Construction begins tomorrow on replacement for Twin Towers.

[Morilore]

But why take the opportunity to raise that issue in a thread that hasn't the remotest connection to Bush in the world? That's an excellent sign of fixation on a topic or issue, when you feel compelled to steer the conversation in a completely unnecessary and irrelevant direction. It's kind of like my maternal grandmother. You can't have a conversation with her that lasts beyond about 15-20 minutes without her steering it into a discussion about The Lord. That's because she's religious as hell, and she's pretty much fixated on that issue.

Because the 1950's are back from a certain POV, where there is always a foe out there ready to strike America and the country must reinforce its moral, democratic, and corporate superiority to combat it and have faith in, this case, an idiot who stole the election.

Come on Kerry; get us back on the right track.

Look closely. He wrote a sentence about 1950 mentality. Where one would say "the leader" he wrote "in this case" and described his opinions of that leader. That doesn't seem like too much of a stretch, does it? He then made a seemingly not-too-serious remark about how he hoped Kerry, if elected, would work against the 1950 mentality. I fail to see why only a Bush-rabid individual could have written that post. See the hypothetical Bush-hater post in my previous reply.

It would be nice if JME2 himself would reply.

[darthdavid]

Is it just me or does this building look like it's ejaculating?

[sketerpot]

Their excuse for all that ugly scaffolding is "wind turbines"? Remember when the Empire State Building put a spire on the roof for a dirigible dock? It looks like the snazzy accessory of the decade is windmills. Solar panels were so 70's....

[Admiral Valdemar]

I still think they should've gone for the giant 3D hologram of a serpent eye on fire looking at everyone and firing death rays at any foolish incoming aircraft.

[Aeolus]

I still think they should've gone for the giant 3D hologram of a serpent eye on fire looking at everyone and firing death rays at any foolish incoming aircraft.

sigh, we can always dream

[salm]

Stupid people piss me off.

you must be pissed off a lot considering that you are around yourself all the time.

I reiterate: Why the fuck do we need the entire building to be a memorial?

i already told you in my last post. see above. or below.

Move the fuck on, for crying out loud. Nobody is going to forget, you don't need to fixate on tragedy to keep it in people's minds.

people won´t fixate on it as said in my last post. see above.

Why can't you let the building just be a building?

why not use it as a building AND a memorial if it´s perfectly suited for those purposes?

Actually, you say that rebuilding the old buildings "you basicly take a piss on the dead folks because you apparantly don´t consider them important enough to be remembered".

but actually that part of my post has absolutely nothing to do with my point that people won´t fixate on the desaster if the building looks different from the old one and is used as a memorial.

and yes, i still thinkt it´s degrading for the dead. still because of the same reasons which you didn´t bother to care about and instead posted some strawman bullshit about fixating on it permanently.

Wow you're ignorant, that's a 180 foot memorial on a base that is several square miles.

And you want to use the entire area as a memorial in NYC.

yes. thanks for totally ignoring my argument about runways and harbor facilities.

just because runways and harbor facilites are unsuitable to serve as memorials doesn´t mean that a building in the heart of new york is.

You still haven't answered the question: why can't you let a building be a building?

you still haven´t answered my argument about runways and harbor facilities.


again. why not use it as a building AND a memorial if it´s perfectly suited for those purposes?
it´s not like you design a building different from a regular building. you simply use it as a memorial by defining it as one.
(even though in this case they actually are doing that with this cheesy light crap which uses the sun to illuminate the park in it´s entirety on 9/11 at 8 and a couple of minutes. but that´s besides the point)
by putting a small memorial inside the building this effect (the building itself being a memorial) would be minimized because the memorial status would be projected on the acutal memorial inside.
by rebuilding the twin towers the effect would be minimized because you couldn´t see the contrast between new and old.

Why do you have to make it a memorial? You'd be dooming the entire area to a lifetime of living in the past.

no you wouldn´t. that´s what you´d get if you hadn´t cleaned up ground zero.
a completely new building is clearly a sign of restoration and future while still having it´s memorial status. an all in one solution.

[Howedar]

*snip irrelivant flame*

i already told you in my last post. see above. or below.

people won´t fixate on it as said in my last post. see above.

why not use it as a building AND a memorial if it´s perfectly suited for those purposes?

Because it's unnecessary and will cause undue fixation on the events of Sept. 11th. This is the last time I'm going to explain this.

but actually that part of my post has absolutely nothing to do with my point that people won´t fixate on the desaster if the building looks different from the old one and is used as a memorial.

and yes, i still thinkt it´s degrading for the dead. still because of the same reasons which you didn´t bother to care about and instead posted some strawman bullshit about fixating on it permanently.

Concession accepted. If it's not 100% memorial, you consider it degrading.

yes. thanks for totally ignoring my argument about runways and harbor facilities.

It evades your feeble mind that a cube farm is not the best thing to turn into a memorial.

you still haven´t answered my argument about runways and harbor facilities.


again. why not use it as a building AND a memorial if it´s perfectly suited for those purposes?
it´s not like you design a building different from a regular building. you simply use it as a memorial by defining it as one.

See above.

(even though in this case they actually are doing that with this cheesy light crap which uses the sun to illuminate the park in it´s entirety on 9/11 at 8 and a couple of minutes. but that´s besides the point)
by putting a small memorial inside the building this effect (the building itself being a memorial) would be minimized because the memorial status would be projected on the acutal memorial inside.
by rebuilding the twin towers the effect would be minimized because you couldn´t see the contrast between new and old.

That's the whole idea, as I've explained several times.

no you wouldn´t. that´s what you´d get if you hadn´t cleaned up ground zero.
a completely new building is clearly a sign of restoration and future while still having it´s memorial status. an all in one solution.

I've got an honest question: Where do you live?

[salm]

It evades your feeble mind that a cube farm is not the best thing to turn into a memorial.

art is a good thing to use as a memorial. architecture is art. yes decent cube farms can be a very good thing to turn into a memorial.

That's the whole idea, as I've explained several times.

we´re disagreeing on the most basic point in this discussion (contrast good or bad). until that´s sorted out all other points are doomed to be worthless.
this basic point is based purely on taste and therefor can´t be sorted out. this discussion as a who´s right, who´s wrong discussion is worthless since there´s no objective data on the quality of contrast between old and new.

I've got an honest question: Where do you live?

in stuttgart, germany. why is that relevant?

[Broomstick]

WHY DOES EVERY GODDAMNED THING IN THE US SINCE 9/11 NEED TO HAVE THE FUCKING WORD "FREEDOM" IN IT?

It doesn't.

We have lots of phrases without "freedom" in them.

All of those, I might point out, have the word SECURITY in them.

George Orwell's 1984 was off by about 20 years....

[Broomstick]

And, oh yes - they rebuilt the Pentagon to the same specs as before, the only difference being one block carved with "September 11, 2001" as a memorial. No one pitched a fit over that, go figger...

LET people squabble over the damn WTC replacements. Fact is, they were fugly when they were built and no one loved them until they were gone. They just got used to having them around, that's all.

[frigidmagi]

I'm not defending the new towers, in fact when I see them I tend to think... Ick.

However I am reminded of another building, far away from New York that people hated. In fact there was massive outcry to have it torn down. Today it's a symbol for it's nation. So perhaps we're being short sighted?

On wheter they need a memorial...

People are foolish, short-sighted and mob minded. Anyone, from Wong to Kerry to Bush to you pick is capable of idioticy and will commit idioticy at one time or another in their life. It's not a matter of intellgence, it's a matter of human nature.

Without a reminder, people will forget. They already forgotten in Washington D.C. And those who forget history are doomed to repeat it and I'm not talking school classes.

[Gandalf]

Apparently the shape they chose was supposed to reflect the Statue of Liberty.

What I liked about the old ones was that they made a good representation of capitalism. "Like our big building? We'll we've got two of them."