Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel News
Reload this Page >

Newark Liberty International Airport

Newark Liberty International Airport

Reply

Old Oct 16, 02, 12:46 pm
  #1  
doc
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 46,816
Newark Liberty International Airport

Newark Liberty International Airport

What’s in an airport name? In the case of Newark International Airport, it turns out to be quite a bit. A recent announcement by the governors of New York and New Jersey, who together preside over the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which in turn runs the airport, announced a change to “Liberty International Airport at Newark.” The uproar was immediate and intense, and shortly afterward, the change was modified to Newark Liberty International Airport, a name few expect will be used by travelers.

One reason for the fuss was that the airport has become the crown jewel of the renaissance of New Jersey’s largest city and, some think, the jewel of New York City’s airports. Road warriors who like the airport praise the ease of getting to it, the wide choice of domestic and international flights, and, unique to New York airports, a direct rail link to Manhattan.

http://frequentflyer.oag.com/stories.../f122101-2.asp

---

FWIW, today was kinda' horrendous at EWR due to heavy rain and high winds, but the new sign is now seemingly up and nearly visible as you pass. Yet it is covered, thusfar, by canvas or something! No word regarding the eventual "unveiling" date of this canvas cover as far as I know!

I can't wait!

-Mark

doc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 02, 5:20 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 1,188
While we're at it, how about changing the name back from the silly Reagan National Airport?
Track is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 02, 5:41 pm
  #3  
Moderator: Marriott Bonvoy & Travel with Children
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,678
Actually, naming an airport after President Reagan goes beyond silly, considering that he fired 10,000+ air-traffic controllers in 1981. You could honor the guy in lots of better ways. Anyway, I travel to Washington frequently -- I was there today -- and I've never heard anyone refer to the airport as anything other than "National Airport." They haven't changed the name of the Metro station, either (although Congress debated that, too!).

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 02, 6:51 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: LAX
Programs: UA 1MM, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 6,746
Please see also:

http://www.flyertalk.com/airports/ft...ML/000072.html
Morrissey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 02, 8:12 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Here, there, and everywhere. Hip, hip, so hip to be square.
Posts: 1,122
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bdschobel:
They haven't changed the name of the Metro station, either (although Congress debated that, too!).
</font>
Not true. Well, maybe the name hasn't officially changed, but get off the Metro at National Airport and you will clearly see the station marked, "Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport." It happened about four months ago as best I remember.

As you mentioned, rather ironic IMO as he fired the striking ATC's, but it's definitely there. I believe there was a congressman from Georgia who was raising holy hell about the issue and threatening all sorts of dire consequences if the renaming didn't take place immediately ... the details escape me, though.

Mook


------------------
"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

-- Thomas Jefferson
Mook is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 5:09 am
  #6  
Moderator: Marriott Bonvoy & Travel with Children
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,678
Yeah, I remember that, too. Apparently, the solution was to change one or two signs at the airport itself, but all the Metro maps on the trains and stations, the web site, etc., are unchanged. Anyway, naming an airport after Reagan is like throwing gasoline on a flame! Some people must get furious when they see it.

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 11:01 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: MIA/FLL/ILM/RDU/LIM
Programs: AA Platinum & D2, US SP, SPG Gold
Posts: 221
I actually hear it mentioned all the time as "Reagan National" I personally like it....ALOT.
Miami_Flyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 11:08 am
  #8  
TA
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: if it's Thursday, this must be Belgium
Programs: UA 1K MM
Posts: 6,037
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bdschobel:
You could honor the guy in lots of better ways. </font>
Although he was a president and is an important historical figure worthy of keeping in mind, I find it laughable that he should be anything close to "honored". Sure, some people prospered under his administration, but the Reagan years were marked by greed, big business, and disdain for anyone but the wealthy and successful. I feel embarassed for republicans that he is their greatest idol... Ok, sorry. end of rant.
TA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 11:21 am
  #9  
Moderator: Marriott Bonvoy & Travel with Children
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,678
Well, I said "could."

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 11:24 am
  #10  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Indian Harbour Beach, Fla, USA
Programs: AA Lifetime Plt
Posts: 1,986
There is a movement by some conservatives to have at least one thing named for Ronald Reagan in every county of the United States.

And in one of a growing number of recent breaks with the US Navy's long-standing tradition that the living are never honored in this way, there is an aircraft carrier named the USS Ronald Reagan.

There's also a group that wants to replace the image of Alexander Hamilton on the U.S. $10 bill with Reagan's picture.

But leaving aside the immediate political implications, I wonder if the folks who are so insistent on naming and renaming places and things after 'the Gipper' realize how insecure it makes them look. And how afraid they seem to be of the perspective and impartial judgement of history.

If President Reagan's impact on U.S. and world history is as large as they believe, things will be named after him, just as people today still name things after great 19th Century figures like Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass.

The Roman Catholic Church, I think, has the right idea. As I understand it, the process of canonization, of naming someone a saint, can't begin until at least 75 years after the person's death. A passage of time intended to ensure that the immediate passions of the day have cooled.
greggwiggins is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 11:38 am
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,790
Naming DCA after President Reagan makes more sense to me than San Jose naming their airport after Norm Mineta, whose ineptness prior to September 11 and whose inept response to that incident damaged our aviation system beyond description.

Too harsh, you say? Even Admiral Loy (who works for Clown Mineta) describes many of Mineta's September 11-13, 2001 edicts as the "Stupid Rule List."

The folks at SJC must be proud of their hometown boy who has conditioned Americans to view each airport traveler as the next terrorist.
FWAAA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 11:44 am
  #12  
Moderator: Marriott Bonvoy & Travel with Children
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,678
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by greggwiggins:

The Roman Catholic Church, I think, has the right idea. As I understand it, the process of canonization, of naming someone a saint, can't begin until at least 75 years after the person's death. A passage of time intended to ensure that the immediate passions of the day have cooled.
</font>
I'm not Catholic, but I'm almost certain that you are wrong about this. The New York Times recently had an article about efforts to make Mother Teresa a saint, and she died pretty recently. The founder of Opus Dei was canonized within the past few weeks, and he certainly hasn't been dead for 75 years.

Someone else undoubtedly knows more about this than I do and can shed more light on the subject!

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 11:58 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Indian Harbour Beach, Fla, USA
Programs: AA Lifetime Plt
Posts: 1,986
I'm Lutheran and we started disagreeing with the Roman church quite a few weeks ago so I may be wrong, there may be ways around the rules or they may have changed them, but I seem to remember being told in a history class that the time delay was instituted several hundreds of years ago to prevent political pressures for canonization after a whole bunch of recently-deceased monarchs started getting turned into saints.
greggwiggins is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 2:06 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Programs: AA PLT, SPG GLD, PC PLT SPIRE
Posts: 4,531
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by greggwiggins:
...The Roman Catholic Church, I think, has the right idea. As I understand it, the process of canonization, of naming someone a saint, can't begin until at least 75 years after the person's death. A passage of time intended to ensure that the immediate passions of the day have cooled.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Canonization Process

VATICAN CITY, SEP 12, 1997 (VIS) - Today the Holy See Press Office made public the following note on canonical procedure for causes of beatification and canonization:

"1. Canon norms regarding the procedure to be followed for causes of saints are contained in the Apostolic Constitution 'Divinus Perfectionis Magister,' promulgated by John Paul II on January 25, 1983.

"2. To begin a cause it is necessary for at least 5 years to have passed since the death of the candidate. This is to allow greater balance and objectivity in evaluating the case and to let the emotions of the moment dissipate.

"3. The bishop of the diocese in which the person whose beatification is being requested died is responsible for beginning the investigation. The promoter group ('Actor Causae'): diocese, parish, religious congregation, association, asks the bishop through the postulator for the opening of the investigation. The bishop, once the 'nulla osta' of the Holy See is obtained, forms a diocesan tribunal for this purpose. Witnesses are called before the tribunal to recount concrete facts on the exercise of Christian virtues considered heroic, that is, the theological virtues: faith, hope and charity, and the cardinal virtues: prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude, and others specific to his state in life. In addition, all documents regarding the candidate must be gathered. At this point he is entitled to the title of Servant of God.

"4. Once the diocesan investigation is finished, the acts and documentation are passed on to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. The public copy used for further work is put together here. The postulator, resident in Rome, follows the preparation of the 'Positio', or summary of the documentation that proves the heroic exercise of virtue, under the direction of a relator of the Congregation. The 'Positio' undergoes an examination (theological) by nine theologians who give their vote. If the majority of the theologians are in favour, the cause is passed on for examination by cardinals and bishops who are members of the congregation. They hold meetings twice a month. If their judgment is favourable, the prefect of the congregation presents the results of the entire course of the cause to the Holy Father, who gives his approval and authorizes the congregation to draft the relative decree. The public reading and promulgation of the decree follows.

"5. For the beatification of a confessor a miracle attributed to the Servant of God, verified after his death, is necessary. The required miracle must be proven through the appropriate canonical investigation, following a procedure analogous to that for heroic virtues. This one too is concluded with the relative decree. Once the two decrees are promulgated (regarding the heroic virtues and the miracle) the Holy Father decides on beatification, which is the concession of public worship, limited to a particular sphere. With beatification the candidate receives the title of Blessed.

"6. For canonization another miracle is needed, attributed to the intercession of the Blessed and having occurred after his beatification. The methods for ascertainment of the affirmed miracle are the same as those followed for beatification. Canonization is understood as the concession of public worship in the Universal Church. Pontifical infallibility is involved. With canonization, the Blessed acquires the title of Saint." </font>
I think in Mother Theresa's case, there were a lot of folks who wanted the officialprocess to start immediately, but the Vatican said rules are rules, lets be patient.

What ended up happening is that the process began unoffically. Various groups (supposedly not officially directed or santioned by the Vatican?) began the process of gathering the historical data on Mother Teresa's life (miracles attributed to her etc.) that would be needed when the official process began. This way when the 5 year waiting period ended, all the paperwork and info gathering was completed. Difficulty in gathering appropriate information and being able to make a case before a bunch of skepical bishops and cardinals, combined with lots of buracratic red tape and delays (what'd you expect, the Vatican is in Italy?) usually drag on the process of beatification and canonization for a long, long, long time. Mother Teresa's cause has already progressed through step 5 and they are in the process of step 6. IMHO, it appears that Mother Teresa is a fast tracker to Sainthood if there ever was one.




[This message has been edited by onedog (edited 10-17-2002).]
onedog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 02, 4:11 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: a raft in the middle of the Atlantic
Posts: 51
#1. Reagan isn't dead

#2. Whenever someone says "Reagan National"
to me I politely inquire, "Oh do you
mean Washington National?".

#3. He never did anything to help the work- ing poor so why name anything after
him.
summerdawn is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread