Does anyone realize that Willis Tower is the tallest building in the US?... (Chicago: crime, how much)

[Garfieldian]

Originally Posted by ToriaT

anyone who thinks that chicagoans in general, or even very many or them wish we would have been attacked on 911 is wrong, and sick. I'm sure there are some sick and depraved people who might think that but it was not a prevailing thought. What kind of a nut would think or say something like that. I worked downtown at the time near the Sears Tower and there was fear that we might be attacked too, or we might be next.

Despite their fervor, they aren't saying that. And the argument seems to be going over your head. For what reason did you think the Sears Tower would be attacked, because it is tall?
That is not why WTC towers were attacked (three times, 93, 01(x2)) nor the Pentagon, nor Flight 93 (White House). The Sears Tower represents a box store's corporate building that happens to be tall. No different than AON, ATT, Smurfit-Stone, Prudential, tall buildings in Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Toronto, LA, Seattle, Philadelphia etc. The targets which were attack represented, well...your answer.
So for the media and overreaction to be spun towards something Chicagocentric, (and they did), and still tend to... is the issue, despite any posters being rude or saying things you don't like.
Furthermore it is nothing to do with local news covering news, just for the tendency to somehow back relate Chicago to National News, when it really has nothing to do with it. This is a tendency I have noticed which is more prominent in Chicago than elsewhere, for what reason I don't know, but I noticed it, if you don't notice it and lived in Chicago all your life than well fine, but we could just agree to disagree.
The OP is naive for assuming what he assumed as a reason for attack, as well as not knowing the WTC was never the tallest buildings even when they were there. If people think the Sears Tower was/is an attack for being high in the air well, they are naive also.

[andrew61]

Originally Posted by Kamms

Even Cleveland got more attention on 9/11 than Chicago.

Ouch. That had to hurt.

[Chicago60614]

Originally Posted by wshw997

Chicago is not as large of a target. The fact is the "second city" is actually the 3rd city behind LA and in the future it will be the 5th city. The fact is that many in Chicago have a inferiority complex because deep down inside they understand that Chicago is no match in any way to NYC and this pis#es them off. Denver, LA, Phoenix, Seattle have beauty and things that make them different. I have lived in Chicagoland my whole life and I can say that Chicago is for people who wish they could live in NYC but for some reason just can not cut it in the big apple(I call it the NYC wannabee).

The terrorists know this. Cripple NYC and you cripple the country or cripple Washington and you cripple the nation. Cripple chicago and it will not have as big effect on the whole nation. Chicago has declining population and declining power in the nation and if that is too hard to swollow for some I say too bad.

BTW WTC one is well on the way to becomming the tallest in the nation..just one more nail in the coffin for the pride of chicago!

What Chicago are you in??? I've been here 10 years, and was actually surprised at just how evident the exact opposite of what you are saying is in this metro area. People are extremely happy with Chicago being Chicago, and there's none of that "wanting" to be anything else. Certainly not NYC!! Who in Chicago ever says they want to be NYC???? Chicago should take pride in the fact it's the opposite of what you're saying.

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by Garfieldian

Despite their fervor, they aren't saying that. And the argument seems to be going over your head. For what reason did you think the Sears Tower would be attacked, because it is tall?
That is not why WTC towers were attacked (three times, 93, 01(x2)) nor the Pentagon, nor Flight 93 (White House). The Sears Tower represents a box store's corporate building that happens to be tall. No different than AON, ATT, Smurfit-Stone, Prudential, tall buildings in Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Toronto, LA, Seattle, Philadelphia etc.....So for the media and overreaction to be spun towards something Chicagocentric, (and they did), and still tend to... is the issue, despite any posters being rude or saying things you don't like.

And immediately following 9/11 ALL tall buildings in the US were seen as potential targets. Buildings in Chicago, LA, and SF were specifically mentioned as suspected targets by the FBI and the Attorney General at the time. I don't see how the media reporting alerts and concerns of Federal officials makes them "Chicago-centric".

The targets on 9/11 were certainly chosen for their symbolic properties, but the attack on the World Trade Towers showed how vulnerable tall buildings could be, and it would have been insanely irresponsible and ignorant for local, state, and federal authorities to not acknowledge that tall buildings represented targets of opportunity.

Beyond that common sense reason to fear an attack on the Sears Tower there have been a large number of plots uncovered that include the Sears Tower. Kahlid Sheik Mohammed planned a second wave of attacks on 9/11 that included the Sears Tower and Library Tower in LA. The Liberty Seven in Miami planned an attack on the Sears Tower.

I really don't understand what you're saying with your posts - do you REALLY think that anyone working in a skyscraper could watch the attacks on the World Trade Towers and NOT feel less secure in their office? You think they were just being "Chicago-centric", and that was the cause of their concern?!?! I guess you didn't see the people leaping to their deaths and the Towers fall.

You think Federal Authorities were being "Chicago-centric" when they thought an American city with the busiest airport in the world and loads of skyscrapers was a potential target?

That's a pretty twisted way of looking at the world.

[Garfieldian]

Originally Posted by Attrill

And immediately following 9/11 ALL tall buildings in the US were seen as potential targets. Buildings in Chicago, LA, and SF were specifically mentioned as suspected targets by the FBI and the Attorney General at the time. I don't see how the media reporting alerts and concerns of Federal officials makes them "Chicago-centric".

The targets on 9/11 were certainly chosen for their symbolic properties, but the attack on the World Trade Towers showed how vulnerable tall buildings could be, and it would have been insanely irresponsible and ignorant for local, state, and federal authorities to not acknowledge that tall buildings represented targets of opportunity.

Beyond that common sense reason to fear an attack on the Sears Tower there have been a large number of plots uncovered that include the Sears Tower. Kahlid Sheik Mohammed planned a second wave of attacks on 9/11 that included the Sears Tower and Library Tower in LA. The Liberty Seven in Miami planned an attack on the Sears Tower.

I really don't understand what you're saying with your posts - do you REALLY think that anyone working in a skyscraper could watch the attacks on the World Trade Towers and NOT feel less secure in their office? You think they were just being "Chicago-centric", and that was the cause of their concern?!?! I guess you didn't see the people leaping to their deaths and the Towers fall.

You think Federal Authorities were being "Chicago-centric" when they thought an American city with the busiest airport in the world and loads of skyscrapers was a potential target?

That's a pretty twisted way of looking at the world.

I see what you are doing so cut the trying to be snarky b.s. please. I'm not a "trollish" user and enjoy open critiques on Chicago as well as praise, no matter who starts the argument, so you are taking the wrong angle, you should read my post over again, because you got the wrong idea from it. If you can't put a critical lens towards your own city, then you really do it a disservice as a citizen. I certainly take nothing back I've said, and your additional banter off on a tangent had nothing to do with my position with Chicago media. I for one, am not the least bit scared of airing Chicago's dirty laundry and faults, of which the things I posited are some of them.

[jwaiter]

Originally Posted by Garfieldian

If people think the Sears Tower was/is an attack for being high in the air well, they are naive also.

No, you're the naive one. Sears tower is a potential target, it is well documented and well known to the US homeland security department, that's just a simple fact.

[Garfieldian]

Originally Posted by jwaiter

No, you're the naive one. Sears tower is a potential target, it is well documented and well known to the US homeland security department, that's just a simple fact.

Read again carefully before busting in the door.

[pw72]

I admit I have not read every post here. However, as some have perhaps stated, it isn't about the height, it is about the city. NY and WA DC are the targets of our enemies. Why?, another thread. But this is the reality. The threats, (fortunately seemingly just that), were against these two cities, not Chicago.

[Larry Siegel]

Originally Posted by Garfieldian

WTC was not targeted for being tall, it was targeted for an economic symbol.."WORLD trade center"...i.e. a hand in the western economic policy Al-Queda opposes...The level of intelligence on this board never ceases to surprise me.

Al-Qaeda doesn't know an economic symbol from a camel. WTC was an urban renewal program that was never economically successful. About 40% of the space was taken by government agencies including the landlord (the Port Authority). The amount of "world trade" that was conducted from WTC was minimal. Anyone who wants to damage world trade should attack the ports, airports, and computer systems.

There is no "western economic policy." Some Western countries are mostly capitalist, some are socialist, some are mixed. All have different policies regarding trade, financial services, labor relations, government regulation of business, and so forth.

Al-Qaeda attacked WTC because they are terrorists and it is terrifying to have two (actually more) buildings full of people in the middle of the country's largest city fall down.

[wrcousert]

Originally Posted by Attrill

Because of this it's hard to get the capital together to build a 100+ story building in the US. Chicago and NYC are probably the only two cities that have the elements in place to support buildings of that size.

I think downtown LA could support a few, if it wasn't for the threat of a massive Earthquake any second...