Ground Zero's conflict and unity

By Stephen Evans
BBC North America business correspondent

The platform for the dignitaries at the unveiling of the cornerstone of the Freedom Tower at Ground Zero was a picture of all the unity and disunity that surrounds the ambitious project to replace the Twin Towers that were destroyed on 11 September, 2001.

Controversy surrounds Ground Zero's future

There sat a Muslim cleric and a Christian minister and a rabbi.

They were united, without doubt, in the feeling voiced by the Imam, Izak-El Mu'eed Pasha.

"America represents all the best of humanity and freedom as we set this stone in place that we all of us - Muslim, Christian, Jews, others - are willing to forfeit our lives to defend this unique freedom," he said.

Dignitaries

And there were the representatives of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey which owns the site (and which lost many employees in the attacks nearly three years ago).

Alongside was the architect, Daniel Libeskind, whose plan for what he called a Freedom Tower became the blueprint.

Near him was the leaseholder, Larry Silverstein, who is concerned that there are enough shops and offices.

And at the front were the politicians, Governor George Pataki of the State of New York, and Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York.

Shops versus space

These groups, the architect, the leaseholder and the owner plus the politicians now have a lot of wrangling to do.

There are disagreements on how the space should be used

"We have a 16-acre site. Every square inch is being contested by everybody," Mr Libeskind said.

"There's transportation, there's infrastructure, there's questions of security or retail spaces or public spaces."

This last conflict - between shops and open space - is the most contentious as the debate takes place about the way the original plan will now be executed.

"Like the American Constitution there is a document but one has to be able to interpret it in such a way that it gives those beautiful spaces back to the public and prevents private interests from dominating the site," Mr Libeskind said.

Different interests will jostle to get their own way.

For Mr Libeskind, the danger seems to be that diluting the plan means diluting the splendour.

Relatives' viewpoint

It is not just the commercial interests versus the architectural ones: Ground Zero is also a mass grave.

The bereaved families demand a say but with which voice exactly?

The site is also a grave

Lately, some individuals have been attacking others, accusing them of dwelling on grief.

Some relatives want to walk away and grieve in private; others go to public functions like the one at Ground Zero on 4 July.

Those who did go and who sat in the sun on the rock which is the base of Ground Zero said it helped them.

The symbol of re-building by unveiling the Freedom Towers cornerstone touched their own lives, they felt.

"It's a new beginning", said John Foy whose mother-in-law was killed on the 90th floor of one of the towers.

"We all need to move on and rise above this".

Inscription

The cornerstone put in place is garnet-flecked granite from the Adirondack Mountains in upstate New York.

On it is inscribed: "To honour and remember those who lost their lives on 11 September, 2001 and as a tribute to the enduring spirit of freedom. - 4 July, 2004."

Independence Day is a day of political reflection in the US.

There are fireworks, certainly, to celebrate independence from Britain in 1776 but also much rumination about what freedom means.

The word was liberally used at Ground Zero on July 4 2004.

It will be used much more as the presidential election approaches in November.