Originally posted by Murphs

Originally posted by 2PacSade
When I look at the OP's pic I do see the similarity to all the symbols mentioned so far in this thread yes BUT. . .

*snip*

. . .Just my $0.02

2PacSade-

Well your $0.02 worth is the same as my husbands..LOL

AW NOT YOU TOO!!!

My wife tells me the same thing. . .

2PacSade-

That is a very good find!!
What i find interesting is the fact that here we have a building or two that are shaped like the swastika.

We all have our opinions on why they "could have " been built that way, ie for extra size to maximise the square footage of each building, blah blah blah,

Unless there is a regulation within that area to limit the number of stories a building can go up surely, (i know here in the UK) that the majority of the financial outlay would come from the "groundwork" ie the footings, pipework etc.
And it dosent matter what country you are from the financial cost of construction is uppermost.
So why would a company go to added cost to get a bit of extra floor space when they can just go upwards?...It dosent make sense to me?

We have had two posters (or one that has posted twice) state that in their "QUALIFIED" opinion the original drawings would have to have been passed by many people and from every angle, so why was this note picked up at one of these veiwings?

IMO whoever owns and or commisioned this building to be built KNEW exactly what they were asking for!!

Originally posted by spymaster
That is a very good find!!
What i find interesting is the fact that here we have a building or two that are shaped like the swastika.

We all have our opinions on why they "could have " been built that way, ie for extra size to maximise the square footage of each building, blah blah blah,

Unless there is a regulation within that area to limit the number of stories a building can go up surely, (i know here in the UK) that the majority of the financial outlay would come from the "groundwork" ie the footings, pipework etc.
And it dosent matter what country you are from the financial cost of construction is uppermost.
So why would a company go to added cost to get a bit of extra floor space when they can just go upwards?...It dosent make sense to me?

We have had two posters (or one that has posted twice) state that in their "QUALIFIED" opinion the original drawings would have to have been passed by many people and from every angle, so why was this note picked up at one of these veiwings?

IMO whoever owns and or commisioned this building to be built KNEW exactly what they were asking for!!

Bollocks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Utter and total bollocks!

To murphs:
You obviously thought your answere out?
Im glad that you have knowledge of the ENGLISH Language.
If you (and you can ask for help from your husband/partner) because you obvioulsy need it, with an answere like that, what is "utter & total" and i wont even bother to use the launguage you used.

If you do reply (when your husband /partner) gets in lets hope the reply is more than 3 or 4 words...if you can manage it!

The lines connecting a swastika are STRAIGHT lines. These buildings aren't lined up like that. They look similar, but it isn't accurate to say that they ARE swastikas.

That being said, if it is really bothering you, it wouldn't take much digging to find out who the architect/firm was that designed the buildings and research their background and/or simply ask them about the coincidence.

I personally feel the two designs are too different to mean anything. I mean, if you are going to design a building like a swastika, wouldn't you just make it look EXACTLY like a swastika?

Here's a snip I found about the construction of the San Diego building.

On a website for the Coronado Amphibious Base, the Navy admits that there was an “oversight” by Navy planners in the design and construction of the complex, officially called “NAB Complex 320-325.” According to the site (as it appeared on December 7, 2006): “It wasn’t until after the groundbreaking began that Navy officials realized how the buildings would appear when seen from above.”

We asked for amplification from Steve Fiebing, a civilian public affairs officer at Naval Base Coronado—of which Naval Amphibious Base in a component. He said that the snafu was that the design of the first L-shaped building was approved by the Navy without anyone thinking about what happens when four L-shaped buildings are configured together. Fiebing said it is his understanding that the Vicinity Map accompanying this article was drawn well after the project was too far along in the process to be changed.


Seems resonable the same happened in Glendale.
Sorry , in a hurry to post a link now.

Originally posted by harrytuttle
The lines connecting a swastika are STRAIGHT lines. These buildings aren't lined up like that. They look similar, but it isn't accurate to say that they ARE swastikas.

That being said, if it is really bothering you, it wouldn't take much digging to find out who the architect/firm was that designed the buildings and research their background and/or simply ask them about the coincidence.

I personally feel the two designs are too different to mean anything. I mean, if you are going to design a building like a swastika, wouldn't you just make it look EXACTLY like a swastika?

I also mentioned the design being offset with respect to a swastika, and that the reason could have been to fit the buildings in a smaller footprint. ( Almost like a pinwheel. ). Could also be "subtly" designed to look like a swastika could it not?

In any case I have someone that is going to hopefully get me some information on the buildings in question. When I hear back from them I will post the findings here.

2PacSade-