It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why would a bunch of arabs atack united states , what would be the reason?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by tovenar
Killing hundreds of thousands because of the comparitive few that died

Hundreds of thousands? Of what? Civilians? Got some proof to back that up?
Good luck with that.


Its the same as saying american lives are worth more than anyone elses

Uh .. no. America fought back because if you don't fight back to a bully
then they will continue to pound you and pound you. If you don't fight
back, it's giving them a free ticket to hit you again. Our response was
not 'overwhelming'. It was exactly right. You don't measure a response
exactly as it was measured to you. You hit harder so they know you are
bigger and so they won't hit you again.




posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Originally posted by Xeros


Oh, hang on................. Justification for war in Iraq? Remind me, I forgot. Religious fanatics with technology and Christianity always win over poverty and Muslims. Yes well I'll just sit back in my big comfy fu****g chair and pretend I know it all. And probably W*** off to Bill O'reilly D****face. AAAAAAAAAmerica!
Give me and the rest of the world a break.


Um, you assume much, which you know what they say about assumptions. it makes an ASS out of you and.....well, its making an ass out of YOU.

Did I say I support the war in Iraq? Hm? No. Did I say I support the Christian right? Hm? No. In fact, you pulled your little diatribe right out of your rear.

Since the subject is why a group of Arabs would attack the U.S., I was giving reasons why. Religous fanatics are seldom rational regardless of their creed.

No where did I say the war in iraq was justified. But just because I don't believe the war is ok doesn't mean I think the Muslim nuts are in anyway innocent victims.

So kindly stuff your juvinile sanctimonious ranting where the sun don't shine, and don't make assumptions that will make you out to be a raving idiot.



Well that's fair enough and sorry for sounding like an ass. I realise that I was judging your character (wrongly albeit). I'm not a raving idiot, I'm just (maybe too) passionate about things sometimes.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xeros

Well that's fair enough and sorry for sounding like an ass. I realise that I was judging your character (wrongly albeit). I'm not a raving idiot, I'm just (maybe too) passionate about things sometimes.


Apology accepted. And I understand.

Just remember, even people who oppose the crap in the middle east do so from different angles and for different purposes.

I sometimes get very heated about things too. So don't worry.




posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xeros
I heard some B***h saying it was an act of war - speaking about the
poor guys (yes ahem "terrorists") who commited suicide because of
being held for four years without trial!


They aren't 'poor guys'. They are terrorists. They murder innocent
Iraqis in the streets. They try to kill freely elected Iraqi officials and
they threaten death upon any Iraqi who dares to vote in free elections.
They kill children who are playing. They are not 'poor guys'.
They are vermin.

They are enemy combatants who do not get a trial. Never have.
They are in GITMO through their own faults. They made their
beds. Now they will lie, and perhaps die by their own hand, in them.

The general who said that suicide was a part of war for the
radical muslims was exactly correct. Remove your emotional
anti-american-governmentism and look at the facts, then perhaps
you will see the truth of his statement. The terrorists continually
use suicide as a weapon. They have no respect for people's lives
and no respect for their own lives. They freely kill other muslims
and themselves when it suits their radical needs, this despite the
fact that murder of muslims and suicide is against Islam.

One more dead terrorist. Boo-freak'n-hoo.


cowards




[edit on 6/13/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Osama's main purpose is the recreation of the Islamic Caliphate, a single unitary Muslim government/authority that would stretch from Morocco to Indonesia west to east and Spain to Sudan north to south. This will take two things - the destruction of existing governments all over the area (which tend to be brutal and corrupt anyway) and the radicalisation of men of fighting age in the area.
People, Osama has a plan, and it's a long term one. I think it's completely unrealistic, but we are not dealing with a man who thinks in terms of realisms. The guy's a religious zealot.
The destruction of the WTC was supposed to start an avalanche. We won't be able to see the full picture for some time to come.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Looter
This attack was payback for the Gulf War. They wanted to bring freedom and democracy to Saudi Arabia and the entire Mid East, but the first Gulf War illustrates America will prevent this from happening so they decided to go for the head of the Beast.

Ummm... nope. Osama actually wanted to raise and lead a force to liberate kuwait from Saddam, whom he hated as being far too secular. Who wanted to bring freedom and democracy to the ME? Eh? How would the liberation of Kuwait stop freedom and democracy?

Originally posted by Looter
What was it like when it happened? First there was the fire in the North tower, thats how the story began, how did this fire start? There were reports that a plane had flown into it but Mark said planes shouldn't be flying around there. Then there was the moment of revelation, suddenly all the questions were answered with a massive explosion when another plane crashed into the other tower! This was no accident. They had instant replay and it was hard to make out the plane as it hid among the clutter of buildings. It looked like a small commuter plane seating about 30, and it came from the north, but it wasn't until several days later that they started replaying the videos and then while reviewing them I noticed the inconsistancies. the plane aimed straight for the building and at the last moment it dived and veered slightly to the left to hit the corner of the building. I thought he had tried to knock the building but failed. It seemed he aimed at a sweet spot. Then I stopped watching because I thought the story was over and wanted to reflect on the enormity of the events and no listen to the platitudes of the TV commentators. So I missed out on the collapses, I really feel that but now 5 years later it seems as if I am the only person that has any personal recollection of these events even though we were all alive then and it was the only thing on TV.

Nope again. Actually I do remember that day very clearly. And it was very clear that two 737's had hit the WTC, one in each tower. I'm not sure where you got that information on the supposed fire in the North Tower, but all the witnesses say differently and so does the camera footage of the first impact. As for the second impact, that was a 737 - I remember seeing it go in and the collective gasp that went up in my office is something that I will never forget. By the way, who's Mark? And I don't think that hijackers would have taken any 'do not fly over Manhattan' warnings seriously.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Nope again. Actually I do remember that day very clearly. And it was very clear that two 737's had hit the WTC, one in each tower. I'm not sure where you got that information on the supposed fire in the North Tower, but all the witnesses say differently and so does the camera footage of the first impact. As for the second impact, that was a 737 - I remember seeing it go in and the collective gasp that went up in my office is something that I will never forget. By the way, who's Mark? And I don't think that hijackers would have taken any 'do not fly over Manhattan' warnings seriously.


Actually I belive it was 757, and 767



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

They aren't 'poor guys'. They are terrorists. They murder innocent
Iraqis in the streets.

Those are insurgents, there is a big difference betwen insurgents and terrorists and no they were not terrorists before the war, they were taxi drivers, people that worked in stores, merchans, just people.



They try to kill freely elected Iraqi officials and

Because they think the curent goverment is a pupet.


they threaten death upon any Iraqi who dares to vote in free elections.

That is just secterian violence, its shia against shunny.
Because one of them are the goverment and the other are not.



The general who said that suicide was a part of war for the
radical muslims was exactly correct. Remove your emotional
anti-american-governmentism and look at the facts, then perhaps
you will see the truth of his statement. The terrorists continually
use suicide as a weapon.

You know I'm not for fanatics ,terrorists, and so on but I'm not for bush either, one way to look at it is to look at things from a neutral point of view.


They have no respect for people's lives
and no respect for their own lives. They freely kill other muslims
and themselves when it suits their radical needs, this despite the
fact that murder of muslims and suicide is against Islam.

Neither has bush for his own people.
He sent thoulsads of troups to die on a fake pretex, and while people are dieing he makes money from it? how does that sound, is it fair?

Is it fair that he is got shares in the weapons industry? so when war starts he makes money, the longer the war lasts the more money he makes? how do you justify that , a president being in a group of influence , a president that is involved deep in the oil industry also, he invades he get's oil, so that is okay by you? a president has to be spotles.



One more dead terrorist. Boo-freak'n-hoo.

You mean like the ones that turned out alive?



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 08:18 AM
link   


They aren't 'poor guys'. They are terrorists.


Okay so the USA's intelligence should bring them to trial. The fact is (imo) that
the USA have no intelligence and therefore cannot put them on trial to bring sentance. Alot of them were farmers and such (wrong place wrong time) rounded up by pakistanis and other officials on commission. It's just wrong about 1% have been convicted. How can you say this? watch "The road to Guantanamo" Trailer a story about three totally innocent Britains kept for over two years, without trial and tortured. For what? They could have easily proved of there whereabouts in the UK. but instead were beaten and tryed to be forced to make confessions about being in Al Qaeda. Makes me sick. You cannot excuse this in any way.

[edit on 13-6-2006 by Xeros]



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 08:52 AM
link   
they arent poor guys! especially the one that blew up a marriot in pakistan after his release (abdullah mashud)

oh and the one who rejoined the taliban, but he got killed in 2004
two russian nationals held at gitmo were released then arrested a three years later planning attacks in russia.

plus, 150 are scheduled for released in the immediate months

[edit on 13-6-2006 by blatantblue]

[edit on 13-6-2006 by blatantblue]



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by blatantblue
plus, 150 are scheduled for released in the immediate months


That's the least they can do. With pressure from truly free countrys in Europe this disgrace to the USA will be shut down.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 09:06 AM
link   
its not a disgrace. some of the most hardcore people you will meet, that would gladly kill YOU are held there. and if theyre subjected to loud music, cold water, no sleep, who cares.

the military spends more money on food for them than they do on their own soldiers. the average detainee has gained 18 lbs there. they get muslim meals and are able to pray as much as they want.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem

Nope again. Actually I do remember that day very clearly. And it was very clear that two 737's had hit the WTC, one in each tower. I'm not sure where you got that information on the supposed fire in the North Tower, but all the witnesses say differently and so does the camera footage of the first impact. As for the second impact, that was a 737 - I remember seeing it go in and the collective gasp that went up in my office is something that I will never forget. By the way, who's Mark? And I don't think that hijackers would have taken any 'do not fly over Manhattan' warnings seriously.


Actually I belive it was 757, and 767

Quite right, a 757 and a 767. My bad. Brain has rotted due to sitting at my desk all day and staring out of the window.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

Who benefited the most after this attack?


Now, that is a very important question...



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by blatantblue
its not a disgrace. some of the most hardcore people you will meet, that would gladly kill YOU are held there. and if theyre subjected to loud music, cold water, no sleep, who cares.

the military spends more money on food for them than they do on their own soldiers. the average detainee has gained 18 lbs there. they get muslim meals and are able to pray as much as they want.




Fair enough. If there's one thing that I've learnt from this site it's that there's no use puttting any of your views across (especially for Muslims) because society is going down the fing drain. I hope the wool will be pulled from your eyes someday. Peace out.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
How can you remember that the first plane hit the north tower when at the time no one was watching because the story hadn't happened yet? Thats a problem when people's "memories" are refreshed by the official story. "I was there and I saw whatever we were told we saw, Osama did it. I saw it with my own eyes." Mark Haines, the world's greatest dribbler, what channel were you watching. So I ask you all where were you when history was happening and when did you begin to realize that the official story didn't add up. The great lesson is that you should have begun your investigation the moment these events happened. In the initial moments everyone was taken by panic and they ran. They evacuated all of lower manhattan and sealed the island. All the secrets of what your government has been doing to you and the rest of the World were spread over the streets this was the golden opportunity to discover who knows what. Now 5 years later all the evidence has been cleaned up and we are dealing with the shadows of events. Don't worry the best is yet to come, so learn and next time an event like this happens charge straight in and go after the truth, don't run and hide from it.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
Because...

They wanted the US to invade their countries, shut down their oil production, kill a whole bunch of their people, and demonize the entire Muslim religion.

Makes sense to me...


I don't think they put that much thought into it, myself. Jihad, remember?



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem

Nope again. Actually I do remember that day very clearly. And it was very clear that two 737's had hit the WTC, one in each tower. I'm not sure where you got that information on the supposed fire in the North Tower, but all the witnesses say differently and so does the camera footage of the first impact. As for the second impact, that was a 737 - I remember seeing it go in and the collective gasp that went up in my office is something that I will never forget. By the way, who's Mark? And I don't think that hijackers would have taken any 'do not fly over Manhattan' warnings seriously.


Actually I belive it was 757, and 767


I have the same recollection, and I watched it live over and over. There is no question in my mind what happened on that day.

Some people, unfortunately, have very short memories. Take a flag count in your neighborhood and then compare that with 5 years ago. Oh, that's right...you don't remember.




posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xeros

Originally posted by blatantblue
plus, 150 are scheduled for released in the immediate months


That's the least they can do. With pressure from truly free countrys in Europe this disgrace to the USA will be shut down.


And you completely ignore the three points that the guy posted. Criminals, who went back to pursue more criminal activities once released.

But they are more than criminals and they are not protected under our Constitution.

Remember that and you will be on your way to enlightenment.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   
premise: "insanity is a sane response to an insane world" - RD Laing

therefore, it "makes sense" both as an "inside job" & as an "act of Muslim-inspired terrorism"

(welcome to the other side of the looking glass)



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join