At 16:27 16/09/01, you wrote:
>At 11:38 AM 16/09/2001, Michael Wiik wrote:
>>"Stephan Vladimir Bugaj" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> > The new WTC should be as tall
>> > or taller, but the security precautions and evacuation mechanism
>> > much better.
>>Not to mention structural integrity and fire fighting systems. There's a
>>bunch of seemingly cogent stuff about the WTC at cryptome.org . Maybe
>>they could take out those cell and television antennas and prep the roof
>>for use as helicopter landing pads in case of emergency.
>Parachutes or paragliders, rope bridges to nearby buildings...
>But I still favor the idea of building down instead of up. Tall buildings
>always seemed a dumb idea since Towering Inferno. If you want a great view
>put an eiffel tower kind of structure up there and make it twice the
>height of the WTC buildings.
What your failing to understand Miriam is the love some ppl have for huge
representations of economic and culture supremacy. Some namby pamby tourist
attraction just wouldn't cut it. : )
"FURIOUS GREEN DREAMS, LAY SLEEPING IN STATE,
BUT SOON THE GREAT JELLY SHALL RISE FROM THE
AND ALL THOSE WHO MOCKED SHALL KNOW THEIR FATE
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:48 MDT