It is not "Monday morning quarterbacking" as you wish to suggest. We had a warning. Not preparing ourselves for another attack in the proper fashion is OUR fault.
So, prior to September 11th, what plans had you developed for airborne rooftop rescues in the event of simultaneous hijacked airliner crashes into multiple skyscapers?
I can't fault anyone for not using helicopters to rescue people -- can you imagine the panic that would have ensued if helicopters *had* come up by the roof, after two jumbo jets had crashed into the towers? People would have thought they were part of the plot as well!
But not evacuating the building properly is something the Port Authority and Larry Silverstein can be criticized on. Nobody expected planes to crash into the towers, but there should have been better evacuation plans other than telling people to stay in their offices when the buildings were on fire.
The helicopter rescue portion of this argument has nothing to do at all with how or why the fire starts. It is either a feasable option under allowable conditions or it isn't. What is so complicated about this? If there are two 110 story buildings standing close enough to one another that if one collapses due to structural failure, the other might be at risk from the collapse of the first, it seems prudent to evacuate BOTH buildings. What is so complicated about this? Are you trying to imply that structural failure and the potential collapse it might cause was not a reasonable factor to consider, especially AFTER 1993? The terrorist caused the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Sadly, our very own lack of planning contributed to the toll. We should not allow this to happen again.