Sorry, missed that. Seven? I would suspect it was filled with asbestos and concrete dust, had the windows blown in, the air conditions smashed, and was generally battered around enough that it would be cheaper to replace than refurbish. Most of the buildings in the immediate vicinity suffered considerable damage.
And it was the Port Authority's building. Maybe they wanted all new, who knows? Peter On Jun 29, 2008, at 10:17 PM, Steve MacSween wrote: > on 6/29/08 23:13, Peter Frederick at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> The combustion of 40,000 gallons of aviation fuel, along with the >> design of the building and the impact damage did them in. > > I said WTC SEVEN. > > It was not hit by ANYTHING. > > Mac > > > _______________________________________ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ > For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
