Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

I'd be interested in hearing different opinions on what people think 9/11 represented in terms of :

1. How many people were involved in the 9/11 attacks - how many actually had knowledge and gave support to the attacks?

2. Why did Al Qaeda carry out the attacks?

3. Roughly how many people died in the attacks? (I know you can look this up - but please answer before doing so)

4. How has the world changed since 9/11?

5. Have the actions in Iraq increased or decreased the risk of terrorist attacks?



I'll start things off with my views (off the top of my head):

(if possible, don't read my answers before you post.. just a bit of fun, and I'm sure I'm not correct in all my answers - but this reflects what I currently believe)






1. about 40 to 50 people.
2. Bin Laden wants American troops out of Saudi Arabia and objects to US support of Israel against Palestine.
3. about 3000.
4. 9/11 in itself did not change chances of terrorist attacks - but the reactions has led to heightened security and many people dying in the war against terror.
5. Terrorism threat has increased a lot.

I would have said the same as Shaf, but for question one I don't know. At first I thought more people might have known - but perhaps 100 would be too much - the plot would have unravelled if too many people knew about it. Perhaps Shaf's numbers of 40-50 are good.

Q:

1. How many people were involved in the 9/11 attacks - how many actually had knowledge and gave support to the attacks? Agree with both of you maybe 40 - 50 people

2. Why did Al Qaeda carry out the attacks? The toughest question of all. We should ask BUSH!

3. Roughly how many people died in the attacks? (I know you can look this up - but please answer before doing so) Stubborn me...oops

http://www.llrx.com/newstand/wtc_s.htm:

Islamic fanatics murdered 2,823 people in New York that day. Of those casualties, only 289 intact bodies were found, and remains of 1,102 people have been identified. The latter number may increase; the Associated Press reports some 19,550 body parts have been recovered. "New York City officials said . . . the identification process will go on for months. Those parts that cannot be identified will be retained, in case new technology makes it possible someday.

4. How has the world changed since 9/11? No

5. Have the actions in Iraq increased or decreased the risk of terrorist attacks? Definitely increased

now zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

So Bush is responsible for Al Qaeda? Bush was not in office when Al Qaeda attacked the US embassies in Africa.

shafique wrote:I'd be interested in hearing different opinions on what people think 9/11 represented in terms of :

1. How many people were involved in the 9/11 attacks - how many actually had knowledge and gave support to the attacks?

2. Why did Al Qaeda carry out the attacks?

3. Roughly how many people died in the attacks? (I know you can look this up - but please answer before doing so)

4. How has the world changed since 9/11?

5. Have the actions in Iraq increased or decreased the risk of terrorist attacks?

.

1) 25-30 including the hijackers
2) Retaliation for USA breaking their promise to Bin Laden to Leave Saudi after he help then in Afghanestan against Russia. + Supporting Israel + Feeling so unvunrable so it was a slap to the government arrogance.
3) 2500
4) New world order and terminologies (Axis of Evil, New crusade, if not with us then against us) War on terror.... (what is terror??) Increased the Gap between East and West, Increased the tension against immigrants world wide, special muslim minorities. And last but not least. More curiousity of the west about east and islam.
5)Increased for sure.

shafique wrote:
1. How many people were involved in the 9/11 attacks - how many actually had knowledge and gave support to the attacks?

2. Why did Al Qaeda carry out the attacks?

3. Roughly how many people died in the attacks? (I know you can look this up - but please answer before doing so)

4. How has the world changed since 9/11?

5. Have the actions in Iraq increased or decreased the risk of terrorist attacks?

1. I never had given thought to how many people were actually involved. I would have to guess between 20 - 30 people. Like Kanelli said, if too many people had previous knowledge of it; the whole thing may never have had happened in the begining.

2. This is something that I have spent countless hours talking with my friends, family, and co-workers with. A family member of mine told me that it was the U.S government that was the one behind the attacks. That they had planned it out, only to aide in their crusade against Muslims. Friends have told me that its purely the hatred that Osama Bin Laden has towards westerners, that he despises their way of life and that they refuse to change their religious beliefs. Co-workers have said basically the same. Me -- well, honestly I am torn. When 9/11 happened I was devistated. I was torn inside. I didnt want to believe that it was really carried out by Muslims, yet I couldnt understand why a government would want to destroy their own country. When I heard on the news the following weeks, how they had discovered evidence on the hiijackers of their actions leading up to 9/11 I began to doubt. For instance, they had claimed that one of the hiijackers had attended a bar/club the night prior to 9/11 and that they had found a Quran he left behind in the bar/club. For me, that made absolutely no sense. Ok, the guy wants to get drunk and have sex before he dies -- makes sense, but taking his Holy Book with him to such a place; cant buy it. Also, after viewing many of the documentaries made surround the 9/11 incident, I was convinced that it was indeed some kind of conspiracy. So to be honest, and I know most will not like my opinion, but I do not believe that it is something that Muslims committed and there is something that is being left out.

3. I believe it somewhere between 2500 - 3000 individuals, unfortunately.

4. The world has not changed for the better. It has become more prejudice, judgmental, and close-minded than it ever has been. People have begun to fear things and others (more precisely arabs and muslims) in a more dangerous manner. I also believe that the world has become a more violent and dangerous place to live; and unfortunately I dont see it changing any time soon.

5. Of course those actions taken have increased the risk of attacks. Look at whats going on in the Middle East, I think that is proof enough.

1. How many people were involved in the 9/11 attacks - how many actually had knowledge and gave support to the attacks?

Directly: 25 to 50 (19 of them where the homicidejackers)

2. Why did Al Qaeda carry out the attacks?

Because they are terrorists and murderers and wanted to kill people and in their warped mind causing death and distruction and terrorizing people is what they perceived as the solution. All they achieved is the killing and destruction of a multiple number of those who they killed on that day. They were and are wrong.

3. Roughly how many people died in the attacks? (I know you can look this up - but please answer before doing so)

1973 in NY, 50 in DC, and 68 in PA.

4. How has the world changed since 9/11?

The world is more security concious and regretabbly more "suspicious" of muslims because of the actions of a few (see 1 above). Ironically it is perhaps muslims who are suffering more now after the actions of a few than the "westerners" who were killed on 9/11 (there were also many muslims killed on that day other than the terrorists). Thus Al Qaeda accomplished nothing.

5. Have the actions in Iraq increased or decreased the risk of terrorist attacks?

Absolutely increased. Before the Iraq war no one ever heard of homice bombers (not suicide the main aim is homicide) now they are a daily occurence. I just read that in July 3500 civilians were killed in Iraq. There is a lot of hatred toward USA but why is it that there has never been a "suicide"bomb in the USA? I think it is because there is no need to since by in large the country is very tolerant and the laws protect everyone equally regardless of race, religion, socio economic status, etc. -(even if some people may not be as tollerant the laws and country as a whole are).


P.S. This "conspiracy" crap is just that; crap. After all, 44 years after a president of the united states was assassinated (JFK) there are still chouring books and articles about the "conspiracy" behing his assasination. Some people simply had nothing better to do.

Concord wrote:

P.S. This "conspiracy" crap is just that; crap. After all, 44 years after a president of the united states was assassinated (JFK) there are still chouring books and articles about the "conspiracy" behing his assasination. Some people simply had nothing better to do.

ofcourse few ppl strive hard to know the other side of the story. i didnt believe in all conspiracy theories until i saw one SCIENTIFIC FACT in the 2nd edition of LOOSe change http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 5726&q=911

in the whole video one thing really convinced me was free fall of the world trade centres both of em had fallen in 10 secs. some say the jet fuel melted the steel ....which is completely preposterous....... those steel were built to withstand 2000+ degrees and all the steel were melted in less than 3 hrs is illogical.......It is confirmed that explosives were placed in the building

You have got to be kidding Sniper! There were no explosives in the building. I've seen a documentary that covered what happened structurally to the towers. You should be ashamed of yourself for believing such drivel.

sniper420 wrote:

Concord wrote:

P.S. This "conspiracy" crap is just that; crap. After all, 44 years after a president of the united states was assassinated (JFK) there are still chouring books and articles about the "conspiracy" behing his assasination. Some people simply had nothing better to do.

ofcourse few ppl strive hard to know the other side of the story. i didnt believe in all conspiracy theories until i saw one SCIENTIFIC FACT in the 2nd edition of LOOSe change http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 5726&q=911

in the whole video one thing really convinced me was free fall of the world trade centres both of em had fallen in 10 secs. some say the jet fuel melted the steel ....which is completely preposterous....... those steel were built to withstand 2000+ degrees and all the steel were melted in less than 3 hrs is illogical.......It is confirmed that explosives were placed in the building

Sniper,

Sorry, I did not know about your expertise in structural engineering!!



Watch out I think you may be hit by a piece of falling sky - I heard rumors about that one!

kanelli wrote:You have got to be kidding Sniper! There were no explosives in the building. I've seen a documentary that covered what happened structurally to the towers. You should be ashamed of yourself for believing such drivel.

Ashamed?? fo what ? following scientific facts?Well I graduated from engineering and know some basic building structural facts...and i have many other civil engineering friends who accept this. if u see the documentary u will know. the photographs of the base of the buildings show sharp cuts which could only have been done by bursting the base. after the fire in 1975, in twin towers the steel was covered with asbestos to withstand 2000+ temperatures... it's obvious US wanted to find a way to increase military spending and secure resources like oil especially in a time when China is growing very fast. so bham afghanistan caspain oil and iraq war for oil....one of my rich friend whose father is in oil business when asked what do u think of 911 he answered "it was relly bad but good for business" and he is really rich after the wars

Concord wrote:2. Why did Al Qaeda carry out the attacks?

Because they are terrorists and murderers and wanted to kill people and in their warped mind causing death and distruction and terrorizing people is what they perceived as the solution. All they achieved is the killing and destruction of a multiple number of those who they killed on that day. They were and are wrong.

3.

mm...... give me some logical reasons of terrorizing....or the perceived solution those terrorists thought

sniper420 wrote: ..... give me some logical reasons of terrorizing....or the perceived solution those terrorists thought

On your first request, as I am not a terrorist so I wouldn't know. On your second request, you would have to ask the terrorist themselves with whom you seem to sympathize (please be sure to let us know their thougths).

sniper420 wrote:

kanelli wrote:You have got to be kidding Sniper! There were no explosives in the building. I've seen a documentary that covered what happened structurally to the towers. You should be ashamed of yourself for believing such drivel.

Ashamed?? fo what ? following scientific facts?Well I graduated from engineering and know some basic building structural facts...and i have many other civil engineering friends who accept this.

Man you should get your money back as clearly you learned nothing (same goes for your "friends').

sniper420 wrote:

Concord wrote:

P.S. This "conspiracy" crap is just that; crap. After all, 44 years after a president of the united states was assassinated (JFK) there are still chouring books and articles about the "conspiracy" behing his assasination. Some people simply had nothing better to do.

ofcourse few ppl strive hard to know the other side of the story. i didnt believe in all conspiracy theories until i saw one SCIENTIFIC FACT in the 2nd edition of LOOSe change http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 5726&q=911

in the whole video one thing really convinced me was free fall of the world trade centres both of em had fallen in 10 secs. some say the jet fuel melted the steel ....which is completely preposterous....... those steel were built to withstand 2000+ degrees and all the steel were melted in less than 3 hrs is illogical.......It is confirmed that explosives were placed in the building

That is what swayed my decision. I will honestly admit I know nothing of engineering but I saw that documentary with my cousin who is an engineering majour as well as my uncle who got has his degree in structural engineering...or something like that, he builds buildings lol thats what i know. But if what they say in the documentary is wrong, and that both my uncle and cousin are wrong can someone prove it to me. Im not being defensive or anything, I just want to know. This whole 9/11 ordeal is very confusing for me, I keep shifting on where I stand.

SNIPER FACT

The steel with its fireproof coating was indeed designed to withstand 2000 deg C.


FACT

Due to the force of the explosion, the fireproofing was blown off the steel and this is the reason why the steel melted.

Also it was in fact the now unprotected "welded joints" that actually melted, and thus was the cause of the collapse.

Shafique,

Man you knew very well, your questions will only start another fruitless debate between both sides lol.

You should have known better than to bring up such issues, which you know very well, wont solve anything, and you wont even be able to swing anyone's decision or prespective. Specially in this forum which you know is full of pro-western views who dont believe in objective documentaries that were produced by americans themselves. They rather believe the media and the government.

Although if you do ask me view, i would think its the fault of both parties, Alqaeda and US government......cuz the whole thing is still fuzzy, and unconclusive.

bushra21 wrote:

sniper420 wrote:

Concord wrote:

P.S. This "conspiracy" crap is just that; crap. After all, 44 years after a president of the united states was assassinated (JFK) there are still chouring books and articles about the "conspiracy" behing his assasination. Some people simply had nothing better to do.

ofcourse few ppl strive hard to know the other side of the story. i didnt believe in all conspiracy theories until i saw one SCIENTIFIC FACT in the 2nd edition of LOOSe change http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 5726&q=911

in the whole video one thing really convinced me was free fall of the world trade centres both of em had fallen in 10 secs. some say the jet fuel melted the steel ....which is completely preposterous....... those steel were built to withstand 2000+ degrees and all the steel were melted in less than 3 hrs is illogical.......It is confirmed that explosives were placed in the building

That is what swayed my decision. I will honestly admit I know nothing of engineering but I saw that documentary with my cousin who is an engineering majour as well as my uncle who got has his degree in structural engineering...or something like that, he builds buildings lol thats what i know. But if what they say in the documentary is wrong, and that both my uncle and cousin are wrong can someone prove it to me. Im not being defensive or anything, I just want to know. This whole 9/11 ordeal is very confusing for me, I keep shifting on where I stand.

Sniker and Boushra,

I suggest you watch a documentary "why the towers fell" produced by PBS (the program is called "Nova"). The structural engineer who designed the World Trade Center (and many other skyscrapers since, including the Petronas towers) and many other pre-eminent experts explain the reasons, etc. Arnie has it correct and it is what Charlie Thorton and others explain in the documentary. You can purchase the video ( and see for yourselves). You don't have to be structural engineer to understand it (and I would not be able to explain it any better as it is what it is). You only need to read the title of the video on your hyperlink "9/11 coverup" to know its "objective" analysis and conclusion.

Of course if you have any real scientific "non-crock-pot" proof then by all means share it. I won't be holding my breath.

uae75 wrote:Shafique,

Man you knew very well, your questions will only start another fruitless debate between both sides lol.

You should have known better than to bring up such issues, which you know very well, wont solve anything, and you wont even be able to swing anyone's decision or prespective. Specially in this forum which you know is full of pro-western views who dont believe in objective documentaries that were produced by americans themselves. They rather believe the media and the government.

Although if you do ask me view, i would think its the fault of both parties, Alqaeda and US government......cuz the whole thing is still fuzzy, and unconclusive.

UAE75,

I think its going fine. Curiously you did not share your perspective on Shaf's points but went on a tangent! Lets hear it.

Concord,

Well i can answer the last 3 questions, cuz the first two didnt make any sense to answer.

3. Well alot died in this incident, i would suspect between 1000-2000.

4. The world has changed big time, people are becoming more cautious about security, racial profiling is something normal.

5. It sure did increase the attacks, and i doubt if anyone can say otherwise.

uae75 wrote:Concord,

Well i can answer the last 3 questions, cuz the first two didnt make any sense to answer.

3. Well alot died in this incident, i would suspect between 1000-2000.

4. The world has changed big time, people are becoming more cautious about security, racial profiling is something normal.

5. It sure did increase the attacks, and i doubt if anyone can say otherwise.

Nice "duck"!

Concord wrote:

uae75 wrote:Concord,

Well i can answer the last 3 questions, cuz the first two didnt make any sense to answer.

3. Well alot died in this incident, i would suspect between 1000-2000.

4. The world has changed big time, people are becoming more cautious about security, racial profiling is something normal.

5. It sure did increase the attacks, and i doubt if anyone can say otherwise.

Nice "duck"!

I'm just watching the video on google linked above - first time I'm watching it. It does raise interesting points about the crash into the Pentagon - no engines found and no impact of engines seen on the building, for example. The presence of 2 planes above the Pentagon just after the explosions raises interesting questions too.

As for the collapse of the buildings.. they do quote from a paper provided by the suppliers of the steel used for the buildings saying that the steel would not melt even at 2000F, but at close to 3000F.

The various reports of multiple explosions are interesting as well. The documentary shows clips of the news items as they were shown live - reporting the explosions etc.

I tend not to believe in consipiracies until I see evidence that convinces me that the obvious didn't happen. I've dismissed all consipiracy claims about 9/11 before (we have a number of people in the office who are adamant it was all a conspiracy). Now I can see what the fuss was all about concerning the pentagon crash.

I recommend people do watch the video on google video, it's very good quality and raises interesting issues.

(One point I've always been skeptical about was the 'fact' that one of the hijacker's passport was found in the wreckage of the WTC the next day - and yet the flight recorders were 'destroyed'... the odds of this happening are mind-boggling.. a paper passport surviving a crash, fireball that collapsed a building...hmmm?)

For the sake of balance, I'll also try and get a copy of the PBS video to watch about the collapse of the buildings.


Incidentally, after I posted the questions - I went to Wikipaedia and read up on 9/11 etc. I had forgotten that Bin Laden initially emphatically denied any involvement in the events of 9/11 and only much later took credit for them.

Also, Dubai even gets a mention in the documentary - apparently Bin Laden was in the American Hospital in mid-2001 receiving treatment and was visited by a member of the CIA.

I'm not seeking to change anyone's minds - but I may end up modifying some of my views. I always tell people that I'm amazed that the actions of less than 50 people can have such impact. But now I'm wondering whether it was only 50 odd people?

Cheers,
Shafique

uae75 wrote:Shafique,

Man you knew very well, your questions will only start another fruitless debate between both sides lol.

You should have known better than to bring up such issues, which you know very well, wont solve anything, and you wont even be able to swing anyone's decision or prespective. Specially in this forum which you know is full of pro-western views who dont believe in objective documentaries that were produced by americans themselves. They rather believe the media and the government.

Although if you do ask me view, i would think its the fault of both parties, Alqaeda and US government......cuz the whole thing is still fuzzy, and unconclusive.

This post get's the DF "what a load of bollox" award

If i thought you were not being serious i would piss myself laughing

Shaf

It is a fact O-BL was a personal friend of the late Shiek. Right up until 2000 they regulary met up because they both shared an interest in horses and hunting.

UAE - I would hardly call the documentary unbiased.

There are many anti-Government groups in the States - and many conspiracies (faked moon landings, jfk assassination etc)

However, I sometimes think it is worth hearing them out and then hearing the answers from the other side.

Still not convinced that airlines weren't hijacked and crashed into the WTC and that this alone caused the collapse. However, now am not so sure about the pentagon crash..

Hmmm


Cheers
Shafique

shafique wrote:For the sake of balance, I'll also try and get a copy of the PBS video to watch about the collapse of the buildings.



Shafique

I'm glad you will. Let us know what you think. I have no doubt about it and may have a little more knowledge about the subject.

arniegang wrote:

uae75 wrote:Shafique,

Man you knew very well, your questions will only start another fruitless debate between both sides lol.

You should have known better than to bring up such issues, which you know very well, wont solve anything, and you wont even be able to swing anyone's decision or prespective. Specially in this forum which you know is full of pro-western views who dont believe in objective documentaries that were produced by americans themselves. They rather believe the media and the government.

Although if you do ask me view, i would think its the fault of both parties, Alqaeda and US government......cuz the whole thing is still fuzzy, and unconclusive.

This post get's the DF "what a load of bollox" award

If i thought you were not being serious i would piss myself laughing

Thank you for just confirming the point of my post looool

That's right, I'm supposed to believe that the US made an elaborate plot to kill 3000 of its own citizens. It hired some Arab-looking guys who were willing to kill themselves to put on a good show on the airplanes so that people could describe that on the cell phones to their loved ones. Of course there is no way that an airplaine full of fuel would ever create so much heat on impact and continued burning that could ever take down the towers. I mean, when the Trade Center towers were built the engineers though to themselves - "Well, what if someone rams huge airline jets into the buildings?" Also, there is no way that the hijackers would have plotted to hit such tall buildings in strategic spots - they would just hit any old place wouldn't they? So sorry, of course there is no such thing as terrorism. All Muslims are peaceful people. It is only Americans who are evil.

Give me a freaking break.

uae75 - last time I looked this forum was full of pro-Islam conspiracy theorists who would believe anything as long as it makes all Muslims come out like innocent, peaceful, pious people.

Kanelli - I'm not convinced about the WTC, but the other two crashes (Philly and Pentagon crash) look suspicious now I've seen the documentary linked to in this thread.

The crash into the Pentagon created one single circular hole in the building and the engines 'disappeared' - these engines would not melt and would hit the building and make pretty big holes next to the main hole.

Similarly the United 93 crash site had very little debris when compared to similar crashes elsewhere in the world. The documentary said this was unique in crash sites - that whole planes would disintegrate leaving little debris.

As for the collapse of the towers - they timed the first collapse and it took about 10 seconds, which is just a second more than a 'free fall' time - i.e.when it collapsed there was no resistance from the building structure below at all. Now, I'm not a structural engineer - but this is what experts on the day said made it look like it was a demolition (as it happened, US TV had engineers saying this - although they all later retracted the statements).

The retractions add fuel to the conspiracy theorists, as does the many reports of secondary explosions (all the news channels reported this live on the day).

I personally think that the planes that were flown into the twin towers were hijacked and have yet to see convincing evidence that they weren't. But this thread has raised other questions which haven't been satisfactorily answered for my benefit yet.

(I mean, do you believe they could find a Saudi Passport in the rubble a few hours later and believe that this passport survived the crash and was coincidentally that of a hijacker! ? C'mon. And if this isn't true....what else isn't true? Come to think of it...I need to check whether this story of the passport was retracted - I'm sure it isn't an urban legend as I recall the news story when it came out first time)

Cheers,
Shafique