PDA

View Full Version : threats aganst the United states



newbassassin
May 11th, 2011, 03:16
Only the registered members can see the link.



In confirming the death of its leader, Osama bin Laden, the terrorist group al-Qaida is threatening more attacks against the United States and its allies. And top U.S. security officials say they are on alert for possible terrorist retaliation attacks. While the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has not issued specific terror warnings, law enforcement agencies have heightened security around the country to guard against attacks by al-Qaida-affiliated groups or by terrorists acting on their own.

Law enforcement agencies across the United States have stepped up patrols at travel hubs and government facilities, following warnings that Osama bin Laden's death might inspire home-grown extremists.

"You're not going to have 19 hijackers taking down aircraft, but kids trying to find AK-47s or buy handguns or buy hand grenades on the street and go do something at a commercial facility like a mall or a 7-11 [convenience store]," said Philip Mudd, a former CIA officer and FBI counterterrorism agent.


Analysts say authorities have stopped 38 terrorism plots in the United States since September 11, 2001. And U.S. officials say documents seized from bin Laden's compound in Pakistan showed al-Qaida considered attacks a gainst trains in the U.S. this coming September 11th. Al-Qaida-affiliated groups have been linked to rail transport attacks in Europe.




Osama bin Laden’s death, which weakens al-Qaeda by eliminating the leader who recruited members with grainy video messages, won’t end the terror threat as followers morph into smaller groups inspired by him.

“The world’s most wanted international terrorist is no more, but the death of bin Laden does not represent the demise of al-Qaeda affiliates and those inspired by al-Qaeda, who have and will continue to engage in terrorist attacks,” Ronald Noble, secretary general of Lyon, France-based Interpol said in an e-mailed statement.

The news announced to the world by Obama came about three days after a blast ripped through a restaurant in downtown Marrakech, Morocco, killing at least 17 people, underscoring how local terror leaders still have both the desire and capability to carry out attacks against the U.S. and other countries, said analysts and former counter-terrorism officials.

The centrally run al-Qaeda that carried out the Sept. 11 attacks no longer exists and has “transformed into a diffuse global network and philosophical movement composed of dispersed nodes with varying degrees of independence,” according to a U.S. Congressional Research Service report in January.

Bin Laden’s death is “a big deal. It’s something we have sought” since the attacks, said former Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael Hayden in an interview. Still, “this is not a time to spike the ball and do one of those stupid dances in the end zone.”

‘Full Alert’

That point was highlighted by Interpol, the international police organization, which told its member countries today “to be on full alert” for retaliation attacks as it warned that bin Laden’s death of doesn’t represent an end to terror threats.

U.S. officials say al Qaeda cells and associates operate in more than 70 countries, according to the U.S. Congressional Research Service report.

“While a degraded corporate al-Qaeda may be welcome news to many, a trend has emerged over the past few years that some view as more difficult to detect, if not potentially more lethal,” according to the report.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in February the terrorist threat was the highest since Sept. 11 because of U.S. residents willing to carry out attacks with “little or no warning.”

Hayden and other counterterrorism specialists said that the U.S. should brace for retaliatory attacks from al-Qaeda and its allies after U.S. operatives killed bin Laden and other family members during a firefight in a city near of Islamabad.

‘Great Defeat’

“Osama bin Laden is a huge symbol and his killing at the hand of the main enemy, which is the United States, is something that will cause a feeling of a great defeat and a desire for revenge,” Diaa Rashwan, an expert on Islamist groups at the Cairo-based Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, said in a telephone interview.

With bin Laden dead, U.S. counterterrorism officials will turn their attention to potential successors to bin Laden, such as Ayman al-Zawahiri, the group’s No. 2 leader.

“It’s going to diminish their capacity and ability to keep the movement going,” said Thomas Fuentes, a former assistant FBI director who headed the international operations office before leaving the agency in 2008. “He has been the figurehead of the movement.”

Zawahiri lacks bin Laden’s broad support in al-Qaeda, they said. An Egyptian, Zawahiri may have problems unifying a group where there has been a split between the group’s Egyptian associates and other members, Hayden said.

Yemen Branch

Anwar al-Awlaki, who has been tied to several terrorist attacks, including a Nigerian suspected of trying to blow up a Detroit-bound plane on Christmas Day, 2009, may also be a candidate.

That’s because he’s working with the most active branch of the group, Yemen-based al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, said Frank Cillufo, director of the Homeland Security Policy Institute at George Washington University in Washington

“Some of the other wannabees under him may inspire a few people here and there,” Fuentes said. “They’re not going to have the leadership, reputation and charisma that he has.”

Last month, a senior FBI official said the most serious terrorism threat to the U.S. comes from AQAP.

“While core AQ remains a serious threat, I believe the most serious threat to the homeland today emanates from members of AQAP,” said Mark Giuliano, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s assistant director for counterterrorism, in remarks on April 14 at Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Exploiting Social Media

Several key AQAP figures were born and educated in the U.S. and understand the country’s culture, vulnerabilities and security protocols, he said. The group exploits social media to share its knowledge with people of a similar mindset, he said

AQAP claimed credit for the December 2009 attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight on its approach to Detroit and the October 2010 attempted bombings of air cargo flights headed for the U.S. from Yemen.

In addition to AQAP, other groups that pose a threat are Somalia-based al-Shabaab and Lashkar e-Taiba, which carried out the 2008 attacks in Mumbai, India, the analysts said.

Pro-Democracy Movements

While dealing with a decentralized al-Qaeda, the U.S. will need to redouble its efforts to confront the radical Islamic philosophy that fuels al-Qaeda and like-minded groups, Cilluffo said.

“We also need to address ideology,” he said.

The spread of pro-democracy movements throughout the Arab world this year provides a prime moment to highlight opposition to a group intent on imposing a theocracy, said Elliott Abrams, the deputy national security adviser handling Middle East affairs under President George W. Bush.

David H. Schanzer, a professor at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina and director of the Triangle Center of Terrorism and Homeland Security, said that terrorist incidents in the U.S. have been declining in recent years, a reflection of al-Qaeda’s diminished capacity.

Even if al-Qaeda is weakened by its leader’s death, the group will attempt to show it’s still relevant, said Dan Byman, director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies at Georgetown University in Washington.

One of bin Laden’s “successes was to create an organization that would outlive him,” he said.




Read more on Newsmax.com: US Faces Terror Threat After bin Laden Death
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
Just a year year ago, a Pakistani-born U.S. citizen - Faisal Shahzad - tried to set off a car bomb in New York's Times Square. And Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan who has been in the U.S. since 1999, attempted to bomb New York City's subway system in 2009.

James Carafano, a national security expert with The Heritage Foundation in Washington, says security officials are keeping a close eye on al-Qaida-affiliated groups.

"The U.S. has always been concerned about al-Shabab, that is a group based in Somalia," he said. "They have links to the Somali community in the United States. They are a declared enemy of the United States and a supporter of al-Qaida. We have also been very concerned about 'LeT' - Lashkar-e-Taiba - which is a group based in Pakistan, which launched the horrifying [2008] attacks in Mumbai."

Counterterrorism experts say a group based in Yemen, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, might try to stage an attack. The group is linked to radical cleric Anwar al-Alawki, an American believed to have ties to the failed 2009 Christmas Day plot to blow up a U.S.-bound jetliner, and a scheme to plant parcel bombs on U.S. cargo flights last November.

Tim Starks, who covers intelligence and homeland security issues for "Congressional Quarterly," says bin Laden's followers target transport facilities.

"They definitely have a tendency to go back to the targets that they know. those are targets that are easy to plot against in some ways. You don't have to have a lot of sophisticated efforts to go after them."

Analysts say the U.S. remains vulnerable to terrorist attacks, but the best way to protect the country is not adding more layers of security, it is stepping up intelligence efforts before terrorists can attack.

Shishir G
May 11th, 2011, 03:19
This was obviously to come.
I mean if a terrorist killed Obama, wouldn't we (most of us) get pissed off?

Cataclysm
May 11th, 2011, 03:20
I would be happy if they did ^

newbassassin
May 11th, 2011, 03:21
we shouldnt of threw partys and stuff after we killed him now its gonna cause more lifes lossed

bigcasey123
May 11th, 2011, 03:26
ya i know i think we shouldnt of killed osama in a way but we kinda had to because he was planning attacks on the United states so we had no choice and he shot at us when we tried to capture him alive
if we never got him that would be messed up, I mean that man killed 3,000 people, he deserved to get shot.

Jon
May 11th, 2011, 03:29
if we never got him that would be messed up, I mean that man killed 3,000 people, he deserved to get shot.

naw, he deserved much more.

bigcasey123
May 11th, 2011, 03:32
naw, he deserved much more.

i said on my facebook "i'm so happy to hear that bin laden is dead, the biggest terrorist in the world, but they should have took him alive so they could of burned him to death." and then a kid wrote "Dude it's never good to have someone killed even if he did kill thousands of people, America is suppose to be better then that" that pissed me off sooooooo much i wanted to say fuck you mother fucker burn with him.

newbassassin
May 11th, 2011, 04:01
im not saying we shouldnt of killed him we shouldnt of had partys and stuff because of it thats one of the reason why there planning on attacking us

bigcasey123
May 11th, 2011, 04:06
im not saying we shouldnt of killed him we shouldnt of had partys and stuff because of it thats one of the reason why there planning on attacking us
Let them attack we will pwn them!! and that's not fair bin laden had party's after 9/11 (probably) so we should have party's after killing him :)

Sethy
May 11th, 2011, 04:07
Let them attack we will pwn them!! and that's not fair bin laden had party's after 9/11 (probably) so we should have party's after killing him :)

Lol, right. Bin Laden coordinated 9/11 out of vengeance.
And we won't 'pwn' them, we'll lose lives. That's what terrorism about.

bigcasey123
May 11th, 2011, 04:09
Lol, right. Bin Laden coordinated 9/11 out of vengeance.
And we won't 'pwn' them, we'll lose lives. That's what terrorism about.

If war is terrorism then the hole world is terrorist.

Sethy
May 11th, 2011, 04:10
If war is terrorism then the hole world is terrorist.

Um, what?
And war is terror, so it's as good as terrorism on both sides. One country thinks the other is cruel, the other thinks the same about us.

newbassassin
May 11th, 2011, 04:27
Let them attack we will pwn them!! and that's not fair bin laden had party's after 9/11 (probably) so we should have party's after killing him :)

ok well u said probaly we should be going around doing stuff if we didnt know he did throw a party or not after 9/11 we should of got info first if he didnt throw it since where celebraiting because he died its just gonna pissed them off and attack us again and cause more lifes to be loss because of idiots like you who go partying because some one died no one should throw a party because of death thats just gonna cause more lifes to be losted (not all the time)

David
May 11th, 2011, 19:08
if we never got him that would be messed up, I mean that man killed 3,000 people, he deserved to get shot.

You could wonder if killing a murderer is good. I'd say now since that makes you as bad as him.
And ofcourse, he killed thousands of people, but I'd say we'd lock him up in the deepest prison, you wouldn't get the fight then.

bigcasey123
May 11th, 2011, 19:26
You could wonder if killing a murderer is good. I'd say now since that makes you as bad as him.
And ofcourse, he killed thousands of people, but I'd say we'd lock him up in the deepest prison, you wouldn't get the fight then.

Why?? so his people can break him out?

David
May 11th, 2011, 19:31
Why?? so his people can break him out?

If you Americans are smart enough it wouldn't happen.

David
May 11th, 2011, 20:31
I agree, cause you know, Country's like yours have people who are willing to break him out :).

Your argument makes no sense and is discriminating.
I wasn't saying that American's can't do anything, I was just saying they need to secure the place good enough that it isn't possible to break him out.

Matty
May 11th, 2011, 20:32
Your argument makes no sense and is discriminating.
I wasn't saying that American's can't do anything, I was just saying they need to secure the place good enough that it isn't possible to break him out.

And that costs money to do. It was simpler to kill him.

David
May 11th, 2011, 20:33
And that costs money to do. It was simpler to kill him.

Correct, but the most simple way isn't always the best way.

Matty
May 11th, 2011, 20:34
Correct, but the most simple way isn't always the best way.

And? He is better off dead, firstly you would of had to have put him on trial which will cost millions in itself, then putting him in the prison and leaving him there costs more money. Much more cost effective when he is dead.

bigcasey123
May 11th, 2011, 20:43
Your argument makes no sense and is discriminating.
I wasn't saying that American's can't do anything, I was just saying they need to secure the place good enough that it isn't possible to break him out.

there are places like that, IT'S CALLED HELL!!

newbassassin
May 12th, 2011, 01:14
omfg dude read other posts before you post stuff since we killed him the other country is gonna kill us because we threw partys and stuff over his death and you should never have partys and stuff over some ones death so there pissed at us and now because of faggots like you who thinks its ok because we can kick there asses more people are gonna die!

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 01:20
there are places like that, IT'S CALLED HELL!!

Hell doesen't exist in my point of view.
I still blame bush for fucking up the twin towers.

Sethy
May 12th, 2011, 01:43
ya thats why you think bush caused 911 your just like those other people who are dumb asses

How is it dumb to think Bush caused 9/11? Of course, technically he didn't, he's a dumb ass puppet. The government, though, likely allowed 9/11 to happen. There's rather substantial evidence to it.

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 01:44
ya thats why you think bush caused 911 your just like those other people who are dumb asses

Prove that Osama caused the 9/11 attack, and only then will I admit my stupidity.
My opinion remains unchanged.

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 01:52
Prove that Osama caused the 9/11 attack, and only then will I admit my stupidity.
My opinion remains unchanged.

Prove the government did 9/11.

newbassassin
May 12th, 2011, 01:57
only 1 plane went into the tower the other plan went into the pentegon

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 01:57
Prove that Osama leaded them.
Problem?

What about the video saying he did it???

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 01:59
only 1 plane went into the tower the other plan went into the pentegon

dude there were 4 planes that got hijacked, 2 went into the towers, 1 into the Pentagon, and 1 into the ground.

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 02:00
What about the video saying he did it???

Source, translators could always mis-translate shit.
The way the tower collided was weird, and it should've stayed up after those attacks, it was made to hold up.

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 02:01
Source, translators could always mis-translate shit.
The way the tower collided was weird, and it should've stayed up after those attacks, it was made to hold up.



Idiot.
Dude your just denying everything i'm saying so theres no point.

Only the registered members can see the link.'s funny how i'm showing all the proof and your not!

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 02:03
Dude your just denying everything i'm saying so theres no point.


Like I said, translators always fucks up shit, and taking a clear shot of Osama like that, and adding it to Youtube isn't like putting peanut butter on bread.

Shishir G
May 12th, 2011, 02:04
Dude your just denying everything i'm saying so theres no point.

Only the registered members can see the link.

bigcasey, dont be dumb.
If the Government were to do the 911 shit themselves... then im pretty sure as hell they wouldn't release a video like that out in public...


P.S. anyone else noticed the stupidty on these forums has rised about 90% in the past 2 months?

Sethy
May 12th, 2011, 02:04
Dude your just denying everything i'm saying so theres no point.

Only the registered members can see the link.

We know Osama planned it. The government allowed it to happen in order to begin the war they had so long wanted

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 02:05
like i said, translators always fucks up shit, and taking a clear shot of osama like that, and adding it to youtube isn't like putting peanut butter on bread.
please show me your proof (that the government did it)

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 02:08
please show me your proof (that the government did it)


Only the registered members can see the link.
If I happen to find a 10 minute one, I'll give it to you.

Edit:
"Marvin P. Bush, the president's younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Bush also served.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.

Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.

Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY NewsDay]

Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."

Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11"

newbassassin
May 12th, 2011, 02:09
we could get someone who speaks the same language and tell us he said he did it

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 02:15
Only the registered members can see the link.
If I happen to find a 10 minute one, I'll give it to you.

Edit:
"Marvin P. Bush, the president's younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Bush also served.
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.

Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.

Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY NewsDay]

Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."

Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11"

Dude you do know jet fuel can burn through metal right? Also the explosions everyone thought they were hearing could of been gas or something cause on the top of one of those towers there is a restaurant, and restaurant's have gas due to the cooking on there GRILLS, The gas could of heated up and exploded.


we could get someone who speaks the same language and tell us he said he did it Thats what a translator is.

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 02:21
Dude you do know jet fuel can burn through metal right? Also the explosions everyone thought they were hearing could of been gas or something cause on the top of one of those towers there is a Restorriant (can't spell it) and Restorriant's have gas due to the cooking on there GRILLS, The gas could of heated up and exploded.

Thats what a translator is.

Restaurants.
A translator is a person who translates something.
The restaurants stay on the lower floor I assume, So an explosion, floors up, will not effect a small gas tank in the lower floors, along with the fact that they're almost fire-proofed.
And normally, towers contain 4+ giant steel bars, don't know the name in english, That's basiclly what holds the tower up, the tower was made to hold up to those fire.
And gas explodes, it doesen't heat up.
And read the text.

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 02:22
Restaurants.
A translator is a person who translates something.
The restaurants stay on the lower floor I assume, So an explosion, floors up, will not effect a small gas tank in the lower floors, along with the fact that they're almost fire-proofed.
And normally, towers contain 4+ giant steel bars, don't know the name in english, That's basiclly what holds the tower up, the tower was made to hold up to those fire.
And gas explodes, it doesen't heat up.
And read the text.
No there was a restaurant on the top floor cause my mom said all the rich people went there.

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 02:26
No there was a restaurant on the top floor cause my mom said all the rich people went there.

Hmmm, the plane hit under the restaurant, I'd say at least 5-10 floors under, until the fire spread, would take time, unless the rooms were made of gunpowder/alchohol/gasoline, and the small gas tanks would't destroy much, even because it's on the top floor, it would only affect the top floor.
Now let's go to my topic.

Sethy
May 12th, 2011, 02:46
Dude you do know jet fuel can burn through metal right? Also the explosions everyone thought they were hearing could of been gas or something cause on the top of one of those towers there is a restaurant, and restaurant's have gas due to the cooking on there GRILLS, The gas could of heated up and exploded.

Thats what a translator is.

Jet Fuel doesn't heat up even near enough to burn through construction grade steel.

Friss
May 12th, 2011, 20:30
I would just like to take this time to remind everyone that this thread is in the Intelligent Debate Board.

So please remember that:
1) Be smart look things up first
2) Respect others' opinions
3) No need to flame
4) Be civilized
5) Thanks for taking the time to read this.

newbassassin
May 12th, 2011, 23:02
osama did it and thats the end of the story

newbassassin
May 12th, 2011, 23:03
and they could of mest up while building it just like the titanic they said it was un sink able but it still sunk they could of mest up with the towers

tryme
May 12th, 2011, 23:07
This was obviously to come.
I mean if a terrorist killed Obama, wouldn't we (most of us) get pissed off?

i fo hell wouldn't Obama is a wasite of air, all hes managed to do is RAISE GAS PRICES, because hes to afraid to do offshore drilling.

Sethy
May 12th, 2011, 23:09
osama did it and thats the end of the story

You're yet to realize what fucking section you're in.

newbassassin
May 12th, 2011, 23:13
i posted this thread so i know what section im in

Sethy
May 12th, 2011, 23:19
Then learn to debate, fuck.

newbassassin
May 12th, 2011, 23:21
learn the truth

Shishir G
May 12th, 2011, 23:29
Newbassasin can you STFU? Your not meant for this section AT ALL.

OT:
This is not debatable.
Osama DID cause 911 and without proof that you know that someone else did it, you can't debate it.
Government may be involved is what i think, but they may not because i dont know for sure.

bigcasey123
May 12th, 2011, 23:30
Jet Fuel doesn't heat up even near enough to burn through construction grade steel.

Yes it does (try goggling it)
Only the registered members can see the link.

2kbarrows
May 12th, 2011, 23:43
Yes it does (try goggling it)
Only the registered members can see the link.

Yahoo Answers is not a good source of information.

bigcasey123
May 13th, 2011, 00:56
Yahoo Answers is not a good source of information.

Dude thats just one of the links of many that are proof,


THE COLLAPSE

Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down.

The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t.

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.



The World Trade Center was not defectively designed. No designer of the WTC anticipated, nor should have anticipated, a 90,000 L Molotov cocktail on one of the building floors. Skyscrapers are designed to support themselves for three hours in a fire even if the sprinkler system fails to operate. This time should be long enough to evacuate the occupants. The WTC towers lasted for one to two hours—less than the design life, but only because the fire fuel load was so large. No normal office fires would fill 4,000 square meters of floor space in the seconds in which the WTC fire developed. Usually, the fire would take up to an hour to spread so uniformly across the width and breadth of the building.

Sethy
May 13th, 2011, 21:35
Okay, I'm not relying on your source, because it's probably some Wiki shit.

It takes a relatively high temperature to weaken the industrial steel to collapse, and I'm not sure if Jet Fuel can even reach that high.
You're saying that jet fuel CAN melt steel, which is complete ignorance and absurdity in itself. It's a FACT that jet fuel can NOT melt steel.

bigcasey123
May 13th, 2011, 21:38
Okay, I'm not relying on your source, because it's probably some Wiki shit.

It takes a relatively high temperature to weaken the industrial steel to collapse, and I'm not sure if Jet Fuel can even reach that high.
You're saying that jet fuel CAN melt steel, which is complete ignorance and absurdity in itself. It's a FACT that jet fuel can NOT melt steel.

But the fire from the fuel could of weakened the floors, causing the collapse.

Sethy
May 13th, 2011, 22:14
But the fire from the fuel could of weakened the floors, causing the collapse.

Of course, but how possible do you think that was? This building was designed AGAINST attacks like so, you think they'd really pass over something so obvious?

bigcasey123
May 13th, 2011, 22:25
Of course, but how possible do you think that was? This building was designed AGAINST attacks like so, you think they'd really pass over something so obvious?

But the twin towers were meant to stand a fire for about 4 hours and that's what happen, the fire kept burning and weakening the rooms and the floors then the fire was weakening the metal (not burning through them) but weakening them, Finally the metal got so weak it couldn't hold the floors anymore and it gave way.

2kbarrows
May 13th, 2011, 22:44
But the twin towers were meant to stand a fire for about 4 hours and that's what happen, the fire kept burning and weakening the rooms and the floors then the fire was weakening the metal (not burning through them) but weakening them, Finally the metal got so weak it couldn't hold the floors anymore and it gave way.

Until the collapse, it was around 1 hour and 40 mins.
That steel, is thicker than your body.

bigcasey123
May 13th, 2011, 22:48
Until the collapse, it was around 1 hour and 40 mins.
That steel, is thicker than your body.
agreed, but the people who predicted that the towers could hold 4 hours of fire could of been wrong (people make mistakes as you said)

2kbarrows
May 13th, 2011, 22:53
agreed, but the people who predicted that the towers could hold 4 hours of fire could of been wrong (people make mistakes as you said)

Who can affirm the fires caused that alone?
Watch the video I posted.

bigcasey123
May 13th, 2011, 23:01
Who can affirm the fires caused that alone?
Watch the video I posted.

dude i'm sorry but i'm done, you got your opinion, i got mine. :)