Ground Zero to talk about poverty or other issues as barriers to freedom would lessen the meaning of 9/11.

Journalist's Viewpoint

Jeff Jarvis, a journalist who survived 9/11, also shared his thoughts. He noted that the IFC's supporters wanted to connect 9/11 to the idea of freedom. However, he disagreed with this link.

He explained that the people killed on 9/11 were already free. They were not fighting for freedom. The attackers, too, were free and used their freedom to commit the acts. Jarvis believed that while celebrating freedom is good, the struggle at Ground Zero was against extremism and terrorism, not for freedom itself. He suggested that a center about terrorism should be built elsewhere.

New York Times' Opinion

The New York Times newspaper wrote an editorial that criticized the protests against the IFC. The Times argued that the opponents' reasons were not strong. They felt that arguing about the size of the museum space was not logical. The newspaper believed that visiting the World Trade Center site itself would have a powerful effect on visitors.

The Times suggested there was a deeper reason for the opposition. They thought it was about how people wanted to remember 9/11 and its aftermath. They pointed to a group's goal that Ground Zero should not have places for "controversial debate" or "exhibits referring to extraneous historical events." The Times called this idea "un-American."

Political Opposition to the IFC

Many politicians in New York State were either against the IFC or only offered limited support. They listened to the concerns of the 9/11 families and first responders.

Senator Hillary Clinton's Stance

On September 23, 2005, Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton stated she could not support the IFC. She said she was worried about the serious concerns raised by the families and first responders. Senator Clinton made it clear that she would not support any plan unless the families and first responders agreed with it.

Republican Congressmen's Views

Several Republican Congressmen also spoke out against the IFC. These included John E. Sweeney, Peter T. King, and Vito Fossella. They called the IFC a "blame America first" project. This meant they felt the museum would focus too much on America's past mistakes rather than the 9/11 tragedy.

Senator Chuck Schumer's Call for Compromise

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also shared his concerns. He called for a compromise. He hoped that the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC), which oversaw the site, would find a way to meet the families' needs. He also wanted to build a center that honored the freedom for which the victims died.

Governor Pataki's Final Decision

Former New York State Republican Governor George Pataki had a lot of power over the LMDC. He had said he would not support any plan that allowed for "anti-Americanism." On September 28, 2005, Governor Pataki officially barred the IFC from the World Trade Center site. After this decision, the project was considered over. It was very unlikely the IFC would be built anywhere else.