 |
search this site: search the web: |
It would be creepy (like Trumps hair) to build the same buildings again. Like living in a house where a bunch of people were killed.....
by malckdaddy on Fri May 20, 05 2:19am
[+]
Love the idea.
by nuckinfutz on Fri May 20, 05 3:03am
[+]
I like the current idea. I think bigger sends a bigger message than the old ones. I think that most people, myself included, thought the old WTC was ugly. I can't stand anything that Donald Trump gets involved in though he is such a jerk.
by inter_regnum on Fri May 20, 05 3:07am
[+]
I must admit I've never lived in NYC and only visited there once, and that was after 9/11. I heard that a lot of people in NYC didn't like the looks of the old towers. That said, I'm sure most people would understand the motive behind rebuilding the towers (refer to my comments in the description or herzog's comments) and not have too much of a qualm about the towers this time around, all things considered.
by Counciltucky on Fri May 20, 05 3:32am
[+]
btw, I added "Keep the reflecting pools" as an option -- I guess I should ask, there are reflecting pools there now, right? That's at least what I heard at once. When I visited NYC, it wasn't even a full year after 9/11 and it was basically a dirt hole. I heard somewhere along the line that there are currently reflecting pools there right now. If I'm wrong, I apologize, and disregard that option in the votes.
by Counciltucky on Fri May 20, 05 3:34am
[+]
I'd like to see them built in Mecca. I never liked the look of the Twin Towers - they rather spoiled the beautiful New York skyline with their height, and they were architecturally boring. If buildings are rebuilt on that site, I think they should fit in more with the style of the rest of the city - i.e. more brains and less brawn. Don't have any strong opinions about replacement, but Trump comes off like someone whose pride was wounded: "Oh yeah? Well we'll show you! We'll build the same thing ... only BIGGER!" Unfortunately, rather than redressing the 9/11 injury or rebuffing the aggressors, it only makes us look small and petulant. Nuts to Trump. Larry Silverstein wanted those building down for a reason.
by _Beelzebubba on Fri May 20, 05 11:10am
[+]
i am from britain so i havent seen it yet. but isnt it great that he can have all that money and still have a terrible hairstyle. when you say trumps idea , surely he ddint design it did he? Perhaps on the top of the building could be a statue of a giant clentched fist with it's middle finger extended, facing mecca. ^Not so much. Intentionally pissing all of Islam off isn't quite what we need at this point.
by Counciltucky on Sat May 21, 05 1:15pm
[+]
screw them CT: what happens if we do? Will they get so mad that they steal some of our planes and crash them into some of our cities? Or will they stop their overwhelming support for our war on terror? It seems that a pissed off arab world and the arab world in it's usual state are nearly inseperable. Herz: I refer you to the worldwide reaction to the Koran deal in Newsweek. That and it'd be unfair to the Muslims who are peaceful and don't give their religion a bad eye like the fundamentalists.
by Counciltucky on Mon May 23, 05 12:44am
[+]
CT: as long as they riot within their own countries and kill their fellow radicals, I couldn't care less. Besides, I'm getting pretty damn sick of this supposed 'moderate muslim majority'. Besides being too many Ms in a row, they aren't doing their job. All of germany got a bad rap because of their nazi minority. And I think this is fair because the good germans did nothing to reign them in, and as a result they died along with their radicals. If the moderate muslims don't do anything to reign in their radicals (which they haven't so far) they can go to hell. herz, I have no problem with Ms -- my last name's Murphy. ;-) All kidding aside, what you're saying seems to smack of bigotry. That's like telling me, a Christian, to reign in the likes of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson because they're fellow Christians. Now I know that's not an accurate comparison because they haven't killed someone, but if there was a Christian crusade going on, I would be powerless against the movement. Remember, the US was settled in part be pilgrims who came over here so they could be comfortable practicing their religion -- that's one of the great things about America is religious tolerance. Intentionally insulting Islam goes against what America should stand for. Not only would it throw fuel on the fire (once again, we've heard about the Newsweek incident and its aftereffects for the better part of a couple weeks now), but it'd be an insult to the Muslims living in America, the vast majority who DON'T support what happened on 9/11 and live peacefully and don't cause trouble for anyone.
by Counciltucky on Mon May 23, 05 11:34pm
[+]
CT: if falwell and his buddies went out and killed people in the name of christianity I'd expect you to say something on the subject. Better yet, if there were hundreds of falwells calling for the deaths of all non-christians, and acting on those beliefs, and you choose to remain silent I would lump you in with them. Decent people have a responsibility to stand up to this sort of thing, and if they don't they can no longer consider themselves decent people. Look at how many muslims took to the streets because maybe a koran had possibly got some water damage. If they had that same response to terrorism carried out in their names there would be no terrorists left, they'd all be riped to shreds by the good muslims. But that hasn't happend. Nor has there been a single protest against terrorism of any significance in the muslim world. This is very telling. And the vast majority of muslims in america haven't done anything to condemn terrorism. They've had ample oppurtunity, so why the silence? herz: Remember, one of the principles of Islam is the ultimate holiness of the Koran. They took the flushing of the Koran as a slap in the face. As for American Muslims remaining silent, how so? Fact of the matter is, their opinions haven't really been expressed one way or the other, so it seems like it'd be an assumption to say they don't condemn it. What about people who have converted to Islam since 9/11, not because of anything terrorism-related but because of something they felt inside them that lured them to the religion? They don't deserve persecution. They don't deserve a large symbol that serves no purpose than to insult their faith.
by Counciltucky on Tue May 24, 05 11:58pm
[+]
"As for American Muslims remaining silent, how so? Fact of the matter is, their opinions haven't really been expressed one way or the other, so it seems like it'd be an assumption to say they don't condemn it." Exactly, not expressing your opinion on a subject is the very definition of 'remaining silent'. I've heard muslim leaders in the US condemn airport security, our prison in cuba, the unfair stereotyping and treatment of muslims in the US following 911, and all the rest. Obviously they have the ability to get their message out if they want to. This fact and the fact taht they've said nothing about terrorism is very telling. "What about people who have converted to Islam since 9/11, not because of anything terrorism-related but because of something they felt inside them that lured them to the religion? They don't deserve persecution." If they refuse to condemn terrorism they don't deserve to be included in civilized society either. "They don't deserve a large symbol that serves no purpose than to insult their faith." Perhaps not. And innocent americans don't deserve to die while these people complain about how rough they have it here. I'll make them a deal; if all the good muslims of the world would take a stand against terrorism and end it (that'd be easy if they made the effort) I promise to never say another bad thing about the religion again. That's really all I have against islam, that and their treatment of women, distain for science, and love for fundamentalist regimes. Otherwise they're pretty similiar to any other religion. The thing is, they can't stop rogue sects from popping up and committing atrocities. This has happened throughout history, and with pretty much every religion. It isn't all of Islam that has a gripe against America -- mainly it's just the Wahhabi sect. I agree with you that perhaps they should be more vocal about denouncing terrorism, though at the same time neither you nor I know any real extent as to whether or not Muslims have spoken up. By that, I mean that perhaps the media hasn't really stepped up and asked what Muslims think of terrorism. Just because we haven't heard anything from them doesn't mean they condone it. Who knows the real reason behind not hearing anything? Right now, it's nothing short of speculation. Most Muslims I'd imagine do condone it (a good example would be aya -- she isn't Muslim anymore, but she was, and she has spoken against terrorism). Another problem would be the fundies that exist in pretty much every center of worship on Earth -- and fundie Muslims probably would be more openly in support of terrorist activity and would frown upon someone speaking up against acts of Islam and would try to perhaps push those people out of their mosque. Nobody wants to be excommunicated from their house of worship -- no matter the religion, there'd have to be a deep feeling of shame for that happening to ya. And that might be why they don't speak up -- fear of excommunication, especially with a religion as stringent as Islam. The reason there shouldn't be a big symbol flipping off Mecca is because America prides herself on freedom of religion, and one can make a pretty good argument that the symbol would promote religious intolerance. We can't violate a basic principle of what America stands for because we were attacked -- in a way, that would mean the terrorists have won, because the impact would have greatly changed American society. btw, you've mentioned Muslims not necessarily speaking up against terrorism. What about Christians, if that's the case? While I'm Christian and quite obviously don't support terrorism at all, the example I'm going to throw out to you is Pastor Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church. One of the church's websites, godhatesamerica. com, has previously said that the 9/11 attacks were a sign of God's wrath and openly hoped for more dead Americans because of this country condoning homosexuality. Basically, they seemed to support terrorism because of their religious beliefs. And if that's the case, and you can probably find examples in other faiths of open support of terrorism, why not condone all religion? Anyways nice debating with ya.
by Counciltucky on Thu May 26, 05 9:07pm
[+]
^Not to imply that this is the end of the debate. Simply meant it as a compliment.
by Counciltucky on Sat May 28, 05 12:14am
[+]
|