AUShole wrote on Mar 24^th, 2007 at 7:08am:

Engineering is always about compromise, you can't expect budgets that allow for every little scenario to be tested, you can't necessarily build things to be perfectly impervious to all situations either. Designing and building a tower of that size with a possible collision with a loaded 747 in mind would mean unreasonable costs for what amounts to a very small risk (despite what we know of history).

Quote:

I'm sorry Trump, but you have to admit, a 9/11 thread was always very likely to have ended up at this point... 

Cost. A regular fire on multiple levels would not have brought it down. Ripping it open and pouring in jet fuel is a completely different matter"
--------------------

Yes freediver..saw a peice on the structural integrity or lack of it, on the Twin Towers from theyre inception and there were a lot of structural flaws that just didnt take into account the advent of a plane or 2 careering inot the side of them.

I must admit ,  although a terrible tradgedy ,it was a sight to behold,  i never tired of watching and whilst watching  not even at that point aware that there were humans struggling to save themselves.

We will never see  such scenes again I doubt we will..unless a controlled demolition.

What is the payload of the 3 types of aircraft? I would expect the speed would have a major impact. An aircraft lost in fog that low to the ground would not be travelling at full speed. The speed would effect the initial structural damage, the size of the hole for fresh air to enter, and the amount of jet fuel entering the building.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Four-charged-in-plot-to-blow-up-airport/2007/06/03/1180809306814.html

Four people, including a former member of Guyana's parliament, have been charged with planning to blow up New York's John F Kennedy International Airport, US officials say.

This was "one of the most chilling plots imaginable," Roslynn Mauskopf, US attorney for the Eastern District of New York, said at a news conference in New York. "The devastation that would be caused ... is just unthinkable."

The plotters sought to blow up the airport's jet fuel tanks and part of the 64km pipeline feeding them from New Jersey. Three of the four suspects, who included a former airline cargo handler, have been arrested, federal law enforcement officials said.

In a recorded conversation one suspect predicted there would be few survivors and that the attacks would result in the destruction of "the whole of Kennedy."

There was no connection to al Qaeda, officials said, but some suspects were linked to an Islamist extremist group in Trinidad.

In one recorded conversation, a suspect compared the plot to the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, saying, "Even the twin towers can't touch it." He added, "This can destroy the economy of America for some time."

News of the foiled plot comes weeks after six suspected Islamist militants were detained on charges of planning to attack a US Army base at Fort Dix in New Jersey.

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said the plot was "different in its distinct ties to the Caribbean, a region that is rarely thought of in terms of terrorism but of increasing concern to us as a crucible in the foment of Islamic radicalism."

White House spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo said President George W Bush had been briefed and updated regularly on the progress of the investigation. "This case is a good example of international counterterrorism cooperation," she said.

Should we ban the Bible while we are at it for followers targeting abortion clinics?

Fair comment IQSRLOW.  I was wrong to post that. 
Even if it were possible, we should not ban the koran.

My belief in freedom of speech overides a simplistic idealistic approach.

As a side point, other christians reported the abortion clinic bombers. 
The abortion clinic bombings were not supported by The Bible

I just realised that  IQSRLOW had only a few postings. And a full stop after their name.
Silly me.