 |
19 Dec 2002, 18:36
|
#1
|
|
share the <3
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 2,709
|
Wtc
the new designs
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2587707.stm
now i know the other proposals were 'drab and boring', but in all honesty, would you go and work in those towers?? And secondly, if you were a member of AQ, wouldnt you want to knock it all down again??
__________________
Sophie is hotter than you
though ive gone off her now; the way Susanna Reid squirms around on sml is, however, awesome
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 18:49
|
#2
|
|
Guest
|
does anyone remember that cartoon-picture with the wtc rebuild twice as high with a large american flag on it? it somehow remindes me of this :/
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 18:51
|
#3
|
|
Rawr rawr
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Upside down
Posts: 5,300
|
Oh my god...
Monkeys in an architecture office...
But no, I wouldn't go work in those things because:
1) they are UGLY, I'd be ashamed to work in there
2) It's very likely that they get pushed over again
Al Queda or any other terrorist organisation will prolly try to knock it down again... it's no more than logical though...
__________________
"Yay"
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 19:13
|
#4
|
|
Klaatu barada nikto
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 3,237
|
Yes, they are all incredibly ugly.
The designs have to be picked by a committee, which will cater to the lowest common denominators; so I seriously doubt that any decent design will ever be selected.
As for al-Qaida, it would be very stupid of them to go after it a third time. Security for whatever is built there will be a lot higher than just about any other building.
__________________
The Ottawa Citizen and Southam News wish to apologize for our apology to Mark Steyn, published Oct. 22. In correcting the incorrect statements about Mr. Steyn published Oct. 15, we incorrectly published the incorrect correction. We accept and regret that our original regrets were unacceptable and we apologize to Mr. Steyn for any distress caused by our previous apology.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 19:15
|
#5
|
|
Rawr rawr
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Upside down
Posts: 5,300
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
As for al-Qaida, it would be very stupid of them to go after it a third time. Security for whatever is built there will be a lot higher than just about any other building.
|
How many security agents will it take to catch a plane? Literally!
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 20:46
|
#6
|
|
monkey on crack
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: US
Posts: 259
|
There really should be a 'none of the above' vote in this poll...
__________________
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 20:51
|
#7
|
|
J to the C to the A G E
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Scúnthorpe
Posts: 5,583
|
The "Studio Libeskind" one is the worst, I reckon.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 20:52
|
#8
|
|
Little Bitch
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Location Location!
Posts: 771
|
the norman foster one is the least bad imho.
__________________
Well I'd love to stay and talk, but you're a total bitch.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:22
|
#9
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: in a house
Posts: 185
|
id like to work there simply because of the technology that will most likely be used in the building. who cares what the building you work in looks like?
__________________
I can't believe someone actually said this:
Quote:
Originally posted by Achilles
CNN is liberal bull****...no wonder you people are so ****ing stupid. If you want a real News Channel try Fox News.
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:24
|
#10
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Originally posted by bobble
id like to work there simply because of the technology that will most likely be used in the building. who cares what the building you work in looks like?
|
The people living around it, most likely
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:27
|
#11
|
|
Guest
|
why don't they just make two ƒucking tall buildings that don't fall down and not complain about how pretty they look?
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:33
|
#12
|
|
Klaatu barada nikto
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 3,237
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Structural Integrity
How many security agents will it take to catch a plane? Literally!
|
Trying the hijack plane thing again would be even more stupid than going after the WTC a third time. Literally! :reindeer:
__________________
The Ottawa Citizen and Southam News wish to apologize for our apology to Mark Steyn, published Oct. 22. In correcting the incorrect statements about Mr. Steyn published Oct. 15, we incorrectly published the incorrect correction. We accept and regret that our original regrets were unacceptable and we apologize to Mr. Steyn for any distress caused by our previous apology.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:36
|
#13
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
Trying the hijack plane thing again would be even more stupid than going after the WTC a third time. Literally! :reindeer:
|
I agree!
Al-Quaida should hijack a hovercraft next time!
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:37
|
#14
|
|
Rawr rawr
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Upside down
Posts: 5,300
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
Trying the hijack plane thing again would be even more stupid than going after the WTC a third time. Literally! :reindeer:
|
yeh... I read that before... DeJa Vu!!!
Heh... still, I think planes are quite vulnerable to hijackings tho and it only takes one to cause massive havoc.
To be honest, I think the terrorists will try the same trick again, just to make a statement, even though I don't hope for it.
__________________
"Yay"
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:37
|
#15
|
|
Mr. Blobby
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Belgium
Posts: 8,271
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LHC
The "Studio Libeskind" one is the worst, I reckon.
|
Actually, in my opinion that's the least ugly one, with the Littenberg as a close second. Both of those look at least tolerable, whereas the rest are ugly crap.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:40
|
#16
|
|
J to the C to the A G E
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Scúnthorpe
Posts: 5,583
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Leshy
Actually, in my opinion that's the least ugly one, with the Littenberg as a close second. Both of those look at least tolerable, whereas the rest are ugly crap.
|
Well I like the Littenburg, as much as one of these monstrosities can be liked.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:54
|
#17
|
|
Rawr rawr
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Upside down
Posts: 5,300
|
Quote:
Originally posted by LHC
Well I like the Littenburg, as much as one of these monstrosities can be liked.
|
nah... it looks too "Empire State Building"-like...
If I had to pick on it'd be LibesKind's design, although I'm not sure about the big "pole" thing on the left.
__________________
"Yay"
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 21:59
|
#18
|
|
Klaatu barada nikto
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 3,237
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Structural Integrity
yeh... I read that before... DeJa Vu!!!
|
Yeah... My posts are disappearing almost as fast as I can (re)write them. :/
Quote:
|
Heh... still, I think planes are quite vulnerable to hijackings tho and it only takes one to cause massive havoc.
|
The US government has spent a lot of effort and money upgrading airport and airplane security (in the finest American tradition of preparing to win the last war instead of the next one). Also, and more importantly, al-Qaida has raised the bar for hostages--who now will rightfully assume they have nothing to lose...
Quote:
|
To be honest, I think the terrorists will try the same trick again, just to make a statement, even though I don't hope for it.
|
Well, I kinda hope they do; because then they'd be passing up a lot better targets. :reindeer:
__________________
The Ottawa Citizen and Southam News wish to apologize for our apology to Mark Steyn, published Oct. 22. In correcting the incorrect statements about Mr. Steyn published Oct. 15, we incorrectly published the incorrect correction. We accept and regret that our original regrets were unacceptable and we apologize to Mr. Steyn for any distress caused by our previous apology.
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 22:22
|
#19
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: in a house
Posts: 185
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
(in the finest American tradition of preparing to win the last war instead of the next one).
|
heh heh this one made me laugh. You'd think they'd get this right eventually
__________________
I can't believe someone actually said this:
Quote:
Originally posted by Achilles
CNN is liberal bull****...no wonder you people are so ****ing stupid. If you want a real News Channel try Fox News.
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 22:49
|
#20
|
|
Darling
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 890
|
i vote for www.wtc2002.com's revision 3 :/
the final proposals are bull**** 
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 23:27
|
#21
|
|
Guest
|
um you people dont like to read. These designs are the first out of three more rounds of designs. The designs you see here most likely won't become what is built
|
|
|
|
|
19 Dec 2002, 23:43
|
#22
|
|
no
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: in a chair
Posts: 329
|
i voted libeskind...i dont "get" the pole thingie though..
|
|
|
|
|
20 Dec 2002, 00:03
|
#24
|
|
Vermin Supreme
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,280
|
The new building(s) will be thought to symbolize america's reaction to terrorism no matter what.
From that, a few points are obvious:
It must be the tallest building in the world. Americans will accept nothing less.
It must stand out. You'd think being 1000 feet taller than anything else around would be enough here, but anything that doesn't make terrorists stew in anger will be thought to be the same as hiding.
Given that, it is quite the oppurtunity to create something truly grand, something outside of the bland gray rectangular prisms that lord over our cities, something unlike anything else in this world.
I look at those designs, and it seems that whether or not I like the designs, at least the designers are thinking now. A huge step over last summer's bunch.
The secenth one bores me to hell though, and most of the rest are ugly:/ I'll take ugly over boring anyday though.
|
|
|
|
|
20 Dec 2002, 09:02
|
#25
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: get off my case
Posts: 23
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
The US government has spent a lot of effort and money upgrading airport and airplane security (in the finest American tradition of preparing to win the last war instead of the next one). Also, and more importantly, al-Qaida has raised the bar for hostages--who now will rightfully assume they have nothing to lose...
|
Id have to disagree with the airport security part, I fly in and out of the States quite regularly. Security seemed quite lax at Newark, I passed through security checkpoints several times with aerosols, lighters and scissors. However, this could well be because I dont fit the racial profile they have and as such was subject to less intense scrutiny.
Second point is a good one though, after the plane that went down in PA I think the days of people hijacking planes with scissors are over, passengers are a lot more aware.
And yup, the designs are ****in ugly.
|
|
|
|
|
20 Dec 2002, 18:47
|
#26
|
|
Guest
|
wtc
none of them and build the wtc as circular instead of square (oh and put parachutes in the higher floors and dont put all the stairs and lifts in the central core).
|
|
|
|
|
20 Dec 2002, 18:50
|
#27
|
|
Bitch
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,848
|
Stick a few pulse cannons and...(must resist)...hadron turrets round the base, that should kee...NO, PA WITHDRAWL SYMPTOMS! SOMEONE HELP ME!!!!!
__________________
ACHTUNG!!!
Das machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy
schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und corkenpoppen mit
spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das
rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets. Relaxen und vatch
das blinkenlights!!!
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:13.
| |
Linear Mode
