Freedom Tower.
The designs for the replacement for the World Trade Center towers destroyed by hateful bastards are being finalized, according to MSNBC. The new building will be more "blast-resistant" to truck bombs. As I recall, truck bombs aren't what brought the towers down. Anyway, the whole thing is supposed to be the tallest and safest building in the world -- and extremely beautiful to boot.But who the hell would want an office in what amounts to a really big tombstone? Why the hell can't they leave it (that spot) alone and maybe put a park there of some other memorial? I suppose we're really stupid enough to believe that no one will blow this one up, unless this one comes with its own squadron of F-22s to intercept potential suicide planes.
But then again, the evil-doers will find a way around that, too.
The way I see it, it's almost...disrespectful to put another giant building structure. I mean, there's getting on with our lives. And then there's creating a shiny distraction so that we forget what happened and the thousands of people that died at that spot one day. This is, of course, not to mention the pragmatik concerns about putting another target there.
What do you think?
put here by Pragmatik at 2:27 PM
8 Comments:
Anything dealing with the loss of lives is truly a tragedy, innocent lives were lost, and my prayers do go out to all those affected. I mean no disrespect to the American people, or anyone affected, the following is just my thoughts and conclusions.
I'm a conspieracy theory nut, the truth of the matter is, the buildings should never have come down in the first place.
planes hit the upper floors, which isn't even half way up. Suppoosidly the supports melted and the both buildings crashed, right? Look at Oklahoma City, that was at the base of the building and half of it went down. That's an example of supports being destructed.
The only way the buildings would have come down is by means of a demo. setup. It's also been documented in many interviews, and excerpts from interviewed personell stating they "pulled" the buildings.
Man, stuff like this really makes me mad, and sad. So much corrupt shit is going on, and noone can stop it. Read the REAL news people, not CNN or the like. Look up the "DOWNING STREET MEMOS".
Go ahead and bash me, or whatever, its my opinion like I said. Last time I checked, opinions were allowed. There's no patriot act clause against it, right now anyways.
Not yet, lol.
You'd be immune to Patriot Act bullshit, though, my Canadian brother:)
I don't know anything about the theories about what happened to bring the buildings down. But I would certainly be interested in reading about a theory or two, if you can point out some good articles on it. Always good to have a look see regarding things like this.
I do remember hearing that the building was made to handle being hit by a 747, which is considerably larger than the planes that brought each tower down. That's weird.
Yeah man, I'll hook you up.
Honestly, I probably sound like an escaped insane idiot, but the puzzle pieces really come together.
Pull-It Evidence: Here
Basic Overview of 9/11 Report & Evidence: Here
Haha you wanna know something funny, 4/19 hijackers that were supposidly on the planes that crashed, have been found alive.
Lastly, evidence that Bush authorized it 9/11.
Massive cover-up in effect boys, come get it.
Like I said man, the puzzle pieces start to fit quite snug.
Bushy baby thought about invading Iraq back in 2002. Instituted some PATRIOT ACT, which is borderline dictatorship. Rigged two elections. list goes on.
Sure, I don't believe everything some crackpot writes, but like I said, alot is out of place.
I don't think Dubbya rigged the elections. I think that the majority of the voters in America don't know what's best for the nation. Or they didn't bother to vote.
Bush wanted to invade Iraq before 2002, I think. It was already talked about in the news by then. They went in very very early in 2003, just after my brother left for bootcamp.
While most thinking people would certainly agree that the Patriot Act is largely bullshit and mostly unnecessary, and totally sneaky, I'm not sure it's fair to call it borderline dictatorship. There is still a government process involved and all that. It might curtail some freedoms, but it doesn't give all the power to one dictating monad.
Besides, we have no dictator. That would mean that Bush thinks for himself and makes his own choices:)
I personally never thought of it that way. As much as I disagree with Dubbya and find having a moron as a leader unpleasant to say the least, I never thought of it as offensive to suggest that our own goverment would kill a few thousand of us, with lots of them being emergency troopers. Even if some people are right in calling Bush "evil," (not that I agree or disagree with that), I don't think he's THAT evil. That would be a special kind of evil, one that shouldn't get tossed around in theories. You're right, R.M.
Nationalism. I find that the most offensive.
Nationalism: offensive to one in the nation or in another nation? I don't understand what you mean. :)
Post a Comment
<< Home