StarDestroyer.Net BBS

jaeger115 wrote: That's a bit insensitive when you take Sept. 11 in account..

Fuck NYC. They're still waffling over what to build to replace the WTC,
while the Pentagon's been rebuilt already.

And the joke down here in Maryland when THE SUM OF ALL FEARS came
out was that nuking Baltimore, MD was an IMPROVEMENT....

MKSheppard wrote:Fuck NYC. They're still waffling over what to build to replace the WTC,
while the Pentagon's been rebuilt already.

WTC was completely destroyed. Pentagon got one side smashed in.

Fuck NYC. They're still waffling over what to build to replace the WTC,
while the Pentagon's been rebuilt already.

Well, the Pentagon was partially destroyed while the WTC was completely destroyed, but let's get back on topic, shall we?

Hotfoot wrote: WTC was completely destroyed. Pentagon got one side smashed in.

They didn't waffle around for months deciding on what to do with the
Pentagon, they just started clearing the rubble and rebuilding.....

NYC just excavacated a fucking deep pit and proceeded to fill said pit up
with thousands of pages of fucking worthless studies with what to replace
the WTC.....

Funny thing is, NYC called in environmental groups to talk at the WTC
rebuilding forums, where they proceeded to bitch about the effect
of rebuilding the WTC will have on fucking BIRDS..

They didn't waffle around for months deciding on what to do with the
Pentagon, they just started clearing the rubble and rebuilding.....

NYC just excavacated a fucking deep pit and proceeded to fill said pit up
with thousands of pages of fucking worthless studies with what to replace
the WTC.....

They rebuilt the Pentagon because there was still most of it left. We're still arguing about the WTC because it was COMPLETELY destroyed and some people want something built there in its memory and others disagree with them. What fucking part of this don't you understand?

You won't have a voice in the WTC's rebuilding until YOU speak up.

MKSheppard wrote:They didn't waffle around for months deciding on what to do with the
Pentagon, they just started clearing the rubble and rebuilding.....

When most of the building is still standing, that's not a hard decision. What, would they tear it down and rebuild it from scratch? It's a no-brainer.

NYC just excavacated a fucking deep pit and proceeded to fill said pit up
with thousands of pages of fucking worthless studies with what to replace
the WTC.....

The level of destruction achieved when the planes struck was massive. The buildings were completely destroyed. They have to build from the ground up again, and they don't want it to be as vulnerable as before. There's a lot to be considered. It is not a no-brainer.

jaeger115 wrote: They rebuilt the Pentagon because there was still most of it left. We're still arguing about the WTC because it was COMPLETELY destroyed and some people want something built there in its memory and others disagree with them. What fucking part of this don't you understand?

You want my design?

Build a new WTC from completely new plans, but retaining the exterior
cladding of the old WTC so they look identical from a distance, and also
include a carbon copy of the old WTC lobby for the new ones' lobby.

To appease the liberals, simply switch the footprint of the new WTC buildings
around so that they don't stand on the footprints of the old WTC.....a simple
solution....but that never occured to the morons up in NYC....

Shep then say blow up the fucken retards that is working on the WTC...not the entire fuckin community aka Stravo, many others including me.

Cyaround,
Jason

MKSheppard wrote:To see New York City disappear in a ball of thermonuclear
fire from a ten megaton detonation, press 382-5692 (FUCK NYC)
on your phone.

To chose the country to take the Fall for the Nuclear Destruction of NYC,
press:

1. For Iraq

2. For North Korea

3. For Russia

4. For China

5. For France

(BEEP)

Normally I'd know better.

But shit its fucking hilarious.

I like the strobe-lights better.

jaeger115 wrote: WTF? Build something in memory of something on a different location?

Hey genius, take a look here:



Lots of space....simply turn the original footprints of the twin towers
into a park memorial, with the new twin towers rising up from an
opposite location.

new twin towers rising up from an
opposite location.

Why do we need them? Why not build the parks on the original footprints and leave them alone?

jaeger115 wrote: Why do we need them? Why not build the parks on the original footprints and leave them alone?

By rebuilding, we send a simple "fuck you" visual bitchslap to the
Osamas of the world.

Besides, it's impossible NOT to rebuild. That's some of the most prime
real estate in NYC, man.

Wow, nice hijack.

Back on Topic: To Hear a Fucking HUUUUUGE Flame War, Just Stay On The Line.

MKSheppard wrote:To see New York City disappear in a ball of thermonuclear
fire from a ten megaton detonation, press 382-5692 (FUCK NYC)
on your phone.

To chose the country to take the Fall for the Nuclear Destruction of NYC,
press:

1. For Iraq

2. For North Korea

3. For Russia

4. For China

5. For France

(BEEP)

Quite funny. Sorry guys despite NYC but it's still funny. And yes nuking Baltimore probably would be an improvement.

MKSheppard wrote:

jaeger115 wrote: Why do we need them? Why not build the parks on the original footprints and leave them alone?

By rebuilding, we send a simple "fuck you" visual bitchslap to the
Osamas of the world.

Besides, it's impossible NOT to rebuild. That's some of the most prime
real estate in NYC, man.

humbug! by simply rebuilding it you deny what has happened. you hide the scar.
by building a completely new one, better one, bigger, taller, better designed one you bitchslap the osamas.
when people in the near and distant future see pictures or movies of the new yorker skyline in which the old wtc still stood they´re always going to be reminded of 9/11 because there´s no way of seeing the old one in real life and they´re going to be used to the new one. that´s in case it´s different from the old one.


if the new one is the same they´re not going to think anything when seeing pictures of the old one because it looks perfectly normal.

rebuilding it the same would be an incredible misstake.

salm wrote:

MKSheppard wrote:

jaeger115 wrote: Why do we need them? Why not build the parks on the original footprints and leave them alone?

By rebuilding, we send a simple "fuck you" visual bitchslap to the
Osamas of the world.

Besides, it's impossible NOT to rebuild. That's some of the most prime
real estate in NYC, man.

humbug! by simply rebuilding it you deny what has happened. you hide the scar.
by building a completely new one, better one, bigger, taller, better designed one you bitchslap the osamas.
when people in the near and distant future see pictures or movies of the new yorker skyline in which the old wtc still stood they´re always going to be reminded of 9/11 because there´s no way of seeing the old one in real life and they´re going to be used to the new one. that´s in case it´s different from the old one.


if the new one is the same they´re not going to think anything when seeing pictures of the old one because it looks perfectly normal.

rebuilding it the same would be an incredible mistake.

Its just my opinion that if you build a similiar one you bitchslap them by saying: "We're back, fuckers!"

Captain Lennox wrote:

salm wrote:

MKSheppard wrote: By rebuilding, we send a simple "fuck you" visual bitchslap to the
Osamas of the world.

Besides, it's impossible NOT to rebuild. That's some of the most prime
real estate in NYC, man.

humbug! by simply rebuilding it you deny what has happened. you hide the scar.
by building a completely new one, better one, bigger, taller, better designed one you bitchslap the osamas.
when people in the near and distant future see pictures or movies of the new yorker skyline in which the old wtc still stood they´re always going to be reminded of 9/11 because there´s no way of seeing the old one in real life and they´re going to be used to the new one. that´s in case it´s different from the old one.


if the new one is the same they´re not going to think anything when seeing pictures of the old one because it looks perfectly normal.

rebuilding it the same would be an incredible mistake.

Its just my opinion that if you build a similiar one you bitchslap them by saying: "We're back, fuckers!"

how is building a skyscraper designed in the 60s bitchslapping anybody?
a building with modern superior design and technology is bitchslaping.
if you build a different one you also say, we´re back, but 10 times as strong.

furthermore my mainpoint is not to bitchslap anybody but the thing i wrote about remembering 9/11.
the old wtc is dead. it died along with 3000 people. resurecting it would be like laughing and forgetting these people.

salm wrote: how is building a skyscraper designed in the 60s bitchslapping anybody?
a building with modern superior design and technology is bitchslaping.
if you build a different one you also say, we´re back, but 10 times as strong.

Did you not get my point?

Build a new WTC from completely new plans, but retaining the exterior
cladding of the old WTC so they look identical from a distance, and also
include a carbon copy of the old WTC lobby for the new ones' lobby.

Basically, we build a new WTC, but put enough visual touches on the
new design so that it looks like the old one from a distance....

MKSheppard wrote:

jaeger115 wrote: That's a bit insensitive when you take Sept. 11 in account..

Fuck NYC. They're still waffling over what to build to replace the WTC,
while the Pentagon's been rebuilt already.

By law as a historical building the Pentagon had to be rebuilt the same way it was. As for NYC, a direct or even larger replacement was proposed but was rejected for cost.

Captain Lennox wrote:Scum*Loads Colt then slaps you with* Damn coward get him out of my place. Guess who I'm referring too you get a cookie.

Hey, at least Patton was fighting for the good guys. WHERE'S MAH COOKAH YA IMP BIATCH?!?!?!

Captain Lennox wrote:
Its just my opinion that if you build a similiar one you bitchslap them by saying: "We're back, fuckers!"

I have a better idea. We build them to both look like the original towers, but the inside is really a pair of giant laser systems. These will fire upward and be targeted by mirror-equipped satellites, capable of vaporizing a cubic kilometer of solid rock.

MKSheppard wrote:

salm wrote: how is building a skyscraper designed in the 60s bitchslapping anybody?
a building with modern superior design and technology is bitchslaping.
if you build a different one you also say, we´re back, but 10 times as strong.

Did you not get my point?

of course i got your point and that argument was pointed at captain lennox

Build a new WTC from completely new plans, but retaining the exterior
cladding of the old WTC so they look identical from a distance, and also
include a carbon copy of the old WTC lobby for the new ones' lobby.

Basically, we build a new WTC, but put enough visual touches on the
new design so that it looks like the old one from a distance....

i still see no point in making it look the same from a distance.
i´d want all the world (most part of it IS distant) to see that it is different.
making it look the same from the distance but different when your close is like wispering: psst, we´re back!
making it look different from the distance as well is like shouting at the top of your voice: "HEY, WE´RE BACK FUCKERS! COME GET SOME!!!

IRG CommandoJoe wrote:

Captain Lennox wrote:Scum*Loads Colt then slaps you with* Damn coward get him out of my place. Guess who I'm referring too you get a cookie.

Hey, at least Patton was fighting for the good guys. WHERE'S MAH COOKAH YA IMP BIATCH?!?!?!

There bitch:

ezuniq
20020801231548.169148
ezboard.com/
0
2189574176
32107986
1172026976
29506419
*

(Note: a few digits were changed too protect the great ones. Read: me.)