US warship built from salvaged 9/11 steel

The bow contains 7.5 tonnes of steel taken from Ground Zero. Friends and families of 9/11 victims were among those at the ceremony for the new amphibious assault ship, the USS New York, in the base of Avondale.

It also bore a shield with two bars to symbolise the towers and a banner with the slogan Never Forget.

www.rawstory.com...

could this be the reason the steel was removed from the wtc-7 site so quickly? this is ironic in a way. instead of using the steel for a PEACE monument or something that doesnt kill, the americans undeniably decide to use the steel to build a machine of WAR.

why?



[edit on 5-3-2008 by SuperSlovak]

Well thats stupid to build a warship out of WTC steel.

One small fire in the gully and the whole ship will collapse.

reply to post by IvanZana


I had to star that one. That's pretty funny.

are you joking because im not american is that tha reason?

reply to post by SuperSlovak


Ivan wasn't joking about you. It was simply a WTC joke. The fact that people seem to think that it is a perfectly reasonable explanation that WTC 7 collapsed due to a fire.


As far as your post is concerned. It certainly is a good way of getting rid of the evidence. Snatch it away and process it into a new ship before any 3rd party can have a look at it.

I can remember as a kid the Japanese used to make toys out of recycled beer cans. I had a set of cars that had been Schlitz beer cans. You could still see the label on the interior and underside of the toys.

For years, the USA has sold scrap steel and old warships to China. These have been turned into a variety of objects, mainly toys, with recycling.

This time, we kept the steel but it is more or less the same thing.

BTW: enjoyed the fire comment. Starred!

more of that creepy american symbolism.

reply to post by SuperSlovak


What's ironic? Our country was attacked on 9/11, and to honor the fallen, ships were built with steel from the WTC, and named to pay respects to them. It's akin to the story of the Phoenix.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by SuperSlovak

 

What's ironic? Our country was attacked on 9/11, and to honor the fallen, ships were built with steel from the WTC, and named to pay respects to them. It's akin to the story of the Phoenix.

its ironic how your country doesnt want world war 3
but they still continue to build bigger warships and deadlier nukes

Originally posted by SuperSlovak

its ironic how your country doesnt want world war 3
but they still continue to build bigger warships and deadlier nukes

Bigger warships and deadlier nukes- from WTC steel? So after being attacked, what do you think our course of action should've been, other than responding? Have you ever heard the expression "Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." - if you want peace, prepare for war.

Here she is during and after the christening.

Pics

A little bit about her:

The 684-foot-long amphibious transport dock ship will be built by Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in New Orleans and carry a Navy crew of 363 and 699 Marines. The ship will be used to transport and land Marines, their equipment and supplies by embarked air cushions or conventional landing craft or amphibious vehicles, augmented by helicopters or vertical take off and landing aircraft in amphibious assault, special operations, or expeditionary warfare missions.

The ship will also incorporate the latest quality of life standards for the embarked sailors and Marines, including the sit-up berth, ship services mall, a fitness center and learning resource center and electronic classroom with the flexibility to accommodate mixed gender sailors and Marines as part of the crew and embarked troops. The design team also incorporated hundreds of suggestions and recommendations from more than 1,000 sailors and Marines in the Design for Ownership process to ensure that this ship will meet their needs throughout the first half of the 21st century.

www.globalsecurity.org...

[edit on 3/5/2008 by Zaphod58]

[edit on 3/5/2008 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Originally posted by SuperSlovak

its ironic how your country doesnt want world war 3
but they still continue to build bigger warships and deadlier nukes

Bigger warships and deadlier nukes- from WTC steel? So after being attacked, what do you think our course of action should've been, other than responding? Have you ever heard the expression "Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." - if you want peace, prepare for war.

you can have peace without war,
and without invading every country that trys to establish its own defenses.

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
[
you can have peace without war,
and without invading every country that trys to establish its own defenses.

But you can't have peace without being prepared for war. At least not for long. How many countries have we invaded for establishing defenses?
Are you talking about Saddam, and him developing various WMD? If so, that'd be 1 country. What do you think the likelihood of Saddam developing WMD for strictly defensive purposes was(considering he used WMD against Iran and his own people), and expressed views that Israel shouldn't exist?

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
could this be the reason the steel was removed from the wtc-7 site so quickly? this is ironic in a way. instead of using the steel for a PEACE monument or something that doesnt kill, the americans undeniably decide to use the steel to build a machine of WAR.
why?
[edit on 5-3-2008 by SuperSlovak]

They only took 7.5 tons of steel, are you trying to say that the whole inside job was done by only modifying 7.5 tons of steel for the entire complex?

No one stepped up and asked for any of the steel to build a peace memorial, had they done so I am sure they would have been given it.

BTW, in order to ensure that the steel would be as strong as the rest of the ship, they melted it down and added some minerals to it. So, there should be no worries about the bow being a weak point.

I can't believe that there are actually people here who are opposed to naming a ship in honor of those who sacrificed themselves on that terrible day. Regardless of what you believe, people still died and this is a fitting memorial to them.

Originally posted by IvanZana
Well thats stupid to build a warship out of WTC steel.

One small fire in the gully and the whole ship will collapse.

I wonder what would happen to a Warship if say a single engined Japanese Zero was to crash into it then explode..catching it on fire.

Do you think it might sink?

Whats all the fuss about? No WWII US Warships were threatened by Planes, Fires, and their effects on steel.... none were ever damaged enough to sink or become completely disabled at sea.Were they? Oh Wait.. OVER 100 were, that's right.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
So after being attacked, what do you think our course of action should've been, other than responding?

How about going after the right people?

Osama Bin Laden and Afghanastan come to mind.

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

Exactly 6 months later.

Need I say more?

Originally posted by COOL HAND
I can't believe that there are actually people here who are opposed to naming a ship in honor of those who sacrificed themselves on that terrible day.

Interesting way you put that. "Sacraficed themselves". What did they sacrafice themselves for? PNAC?

They didn't sacrafice themselves. They were murdered.

Before you try and counter me, yes, they were murdered. No matter what side of the fence you fall on, you can agree that they were murdered.

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
I wonder what would happen to a Warship if say a single engined Japanese Zero was to crash into it then explode..catching it on fire.

Do you think it might sink?

Punching a hole in the hull and sinking from water getting in is far different than what Ivan was talking about with the comparison to the WTC.

Unless you think that those planes that caught fire weakened the steel enough for the hull to implode and then sink? Do you?

Turning ploughshares into swords, now that's the sort of progress only the Pentagon could come up with.

As someone mentioned above, the symbolism is creepy.

[edit on 5-3-2008 by gottago]

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by COOL HAND
I can't believe that there are actually people here who are opposed to naming a ship in honor of those who sacrificed themselves on that terrible day.

Interesting way you put that. "Sacraficed themselves". What did they sacrafice themselves for? PNAC?

They didn't sacrafice themselves. They were murdered.

Before you try and counter me, yes, they were murdered. No matter what side of the fence you fall on, you can agree that they were murdered.

They were murdered, but not by or for PNAC.