Denver International Airport

[starise]

What do you make of it?

 

[pixelsmith]

it speaks for itself just like the georgia guidestones.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

I live in the mountains southwest of Denver and fly in and out of there fairly regularly. I've heard everything involving (alleged) secret tunnels under the airport to the "evil" mustang sculpture, which I admit looks kind of creepy and did kill its creator. Oh yeah, the whole (alleged) Indian burial ground thing as well as some murals which freak out a few people but I tend to think are rather tame.

Is is one of these things we're discussing or something else?

Personally, my biggest issue with DIA is that some friend of the (then) mayor was able to sell his (crappy) land - which was in the middle of tornado alley - for some obscene profit in order to build this airport. My friend's brother-in-law, who is a former D.U. sociology professor, came up with the idea of labeling the restrooms as "tornado shelters" - as if one of the busiest airports in the world would be able to fit everyone into these restrooms. I somehow doubt a Teflon-coated fiberglass roof, which has already seen tears simply due to blizzards, is going to offer any real protection against a strong tornado. This is my single biggest concern about the airport. We've had tornadoes in and around Denver before, especially east of Denver. An F3 hit the town of Limon, only about 65 miles due southeast of DIA. The whole "restrooms as tornado shelters" idea seems remarkably inept in the face of a true emergency.

That being said, I do actually like the aesthetics of the airport and am impressed with how user-friendly such a large airport can be. A quick double-check confirmed that, in terms of land size, it's the largest airport in the U.S. and 2nd largest in the world. I've still had an easier time catching flights and finding my way around DIA than I have much smaller airports. I know that DIA was voted "Best Airport in North America" for six years in a row by Business Traveler Magazine, so I guess I'm not alone in thinking it's decent and user-friendly.

 

[starise]

RL- As an airport I'm sure it works just fine.

I agree with Pixel here. It really does speak for itself only not many people are listening or really looking..or care. In hindsight,what can anyone do about it anyhow? Probably very little, but a little awareness goes a long way here. The longer the place is there the more comfortable everyone is with it.

I have never been there but DA doesn't look like the top parts would stand up to a storm very well, however 5000 ft altitude means you can go a long way down.

Depending on a persons interest or stake in the airport, it would be advantageous to write everything off as being the result of some very eccentric people being in charge of decorating.

The only problem with this is that it wasn't the artists idea as he was commissioned and given a directive. The paintings are rife with symbology. The ideas behind the symbology are threatening to certain people in a very literal way.

There is no conspiracy in the knowledge that there is an underground installation there. This isn't anything odd ...There are well over 100 of these types of installations in the US and Canada alone. The thing that seems to make this one stand out is a possible future strategic purpose involving air travel.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

And what's with the stone with the writing about some internation airport thingamy that supposedly doesn't exist?
I suppose an argument as well is with the need or not for a new airport. Was the previous one over-capacity etc?

The murals? Well, they are downright freaky if you ask me.

 

[starise]

The guys who frequent the Bohemian forest probably know. The most bizarre thing about it for me is how openly overt it all is. Not overt in getting a full explanation but in knowing who is behind it which is most concerning to me.

I mean, at least one of their chief objectives completely goes against the US constitution and involves the imposed loss of human life on a grand scale....yet here it is on American soil and no one has demanded anything be changed, which also speaks volumes.

 

[boomerang]

One possible answer for symbols of power at DIA might be that Denver seems to be the default location for capitol of the U.S. should anything dire happen to D.C. Or so I have heard, anyway.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

RL- As an airport I'm sure it works just fine.

I agree with Pixel here. It really does speak for itself only not many people are listening or really looking..or care. In hindsight,what can anyone do about it anyhow? Probably very little, but a little awareness goes a long way here. The longer the place is there the more comfortable everyone is with it.

Could you explain this to me? I've been at DIA fairly regularly since it first opened. I'd say it's a safe bet I'm paying considerably more attention to the airport than someone who has never been there but takes as "facts"anything - no matter how outlandish - a conspiracy website claims is real. So, enlighten me and explain how this "really does speak for itself." Precisely what is it that you are talking about?

I have never been there but DA doesn't look like the top parts would stand up to a storm very well, however 5000 ft altitude means you can go a long way down.

Huh? Do you think it's built on a cliff or atop a mountain? You do know that the airport is on Colorado's Eastern Plains and the mountains are to the west of both the airport and the city. Denver itself is part of the High Plains, so it's not exactly some remote mountain area. I'm unsure how you can "go a long way down" unless you're in an airplane that's crashing on site.

Depending on a persons interest or stake in the airport, it would be advantageous to write everything off as being the result of some very eccentric people being in charge of decorating.

The only problem with this is that it wasn't the artists idea as he was commissioned and given a directive. The paintings are rife with symbology. The ideas behind the symbology are threatening to certain people in a very literal way.

Um, no. Leo Tanguma was one of several artists commissioned to paint murals that showed prospects and hope for humanity. He made one mural entitled "Children of the World Dream of Peace" that includes a poem written by a child who actually died at Auschwitz. (You can Google this.) The mural shows several phases of world events, including war, oppression (with a soldier wearing a gas mask) and finally the children coming together over the corpse of the oppressor.

Then we have to go into how art is commissioned: No one told Tanguma (or any of these other artists) that, "We demand a scary-ass mural that's going to show soldiers in gas masks oppressing the masses." Rather, he was given some rather loose guidelines and found inspiration in telling a story about oppression and victory, combined with the poem written by the slaughtered child at Auschwitz. This is probably why we have the Nazi-looking solider wearing a gas-mask, followed by children celebrating his demise. The swords become plowshares, which in this case references versus in the bible.

I've seen in person "Children of the World Dream of Peace" and compared to much other "socially conscious" art I've seen, it's rather tame. There's no rule saying that art must be "pretty and enjoyable to the viewer." Often, art is meant to provoke or otherwise right an injustice. In this case, the artist decided he could best capture the positive side of human prospects by showing the history and dreams of that murdered child. It ends on a high note, complete with biblical references.

There's something that needs to be addressed: If you are thinking that when a person commissions art, he usually knows exactly what he will be given, you're showing a poor grasp of the art world and art history. (Google "Diego Rivera" and "Frida Kahlo" for some excellent examples of commissioned art, often as murals, that were anything but what the sponsor was expecting. Their art was often removed, hidden or threatened with destruction simply because it wasn't "on message" by those who commissioned it.) This is often the norm. Usually, only a few basic guidelines are given to the artist entirely because those hiring want room for "artistic expression." This is what separates true artists from sweat shop laborers.

Taguma also made a mural about the need to protect the environment from destruction. Taguma himself is of Mayan ancestry and saw environmental catastrophe - and possible redemption - along the same lines as the 2012 prophecy. Again, the mural ends in the redemption of both humans and nature.

I'm not as familiar with the background behind the mustang sculpture by Luis Jimenez. I will admit it is a rather scary looking mustang and that part of it really did fall and kill its creator. I'll also admit that the first time I saw it (while running late to the airport), I felt as though I had been sucker-punched. It hasn't yet grown on me, though I can't say I actually dislike it. This article states that Jimenez wanted to capture "the grandeur of the Mexican muralists, the energy of the Southwest and the bright colors he experienced as a youth in his father's sign making company." Um, sure buddy. Besides killing Jimenez, it also went more than double the agreed-upon price. This recent article by Huffington Post goes into all the controversy rather well - and explains that the city can now remove the piece should they so choose. I remember some survey up here about that. I'm under the impression most of the city is divided.

There is no conspiracy in the knowledge that there is an underground installation there. This isn't anything odd ...There are well over 100 of these types of installations in the US and Canada alone. The thing that seems to make this one stand out is a possible future strategic purpose involving air travel.

No it isn't. The "knowledge that there is an underground installation there" is only a conspiracy for those who have not heard of magical devices known as "subways", which connect the different concourses and the baggage claim area. You actually, pretty much have to take these to get around. There are also tunnels as part of the baggage system as well as additional tunnels for subways and baggage when further expansions are completed. Some people who saw these tunnels being built - and sometimes covered with dirt during the process of being built - decided that these had to be secret New World Order/NSA/FEMA prisons or bunkers. All this has shown is that there are those who absolutely cannot or will not ever have the ability to understand what they are seeing - yet lack the desire to ask.

In addition to these, I've also heard:

1. That the airport is in the shape of a swastika. (It isn't, as anyone with Google Earth can verify. What apparently has a certain few upset is that some runways intersect other runways at right angles. This still doesn't look like a swastika, not that this is stopping the conspiracy enthusiasts. They'd be better off understanding how wind patterns affect a plane's take-offs and landings, as well as how nearby mountains can dramatically change wind patterns.)
2. There are creepy/alien/New World Order names on the airport's floor. (Which is actually the language known as Navajo and is referring to specific mountains and geographic locations in Colorado. Other unusual words are actually the last names of the artists.)
3. A dedication for "New World Airport Commission" clearly must refer to the New World Order, because all the world's secret organizations and hidden bases label themselves as clearly as possible. (Someone should tell Chris O'Brien because that would make his work so much easier.) The reality is that it was a group of local businesses that organized opening ceremonies at the airport and also gave us a time capsule to be opened in 2094, placed under that marker.

Have I missed anything else?

 

[RenaissanceLady]

And what's with the stone with the writing about some internation airport thingamy that supposedly doesn't exist?
I suppose an argument as well is with the need or not for a new airport. Was the previous one over-capacity etc?

The murals? Well, they are downright freaky if you ask me.

1. The stone writing about the "New World Airport Commission" does actually exist and has never been hidden - not that conspiracy enthusiasts will admit to this. According to this Wiki Answers article, the "New World Airport Commission" was a group of local businesses that organized the opening ceremonies at the airport. They chose the name because the wanted to create a "new, world class city" and airport. I've also read that they put their stone marker on top of a time capsule. Regular Wikipedia goes into the "New World Airport Commission" and the time capsule but doesn't exactly say who made up the NWAC.
2. The old Stapleton airport was considerably smaller and had been completely swallowed by the city. It was also ill-equipped to deal with the constant-changing wind patterns in Denver or major winter storms. Then add into the equation that: A) United Airlines was demanding a larger airport be built if the city wanted it to be an even bigger hub for that airline, allowing Denver to become one of the world's largest airport hubs. (United is about to be offering the city's first non-stop flights to Asia, starting later this Spring.) B) Making the airport as big as it is would allow for it to have what is now the longest public runway in the U.S.; allowing more space for both larger aircraft and to deal with problems associated with winter storms, as well as future expansion; allowing more simultaneous take-offs and landings. C) This would allow the city even greater expansion into the northeast part of the city, claiming new land for Denver. D) A bunch of land developers, including a friend of the (then) mayor, had a whole bunch of cheap, worthless land they could sell to the city for some obscene profits. E) This would free up the old Stapleton area for land developers.
3. Compared to other types of "socially conscious" art, I really don't see the problem - especially when taken in context and alongside other forms of art.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

I should also add, DIA has its own Facebook page so you too can keep up with all the happenings at the airport, such as snow removal, more snow removal, additional snow removal, NWO meetings, lots and lots of snow removal, some airline happenings and even more snow removal. Yesterday's was the biggest storm we've had all season, so snow removal is the happening trend.

Also, if I had read this first, it would have saved me considerable time in my replies. It's about the conspiracy theories and discusses the art - and artists, quite a bit.

Most people, when they read or see pictures of the murals, don't see all the murals or the entire work(s) by Tanguma at the airport. So, let's see this in context. Remember, it's a set. I found these on Flickr and wish I had taken my own photos:
Leo Tanguma: The Children of the World Dream of Peace, Denver Airport | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

https://flic.kr/p/hanneorla%2F89884121%2Fin%2Fphotostream

Is the first one scary? The second one is but is it easier to understand these when seen as a set? We need to remember that Leo Tanguma was an artist specializing in social and political commentary long before he did any work for DIA. Before people stretch to find conspiracies where there are none, it might not be a bad idea to become familiar with the artist, his work (in addition to the art at DIA) and his reasoning behind those murals at the airport. He has his own site and on that site, he discusses his history and the DIA conspiracies. It's worth a read - if you prefer to actually know the artist's reality rather than become enslaved to paranoid propaganda.

Then I hope we can remember that art - including art we might not find appealing - has been in public displays since time immemorial. For example: Anne Whitney was creating sculptures at a time when being a female sculptor would (and did) cost her commissions. She is famous for sculpting the bust of Samuel Adams in the U.S. capitol building. She was also a fierce feminist, abolitionist and social critic, themes of which often found its way into her art. "Africa", created in 1864 (near the end of the Civil War and a year after the Emancipation Proclamation, for those of you who don't know U.S. history) depicted a woman awakening from the dream of slavery. A more famous sculpture entitled "Roma" was inspired by the abject poverty of Roman peasants - and has sometimes been considered a condemnation of the Catholic Church. Specifically, there are a few who view the beggar woman depicted in the sculpture as a metaphor for the poor Catholic masses, desperate for salvation. Whatever the meanings of Whitney's works, are these too political or socially conscious to be seen in public? If we didn't know her background, might we be interpreting her art entirely differently? Perhaps "Africa" wouldn't then be about a heroic female figure but rather a woman who was an escaped convict, or dreaming of deceit?

One of my favorite works by Frida Kahlo is entitled "The Broken Column", which is one of her many self-portraits. (I'm not going to link to this as some might consider it inappropriate. If you're interested you can Google it - and I hope you do.) Without discussing what it depicts (you can Google this, too), I'll say that people who are completely unfamiliar with the artist and this particular work have interpreted it as anything from "erotic" or "BDSM" (a male friend thought it was about a specific type of bondage) all the way to "violence against women." Knowing the artist, her history and exactly what was happening to her when this was painted, I can say conclusively that it isn't any of these things. This is made evident if you can look at clearly, in all it's detail. The title should also give you a hint about what it's about, just as "Children of the World Dream of Peace" can give you an idea of what that is ultimately depicting.

Still, knowing the history of a piece of art helps with understanding and appreciating that art. While I'm actually not wanting to give an entire course on art history, I will say this is why, before we insist that certain murals depict a "New World Order" or anything else, we should look at them in their entire context and maybe even study the life, works and even culture of the artist. It can put an entirely different perspective on things.

Some of us want to live in an evidence-based world and form opinions based on facts. Some, clearly, would rather edit down the facts in order to better fit their opinions. So, what makes more sense? Would an artist with a history of social and political commentary who titles a work "Children of the World Dream of Peace" be about children finding peace after violent oppression - or some prophecy about a New World Order making its headquarters at an airport northeast of Denver? For that matter, are underground tunnels used for the subways and baggage systems (including the notoriously failed automated baggage system) or are they part of some secret underground city/bunker/prison for the Illuminati/NWO/NWS/FEMA?

C'mon, we're better than this.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

All that is cool with me. I still think the murals are completely out of place in an airport, depressing images of imprisonment and weapons etc isn't family viewing, and I'm no prude. People, and especially those scared of flying, do not want unnecessary images of death before they fly!
But of course all that said, there is no conspiracy to that, only bad taste. The new world airport commission is still a little weird, if just invented for this occasion (the opening/naming etc) but once more, it's not really conspiracy worthy.
The underground stuff need not have any sinister purpose and actually, maybe there is some kind of shelter or emergency government storage or installation etc - governments lawfully and rightfully have certain duties and responsibilities that may entail keeping certain installations secret for good reason.

So my point I suppose is most of the stuff can be explained logically without recourse to theories of a break-away new world order civilisation/alternative 3 type-deal, only that it is either a little off normal or bad taste, or legit.
I suppose also though, that when was the last time an airport generated some kind of negative-connotation conspiracy anyway? It's a little weird even just the fact that a huge conspiracy is centred around a modern airport - what next, a Six-flags that has a reptilian holiday resort, 99 basement levels underneath a rollercoaster! The mind boggles, both with the fantasy and the reality.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

All that is cool with me. I still think the murals are completely out of place in an airport, depressing images of imprisonment and weapons etc isn't family viewing, and I'm no prude. People, and especially those scared of flying, do not want unnecessary images of death before they fly!
But of course all that said, there is no conspiracy to that, only bad taste. The new world airport commission is still a little weird, if just invented for this occasion (the opening/naming etc) but once more, it's not really conspiracy worthy.
The underground stuff need not have any sinister purpose and actually, maybe there is some kind of shelter or emergency government storage or installation etc - governments lawfully and rightfully have certain duties and responsibilities that may entail keeping certain installations secret for good reason.

So my point I suppose is most of the stuff can be explained logically without recourse to theories of a break-away new world order civilisation/alternative 3 type-deal, only that it is either a little off normal or bad taste, or legit.
I suppose also though, that when was the last time an airport generated some kind of negative-connotation conspiracy anyway? It's a little weird even just the fact that a huge conspiracy is centred around a modern airport - what next, a Six-flags that has a reptilian holiday resort, 99 basement levels underneath a rollercoaster! The mind boggles, both with the fantasy and the reality.

Is that first mural depressing? Are the nature murals depressing? I've also noticed the murals all begin and end with uplifting notes, so I don't consider them to be depressing - and most people are too busy rushing to catch a plain to even notice one way or the other. For that matter, at least one of these murals is near the baggage claim area, so, people who are afraid of flying won't even see it until after they've flown. So, what places can you put murals so these can never offend anyone? For that matter, what sort of art would you have in an airport?

We can't have children dancing under rainbows, because the religious right would insist this is about the gay indoctrination of our kids.
We can't even have children's characters, as the religious right keeps trying to "out" SpongeBob, Tinky Winky and will eventually "out" some other cartoon character.
Nature scenes would lead to discourse about the environment / nature vs. industry, so we can't have that.
Mountains scenes would be considered to be either pro or anti-fracking. Wildlife scenes would be either pro or anti-hunting.
We can't show people smiling and working together, because some would assume it's about a "workers' paradise" (ie, communism).
Doctor's treating the sick? Well, how do we know if he's insured? Someone will say it's about "Obamacare".
Even if we just show groups of people standing around, someone from each ethnicity, age and gender will wonder if that group is adequately represented.

There's always something that will offend someone, even when offense wasn't intended.

Hmmm, I guess life isn't sanitized for our protection.

I'm actually kind of glad the officials in Denver - and Denverites - are forward-thinking enough to allow for a wide breadth of art. Some of the exhibits at DIA have been rather excellent, often creating enthusiasm for our museums, art world, culture and sites. This is a good thing. There's more to Denver than simply driving to the nearest highway to get to the ski resorts.

As far as "when was the last time an airport generated some kind of negative-connotation conspiracy anyway?" Well, DIA is the newest major airport in the country. In terms of land-size, it is also the largest airport in this country and 2nd largest in the world. Simply being new, big and different can trigger conspiracy theories, especially as it had coincided with a new technology known as the Internet.

When was the last time another super-major airport opened, anywhere? It's kind of a rare thing. We should consider that Ben Gurion (Tel Aviv) recently opened a new, "state of the art" terminal. Do you think there aren't - or won't be - rumors about why it's so technological and what they may be hiding? Super-duper passenger screening, anyone? Maybe they had to build it to secretly imprison all the potential terrorists they're not allowing onto El Al flights? Now that I've typed this here, how long before you think someone decides that these really are happening and Ben Gurion's new terminal is the world's biggest conspiracy theory? This is how bogus rumors are spread, my friend. As long as there's an Internet, these will never die.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I passed through that airport 4 times (had a buddy who lived in Golden, Co) I was too busy to notice anything around me-
wish I had known about these controversial items.

 

[starise]

Renaissance Lady you seem a little miffed with me here. If any of my statements seemed to be somehow personal they were not intended that way.

I am simply saying that until there is another purpose for the airport it will fit right in with daily routine IMO. Of course The airport itself is going to have a nice website putting everything in a perspective that make it palatable to the general public. The whole idea here is that it is an airport with a dual purpose. Too many things are out of place.

The place was ready for service in 95'? I'm not sure. This is an ongoing thing. The time capsule located in the masonic show piece isn't supposed to be opened until in the 2090's.

I don't think the artwork has a happy outcome. Dead people and extermination of certain groups of people are not really the kinds of things that make me a fuzzy warm inside.

No, there's nothing going on here people...move along.

Ideas precede action. In looking at the ideas of the people who are behind the symbols, you can arrive at an objective and the objective is harmful to other people. The agenda is self serving for a select group of people.

If you build an airport and it goes billions over budget (because you built a base under it)...you will likely have a nice PR campaign.

Renaissance Lady, I can't simply write off all of that symbology in the art which was commissioned BTW..not artist inspired entirely. There is a directive.

There were buildings built at least 8 floors down(probably more) that have nothing to do with the airport itself. You can say all of the witnesses are liars but I don't believe it for a minute.

I'm not politically biased either way. I see problems with both sides. My ideas on the airport are not politically motivated.

 

[Rizla]

Then we have to go into how art is commissioned: No one told Tanguma (or any of these other artists) that, "We demand a scary-ass mural that's going to show soldiers in gas masks oppressing the masses."

Good point RL. This has to be stressed over and over again. From my knowledge of commissioned art, when something turns out wrong or weird it's way more likely to
be lack of communication or incompetence, rather than a conspiracy... A conspiracy of artists would be like herding cats.

No it isn't. The "knowledge that there is an underground installation there" is only a conspiracy for those who have not heard of magical devices known as "subways", which connect the different concourses and the baggage claim area. You actually, pretty much have to take these to get around.

I'm trying to remember who started the "DIA as a central hub of a vast NWO underground train network" meme. Was it Al Bielek? Or perhaps John Lear
or (great for clearing people out after the party) a Phil Schneider lecture? Must pull out my old cassette tapes.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

I'm trying to remember who started the "DIA as a central hub of a vast NWO underground train network" meme. Was it Al Bielek? Or perhaps John Lear
or (great for clearing people out after the party) a Phil Schneider lecture? Must pull out my old cassette tapes.

You know, I have no idea who started this or when. I remember many people were unhappy with what they thought was the needless closing of Stapleton and that they felt the city had been coerced by United. The whole land-deal thing with the mayor's friend didn't help. Then, the crazy-talk seemed to be everywhere. I've heard everything from NWO bases, secret trains and eventually that Reptillians were being hidden there. Eventually, it became FEMA camps instead of NWO and/or Reptillians.

I'm amazed at what people will say even when what they're saying can easily be disproved. One site insists - by someone who says he's been there - that DIA is in a valley with spectacular mountain views in all directions. (It isn't and it doesn't, as anyone even with Google Earth could tell.) If someone says something that's blatantly false, I think it would indicate that other things he's saying might also be false. Still, a person such as this can tell lies because no one bothers checking, which in turn enables him to tell the "truths" his audience is desperate to hear.

So, what makes this a conspiracy?

1. Art - which we understand was by a commissioned artist who had his own interpretation of how to make a mural. He included a poem by a child who was murdered in a concentration camp and tried to show the triumph of good over evil - in a mural that is apparently very misunderstood, though it might well be understood better if we could take a step back and actually look at what all it shows. We also have an admittedly creepy looking mustang that truly did fall off a scaffold and kill its creator. It was then completed by artists who paint race cars. Odd, yes - though not some global art conspiracy.
2. Weird words on the floor - which we know are the names of two artists involved in the airport's art scene and some Navajo words for geographic locations here in Colorado. Native languages and artist names are also not part of a global conspiracy.
3. The size of the airport - which shouldn't be surprising as this is the newest airport in the U.S. and was built not only to accommodate newer and biggest planes but also to manage the constant changes in wind and weather patterns, as well as to make additional expansion of the airport that much easier. As planes keep getting bigger (think of the new A380), larger spaces and larger runways will be required. The old Stapleton airport couldn't even manage the larger planes of its era (nor the constant changes of Denver weather). Denver becoming a major international hub is entirely because of this new, enormous airport and its ability to now handle ever-larger international air crafts. The attitude of "bigger means better" is not a global conspiracy, either.
4. Tunnels built underground - which is pretty much the definition of a subway system. The subway, by the way, is ridden by thousands of passengers every single day. Even if someone initially believed these tunnels were nefarious, I'd think after realizing that the airport had a subway, that person would get a clue.

The airport doesn't even need to have anything underground as that's already happened nearby. We have Cheyenne Mountain and NORAD in Colorado Springs, about 77 miles due south/southwest of DIA. This is a whole underground base inside a mountain, for Pete's sake, which is far better hidden than an international airport. It would also make a great conspiracy theory as the majority of its staff has been transferred to Peterson Air Force Base. This means that an enormous underground base only has a fraction of its previous personnel there to know what's really going on. I'd think if the NWO/reptillians/FEMA were looking for a secret base or capital once the whole economy collapses, that would be a far better option.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

Speak of the devil. Looks like "Bluecifer" is staying, after all:

Despite criticism, Denver airport's 'Devil Horse' sculpture likely to stay - Itineraries on NBCNews.com

 

[RonReyes]

Speak of the devil. Looks like "Bluecifer" is staying, after all:
Despite criticism, Denver airport's 'Devil Horse' sculpture likely to stay - Itineraries on NBCNews.com

"Behold "Blue Mustang," a 32-foot, 9,000-pound, electric blue, anatomically correct fiberglass sculpture of a rearing horse situated along Peña Boulevard, the main road to the airport."

So by anatomically correct they mean it has a penis.

 

[RenaissanceLady]

"Behold "Blue Mustang," a 32-foot, 9,000-pound, electric blue, anatomically correct fiberglass sculpture of a rearing horse situated along Peña Boulevard, the main road to the airport."

So by anatomically correct they mean it has a penis.

Oh yes. If you click on any of the links about this sculpture that have pictures, you can see that he has his naughty bits on full display.

 

[RonReyes]

Gross...