What a weird memorial board, I wonder why they've came to such conclusion.
What comes to promoting victims as heroes, I see it as western model for 'martyres'
I'm bit oldist but in my opinion the term 'hero' should be used in conjucation with something what was done - in this case the civilian casualties weren't "heroes", but very sadly victims of a terrorist attack, while the rescue workers were the "heroes", whos of many by the way were heroes from many times before on the line of duty.
It doesn't lessen the civilian casualties status were they promoted as heroes or not.
I don't find it right to call them heroes though, it just doesn't make sense by what the 'hero' means.
Flame me away, dunt care.