Do you think we should have went to war with Iraq?

[Hanbit]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

Technically, the war we are fighting already is a "World War"

Iraq Iran Afghanistan Syria Israel United States Canada Great Britain Germany Japan South Korea China.. they're all participating.. it already IS a world war.. the U.S. just happens to be dominating, that's all

Incorrect. Why?

Half of those countries are on duty on behalf of the United Nations. Japan is not in Iraq.... They can't use military force unless its their country. Israel is most likely a religion reason. South Korea, well they want a training area where theres a desert.

Who ever said Bush is a criminial ... another propaganda? Remmebre when people said Clinton was a criminial? Wtfek... Heck the Southernors said that Lincoln was a criminial. So is bush a criminial? No hes just a president with bad things happening during his term.

 

[jaint]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

There's only one reason that Iraq was invaded, and regardless of what you believe, that one reason is why there will never be peace!

Iraq is probably one of the most valuable land assets in the entire world. Why, you may be asking? Well, Iraq has strategic land value, economic land value, resource land value, and finally religious and cultural value. I don't think any other country has this much value, and it's very obvious and clear to see why everyone wants their piece of this country.

Economic and Resource Value
It has economic and resource value because it contains vast quantities of Oil, Natural Gas and Gold deposits! But everyone already knows about this, so I'm not going to explain it.

Strategic Value
Iraq sits very comfortably between some of the key Middle Eastern countries. Having control over such a country becomes invaluable to the holder. You can make trade with neighboring countries at a tremendous discount since tariffs and transportation costs become marginal. Oil can be purchased at a much lower cost since pipelines become unnecessary, and wholesale price can be easily paid off by the retail price that you can sell these resources for (not only to your own populace, but to other foreign nations). But the main importance of having control over Iraq, is that you can conduct military operations from here with the utmost privacy and secrecy. Iraq is situated in an area of the Middle East, that the UN ignores - or rather doesn't care to deal with. If you wanted to get intel on a country, or have a torture camp - Iraq would be prime real estate! Not to mention that military campaigns against neighboring nations could be much more easily executed if troops were moved first to Iraq and then deployed from there onwards. As opposed to just deploying troops to the country you are attacking, and thereby increase your casualties.

Cultural and Religious Value
Finally, we have the last factor! Sadly, there are still people who feel insanely devoted to their religion. So much so, that they feel that they need to push their religion on to others, these people come in all shapes & sizes, and similarly they come in all sorts of religions. Iraq in the past, was formerly known as Babylon, a Persian capital that was acclaimed for its valor and success. However, this capital was at many times captured by various Empires and as it fell into the hands of a new conqueror, the populace would discover a new and foreign religion. Iraq in modern times however, has been mostly Muslim and the Middle East has become the new proving ground of Missionaries. To the crazily religious, the Middle East is just another place to recruit new converts to Christianity, Judaism, Islam [insert religion here].

Those involved in attacking Iraq are out to expand their empire and increase their profit (for themselves, eg: politicians, they don't care about their own ppl). And the churches and temples are generally concerned with a convert or die policy in these places. Think about it, why are the first relief groups to enter war torn countries almost always are missionary groups?


Lastly, Bush isn't any different from any other president (that doesn't mean he's a good president). The only problem is that his PR agent sucks, and we leave in a more technologically advanced time where it's incredibly easy to reveal how corrupt politicians, corporations and Presidents are. People are only realizing now that the American President is Public Enemy #1, and always has been (The president of every country in the world is generally concerned moreso with increasing his own profits, then in helping the poor).

 

[geancanach]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

i feel that the whole thing was a set up from the beginning. bush's war on terror is a lie to the american public, 9/11 was staged by the US gov't to scare the public and give bush more power.
there is no evidence whatsoever linking Al Quada to 9/11; there is no evidence linking iraq to Al Quada; and as far as WMD's go, if bush wants to find them, he has no further to look than the US aresenals

 

[Hanbit]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

i feel that the whole thing was a set up from the beginning. bush's war on terror is a lie to the american public, 9/11 was staged by the US gov't to scare the public and give bush more power.
there is no evidence whatsoever linking Al Quada to 9/11; there is no evidence linking iraq to Al Quada; and as far as WMD's go, if bush wants to find them, he has no further to look than the US aresenals

^^ :nuts:

I think you read everything wrong. Bush was felt by the American Public that he didn't do anything even if he knew it was coming.

:squint: Hello! 9/11 was not staged by the US Government. What are you out of your mind? There was plenty of evidence that Al Queda staged this. Do you watch any documentary movies? There were audios that they were speaking Arabic.....

 

[Micro]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

i feel that the whole thing was a set up from the beginning. bush's war on terror is a lie to the american public, 9/11 was staged by the US gov't to scare the public and give bush more power.
there is no evidence whatsoever linking Al Quada to 9/11; there is no evidence linking iraq to Al Quada; and as far as WMD's go, if bush wants to find them, he has no further to look than the US aresenals

If he did that, he would be on trial for genocide right about now. The amount of people who were killed for what?

 

[geancanach]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

don't believe me? i challenge anyone to compare the official story behind 9/11 to scrutiny and science. here are a few good start points for it:
http://www.physics911.net/
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&hl=en (it's almost 90 mins, make sure you have time)
http://www.davidicke.com/content/view/3420/33/
check those, then tell me what you believe

 

[Hanbit]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

Dont believe me? Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/ and then tell me what you believe.

Those are more fakeness. Did you watch Loose Change 500 times or something? Watch Faranheit 9/11....

 

[geancanach]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

Dont believe me? Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/ and then tell me what you believe.

Those are more fakeness. Did you watch Loose Change 500 times or something? Watch Faranheit 9/11....

I have seen Farenheit 9/11; and watched loosechange only once. so perhaps you can, within the oficial explanation, explain a few of the following points for us:
1) the cell phone calls from flight 93 - and if cell phones were able to work so well (even though the calculated result is less than 1/100 of 1% chance of success). and if they worked so well on that day, why did american airlines spend so much money on the technology of putting a cell station in one of their jets 4 years later?
2) the near free-fall speed collapse of the twin towers
3) the collapse of WTC 7 (the official eplanation being fire caused by falling debris from the north towers; making it the 3rd steel frame building in history to collapse from a fire; the first 2 being the twin towers)
4) how a skidding 100-ton jet traveling at a speed in excess of 500 mph doesnt damage the lawn
5) how an inexperienced pilot, barely able to handle a private plane so efficiently flies a passenger jet that uses a flight drew of 4
6) why the federal government refuses to release the 3 survellience videos that captured the whole event of the pentagon crash, but instead only 5 frames from their own footage that never shows the jet
7) how passports survive a fire that vaporizes black boxes
8) why no bodies are discovered at the shanksville crash site
9) why there was no damage to the pentagon walls where the engines would have hit
10) why so far to date, 9 of the alleged terrorists on board the various flights have turned up alive
11) why is there such consistant descriptions from eye-witnesses of secondary explosions
12) why experienced military personel describe a bomb going off and the smell of cordite (a nitrogen based explosive) rather than the smell of jet fuel (high-grade kerosene, a hydrocarbon)
13) how did the shock-wave at the pentagon stop clocks several minutes before the impact time (which has been repetedly changed)

let me see how you do on these, then we can bring up the hard questions

 

[Hanbit]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

I have seen Farenheit 9/11; and watched loosechange only once. so perhaps you can, within the oficial explanation, explain a few of the following points for us:
1) the cell phone calls from flight 93 - and if cell phones were able to work so well (even though the calculated result is less than 1/100 of 1% chance of success). and if they worked so well on that day, why did american airlines spend so much money on the technology of putting a cell station in one of their jets 4 years later?
2) the near free-fall speed collapse of the twin towers
3) the collapse of WTC 7 (the official eplanation being fire caused by falling debris from the north towers; making it the 3rd steel frame building in history to collapse from a fire; the first 2 being the twin towers)
4) how a skidding 100-ton jet traveling at a speed in excess of 500 mph doesnt damage the lawn
5) how an inexperienced pilot, barely able to handle a private plane so efficiently flies a passenger jet that uses a flight drew of 4
6) why the federal government refuses to release the 3 survellience videos that captured the whole event of the pentagon crash, but instead only 5 frames from their own footage that never shows the jet
7) how passports survive a fire that vaporizes black boxes
8) why no bodies are discovered at the shanksville crash site
9) why there was no damage to the pentagon walls where the engines would have hit
10) why so far to date, 9 of the alleged terrorists on board the various flights have turned up alive
11) why is there such consistant descriptions from eye-witnesses of secondary explosions
12) why experienced military personel describe a bomb going off and the smell of cordite (a nitrogen based explosive) rather than the smell of jet fuel (high-grade kerosene, a hydrocarbon)
13) how did the shock-wave at the pentagon stop clocks several minutes before the impact time (which has been repetedly changed)

let me see how you do on these, then we can bring up the hard questions

1. Who said it was all Cell Phones? The planes dont require you to turn it off. Just causes statics during pilot communications. Also planes has phones that requres your credit card.

2. The speed was not fast... First of all it was more then a hour before it collapsed. Second of all the plane hit the center of the building the the top was too heavy and it collapsed. Fire does burn metal too....

3. Do you even know World Trade 7 is? Its not even a skyskraper.

4. What are you talking about? The metthow from United 93 was so shownable. Pictures are showable and I even visited the crash site last year in 9/11.

5. That is why the plane crashed..... Cause he was inexpiereienced.

6. Cause the Pentagon has militaric equipment......

7. Use commen sense on that.

8. There was bodies discovered. Also explosions does vaporizes some bodies. Remember Atomic Bomb? No ne found a body....

9. The west side of the pentagon collapsed..... that is damange...

10. No their all dead. They even found one of their bodies.

11. They thought it was a small plane not a commercial airliner.

12. Once again... The plane was a Airbus not a boeing...

13. ITS THE PENTAGON.....

I dont know why you think this event was a fraud... Especially with so many people died. I feel you are trying to tell Americans 3000 americans did not die. I believe you should stop saying this is fake because it was real and you saw it LIVE on the camera in news channel and saw those people falling off the windows. This isnt some kind of fraud dude... This was a attack from Al Quada. and I just proved it.

 

[jaint]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

I don't think the US government planned it, they did antagonize the attack but they probably didn't plan it in advance.

Basically the US funded Osama long back, to fight off the pesky Russians (America hated them at this time). Around this time, America used the Russians to blame all their social and political problems on (in the same manner that they use X middle eastern country today). So they funded Bin Ladin, and gave him CIA and assassin training (courtesy of your tax dollar). Bin Ladin and the CIA set up a training camp, they trained Afghani fighters who ended up defeating the Russians. America later cut funding (they had no more use for him), and they began funding other various exploits across the globe (Chile Coupe of 9/11/1973, Vietnam, Cuban Communist Scare). As they began to forget about the army they trained, Osama began to grow angry at America (which he had once idolized and praised for its support against Russian occupancy). America at this time also began sponsoring Israel, and Bin Ladin got angry at the fact that the UAE was doing little to stop them, and he felt that America was militarizing Israel in support of a war that would surely be won through military might. Israel and the rest of the Middle East having alot of tension between them, this was seen as America pledging allegiance to Israel. And so Bin Ladin got pissed off and upon seeing how American Transnational corporations like to f*ck around with the world, he became disillusioned by religion and started training his followers on various missions that would later on become the respective bombings of the US Embassy in S.Africa, and later the events of 9/11.

As far as Bush is concerned, the CIA had been tracking Bin Ladin after the Embassy bombing in S.Africa - they didn't quite know where he was (and I'm quite certain that most of the talk about knowing where he was is complete BS - it's just political mud slinging). So basically CIA tracked and tracked, and they received some form of suspicion that an attack may come about by a plane. Everyone in the higher up positions of the Bush administration received a report on this, but they uniamously decided that it would serve them better to ignore the threat.

Why? For starters, the attack itself seemed controllable - a plane being hijacked surely would be discovered miles before it could hit anything of importance. Secondly, even if such an attack was to occur, the government or powers that be could take advantage of it and use the fear and sense of revenge to rally the public in support of all sorts of weird and inane actions (war, stripping the public of its power, increasing spending and less taxation on Corporations). The benefits outnumbered the disadvantages.



To sum it all up, the reason 9/11 was able to happen - is because the American Gov't realized that it was more profitable to let the attacks happen, then it would be to stop the attacks.

When you can come to terms with that, you'll understand much of the world (and it's not a Republican thing, Democrats would do the same thing - only more discreetly, that's why you should vote for a fringe candidate like Nader - green party).

 

[geancanach]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

1) the cell phone calls from flight 93 - and if cell phones were able to work so well (even though the calculated result is less than 1/100 of 1% chance of success). and if they worked so well on that day, why did american airlines spend so much money on the technology of putting a cell station in one of their jets 4 years later?
1. Who said it was all Cell Phones? The planes dont require you to turn it off. Just causes statics during pilot communications. Also planes has phones that requres your credit card.

2) the near free-fall speed collapse of the twin towers
2. The speed was not fast... First of all it was more then a hour before it collapsed. Second of all the plane hit the center of the building the the top was too heavy and it collapsed. Fire does burn metal too....

3) the collapse of WTC 7 (the official eplanation being fire caused by falling debris from the north towers; making it the 3rd steel frame building in history to collapse from a fire; the first 2 being the twin towers)
3. Do you even know World Trade 7 is? Its not even a skyskraper.

4) how a skidding 100-ton jet traveling at a speed in excess of 500 mph doesnt damage the lawn
4. What are you talking about? The metthow from United 93 was so shownable. Pictures are showable and I even visited the crash site last year in 9/11.

5) how an inexperienced pilot, barely able to handle a private plane so efficiently flies a passenger jet that uses a flight drew of 4
5. That is why the plane crashed..... Cause he was inexpiereienced.

6) why the federal government refuses to release the 3 survellience videos that captured the whole event of the pentagon crash, but instead only 5 frames from their own footage that never shows the jet
6. Cause the Pentagon has militaric equipment......

7) how passports survive a fire that vaporizes black boxes
7. Use commen sense on that.

8) why no bodies are discovered at the shanksville crash site
8. There was bodies discovered. Also explosions does vaporizes some bodies. Remember Atomic Bomb? No ne found a body....

9) why there was no damage to the pentagon walls where the engines would have hit
9. The west side of the pentagon collapsed..... that is damange...

10) why so far to date, 9 of the alleged terrorists on board the various flights have turned up alive
10. No their all dead. They even found one of their bodies.

11) why is there such consistant descriptions from eye-witnesses of secondary explosions
11. They thought it was a small plane not a commercial airliner.

12) why experienced military personel describe a bomb going off and the smell of cordite (a nitrogen based explosive) rather than the smell of jet fuel (high-grade kerosene, a hydrocarbon)
12. Once again... The plane was a Airbus not a boeing...

13) how did the shock-wave at the pentagon stop clocks several minutes before the impact time (which has been repetedly changed)
13. ITS THE PENTAGON.....

I dont know why you think this event was a fraud... Especially with so many people died. I feel you are trying to tell Americans 3000 americans did not die. I believe you should stop saying this is fake because it was real and you saw it LIVE on the camera in news channel and saw those people falling off the windows. This isnt some kind of fraud dude... This was a attack from Al Quada. and I just proved it.

i never said the event didnt happen, just challenged the idea of who is responsible; but let's look at what you "proved"

1) the official report specifies cell phone, try again
2) each tower's collapse, from beginning to end was approx. 10 seconds. free-fall speed from that height is 9.2 seconds, that's pretty fast since anyone that has ever worked demolitions could tell you you need to take out the bottom support of a building to bring it down like that. jet fuel can burn at a sustained temperature of about 1200 degrees if the fuel source is maintained (most was burned off immediately on impact) the steel used in the construction of the WTC was tested to withstand temperatures in excess of 2000 degrees over the course of several hours (and steel doesnt begin to melt until about 3000 degrees); try again
3) do i ever say 'skyscraper' about WTC 7? it was a steel framed building. can you show me one examplle of any other steel-framed building to collapse as a result of fire besides the WTC? ; try again
4)

for having a boeing 757 skid across it, that lawn looks rather pristine; try again
5) FAA controllers tracking flight 77 are all convinced it's a military jet. no inexperienced pilot could handle a boeing 757 like that (i doubt even an experienced pilot could); try again
6) i feel quite secure in saying that the pentagon doesnt keep classified military equipment out where a survellience camera at a nearby gas station would be able to see it; try again
7) common sense dictates quite the opposite, the paper would be destroyed, the resilient black boxes would be fine; try again
8) the coroner on the scene at shanksville stated that he stopped being the coroner at the site after 10 minutes because there were no bodies. and the temperature of a crashing jet explosion is hardly comparable to the blast and temperature of an atomic bomb. try again
9)

the points where the engines would have hit (each being 6 tons of titanium and steel, traveling at about 500 mph) was perfectly intact after impact, not even a broken window; try again
10) On September 23rd, the BBC reported that Waleed Al Shehri was alive and well in Casablanca, Morroco.
They also tracked down Abdulaziz Alomari, who is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and lost his passport while studying in Denver.
Wail M. Alshehri is alive and well.
Mohand Alshehri is alive in Saudi Arabia.
Khalid Almihdhar is a computer programmer in Mecca.
Salem Alhazmi works at a chemical plant in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia.
Saeed Alghamdi is training to be a pilot in Tunis.
Ahmed Alnami is an administrative supervisor for Saudi Airlines.
Mohammed Atta's father claimed to receive a phone call from his son on September 12th.; try again
11) that doesnt even make sense to the question; try again
12) flight 77 was a boeing 757. but even if it was an airbus, they use jet fuel, and not cordite. no aircraft uses cordite as a fuel, or for any other purpose; try again
13) and your point there is what exactly? try again

well, your proof successfully answers 0% of those questions. want to give it another go, or try some harder ones?

 

[Cubeform]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

This is all from a documentary I saw on TV, so I can't really cite, but...

Around the time of the Clinton administration, al-Qaeda had become more prominent. The government was looking for a way to arm their Predator patrol craft, which had spotted suspected al-Qaeda members. However, a bureaucratic bottleneck held this plan back. Had the predator been armed, Osama bin Laden could have been killed.

The government at the time was considering attacking Afghanistan. This never happened because they were concerned about Afghanistan's citizens. Eventually George W. Bush got elected into office, and there everything started going downhill.

The Bush administration immediately disregarded al-Qaeda, and let them thrive. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda members were thinking of a crazy scheme that would change the world forever...

In the months before 9/11, the FBI suspected a terrorist attack using large passenger aircraft. Although they could have done more about it, the government just went on.

On around September 2001 (if I recall correctly), an FBI agent was sent to investigate. Unfortunately, he had 30 days to report. Of course, a couple of days later, terror struck.

But wait. The story doesn't stop there. Immediately after 9/11, Dick Cheney suggested that the military bomb Iraq. It took a massive amount of persuasion to convince him that Afghanistan was the way to go.

Then, in 2002, troops go into Iraq based on false information. They're still there, even after the information has been debunked.

Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but looks like Bush wanted to invade Iraq at the expense of his country's troops and citizens.

So, no. You shouldn't have gone into Iraq.

Also:

2) each tower's collapse, from beginning to end was approx. 10 seconds. free-fall speed from that height is 9.2 seconds, that's pretty fast since anyone that has ever worked demolitions could tell you you need to take out the bottom support of a building to bring it down like that. jet fuel can burn at a sustained temperature of about 1200 degrees if the fuel source is maintained (most was burned off immediately on impact) the steel used in the construction of the WTC was tested to withstand temperatures in excess of 2000 degrees over the course of several hours (and steel doesnt begin to melt until about 3000 degrees); try again

The actual process of the collapse took about several hours. The building stood still while its floors were slowly burning. And who said you needed to melt the steel columns completely? They just need to bend.

 

[Hanbit]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

i never said the event didnt happen, just challenged the idea of who is responsible; but let's look at what you "proved"

1) the official report specifies cell phone, try again
2) each tower's collapse, from beginning to end was approx. 10 seconds. free-fall speed from that height is 9.2 seconds, that's pretty fast since anyone that has ever worked demolitions could tell you you need to take out the bottom support of a building to bring it down like that. jet fuel can burn at a sustained temperature of about 1200 degrees if the fuel source is maintained (most was burned off immediately on impact) the steel used in the construction of the WTC was tested to withstand temperatures in excess of 2000 degrees over the course of several hours (and steel doesnt begin to melt until about 3000 degrees); try again
3) do i ever say 'skyscraper' about WTC 7? it was a steel framed building. can you show me one examplle of any other steel-framed building to collapse as a result of fire besides the WTC? ; try again
4)

for having a boeing 757 skid across it, that lawn looks rather pristine; try again
5) FAA controllers tracking flight 77 are all convinced it's a military jet. no inexperienced pilot could handle a boeing 757 like that (i doubt even an experienced pilot could); try again
6) i feel quite secure in saying that the pentagon doesnt keep classified military equipment out where a survellience camera at a nearby gas station would be able to see it; try again
7) common sense dictates quite the opposite, the paper would be destroyed, the resilient black boxes would be fine; try again
8) the coroner on the scene at shanksville stated that he stopped being the coroner at the site after 10 minutes because there were no bodies. and the temperature of a crashing jet explosion is hardly comparable to the blast and temperature of an atomic bomb. try again
9)

the points where the engines would have hit (each being 6 tons of titanium and steel, traveling at about 500 mph) was perfectly intact after impact, not even a broken window; try again
10) On September 23rd, the BBC reported that Waleed Al Shehri was alive and well in Casablanca, Morroco.
They also tracked down Abdulaziz Alomari, who is an engineer with Saudi Telecoms, and lost his passport while studying in Denver.
Wail M. Alshehri is alive and well.
Mohand Alshehri is alive in Saudi Arabia.
Khalid Almihdhar is a computer programmer in Mecca.
Salem Alhazmi works at a chemical plant in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia.
Saeed Alghamdi is training to be a pilot in Tunis.
Ahmed Alnami is an administrative supervisor for Saudi Airlines.
Mohammed Atta's father claimed to receive a phone call from his son on September 12th.; try again
11) that doesnt even make sense to the question; try again
12) flight 77 was a boeing 757. but even if it was an airbus, they use jet fuel, and not cordite. no aircraft uses cordite as a fuel, or for any other purpose; try again
13) and your point there is what exactly? try again

well, your proof successfully answers 0% of those questions. want to give it another go, or try some harder ones?

I dont get that post above...

1. THERE WERE ALOT OF REPORTS FROM THE MAINTENECE OFFICE THAT MANY CALLED FROM THE AIRPLANE PHONES. the Airplane phones are reported ONLY to the Maintence ofice. Think about that.

2. Wrong, It was exactly 2 minutes.. And you know microwaves and powerlines and computers were in there too. Igniting a huge explosion. If that was wrong I really do not think people would have jumped from the top of the building.

3.

In May 2002, the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the United States (FEMA) released a report on the collapse. [3] FEMA made preliminary findings that the collapse was due primarily to fires on multiple stories caused by debris from the other two towers, and not to the actual impact damage of 1 WTC and 2 WTC as they collapsed. The report noted that, prior to this collapse, there was no record of the fire-induced collapse of a large fire-protected steel building such as 7 WTC.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#Collapse

4. No boeings crashed.... All were airbuses.

5. Wrong. It hit the pentagon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_77

6. Survellience Cameras.... Not having a survellience camera in a government or military place is just plain stupid... :hahano:

7. Actually some passports were burned half.
Source: (Farenheight 9/11)

8. So...? I dont think we found all the bodies in the WTC....

9. I saw windows broken... :nuts:

10.

nitially, Mohamed Atta's identity was confused with that of a native Jordanian, Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta, who bombed a bus in 1986 on the Israel-occupied West Bank, killing one and severely injuring three. Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta, a naturalized U.S. citizen, was subsequently deported from Venezuela to the United States, extradited to Israel, tried and sentenced to life in prison. The Israeli supreme court later overturned his extradition and set him free; his whereabouts are unknown. He is 14 years older than Mohamed Atta. After the September 11 attacks, a general furor arose over the supposed failure of immigration authorities and the U.S. intelligence community to stop a known terrorist from entering the country under his true name. Eventually, The Boston Globe reported details from records at the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals detailing the detention and subsequent extradition of Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta from the U.S.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Atta#Family_portraits_of_Atta

11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_757 (Nearly the same as a airbus)

 

[EsotericSociety]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

Well, I am not American, but my country is contributing troops to the war. In my opinion it never should have happened. There is a lot of fear-mongering occuring, especially in the United States, in an attempt to gain more control over the people. Most Americans probably can't even remember what it was like 5 years ago, before the September eleven attacks. But technically, it's only 5 years, you should be able to remember. That's the extent of brain-washing the government is capable of. Now I need to shut my mouth before I get started on the subject of blind patriotism.

 

[geancanach]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

I dont get that post above...

1. THERE WERE ALOT OF REPORTS FROM THE MAINTENECE OFFICE THAT MANY CALLED FROM THE AIRPLANE PHONES. the Airplane phones are reported ONLY to the Maintence ofice. Think about that.

2. Wrong, It was exactly 2 minutes.. And you know microwaves and powerlines and computers were in there too. Igniting a huge explosion. If that was wrong I really do not think people would have jumped from the top of the building.

3.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#Collapse

4. No boeings crashed.... All were airbuses.

5. Wrong. It hit the pentagon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_77

6. Survellience Cameras.... Not having a survellience camera in a government or military place is just plain stupid... :hahano:

7. Actually some passports were burned half.
Source: (Farenheight 9/11)

8. So...? I dont think we found all the bodies in the WTC....

9. I saw windows broken... :nuts:

10.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Atta#Family_portraits_of_Atta

11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_757 (Nearly the same as a airbus)

nope, neither did i; not even sure which side its arguing.
1) thought about it, odd that the federal investigators didn't get it reported to them (since the official report still says cell phones)
2) use a stopwatch, watch any news footage of the collapses, begin timing when the towers begin to fall. it's approx. 10 secs. they even said that on every news channel
3) you just made my point for me. there isnt a single other instance of such a building collapsing as a result of fire; before or since.
4) just to pull up a quick example
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/194197/M/

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Aircraft[/FONT] [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Taken at[/FONT] [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]More: American Airlines
More: Boeing 757-223[/FONT] [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]More: Los Angeles - International (LAX / KLAX)
More: USA - California, January 22, 1999[/FONT] [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Remark[/FONT] [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Photographer[/FONT] [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]N644AA (cn 24602/365) This aircraft (as flight 77) was deliberately crashed into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 after being hijacked by terrorists.[/FONT][FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]More: Remi Dallot
Contact Remi Dallot[/FONT]

Boeing 757, from an unrelated source
5) i don't see a Boeing 757 in that picture anywhere, do you?
6) they also confiscated tapes of the survellience cameras from the nearby gas station, the Sheraton Hote, and the Virginia Dept. of Transportation; all three cameras caught the whole thing. so if they want people to believe them, they should release at least one frame from one of those 3 that show the jet
7) paper half-burned, and we shoulld believe that same fire vaporized black boxes and collapsed the towers. can you really say that makes sense?
8) there's a big difference between 'not finding all' and 'there are none'; there was never even a drop of blood found at the shanksville site (which raises another interesting question, what exactly did they use as a source for their DNA idenitifications?)
9) yep, but not where the engines would have hit
10) that doesnt explain them being alive
11) see #4
12) ????
13) ????

 

[Hanbit]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

nope, neither did i; not even sure which side its arguing.
1) thought about it, odd that the federal investigators didn't get it reported to them (since the official report still says cell phones)
2) use a stopwatch, watch any news footage of the collapses, begin timing when the towers begin to fall. it's approx. 10 secs. they even said that on every news channel
3) you just made my point for me. there isnt a single other instance of such a building collapsing as a result of fire; before or since.
4) just to pull up a quick example
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/194197/M/
Boeing 757, from an unrelated source
5) i don't see a Boeing 757 in that picture anywhere, do you?
6) they also confiscated tapes of the survellience cameras from the nearby gas station, the Sheraton Hote, and the Virginia Dept. of Transportation; all three cameras caught the whole thing. so if they want people to believe them, they should release at least one frame from one of those 3 that show the jet
7) paper half-burned, and we shoulld believe that same fire vaporized black boxes and collapsed the towers. can you really say that makes sense?
8) there's a big difference between 'not finding all' and 'there are none'; there was never even a drop of blood found at the shanksville site (which raises another interesting question, what exactly did they use as a source for their DNA idenitifications?)
9) yep, but not where the engines would have hit
10) that doesnt explain them being alive
11) see #4
12) ????
13) ????

1.

Much of what happened on the plane has been reconstructed from the many phone calls made by passengers and crew, mainly through onboard airphones and cellular phones. Ten passengers and two crew members made calls after the hijacking began. This was in marked contrast to the other three planes, where few phone calls were made. It has thus been possible to assemble a detailed yet incomplete picture of what happened on board through these calls.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_93#Passenger_and_crew_phone_calls

2.

Three buildings in the World Trade Center Complex collapsed due to structural failure on the day of the attack. The south tower (2 WTC) fell at approximately 9:59 a.m., after burning for 58 minutes in a fire caused by the impact of United Airlines Flight 175 at 9:03 a.m. The north tower (1 WTC) fell at 10:28 a.m., after burning approximately 103 minutes in a fire caused by the impact of American Airlines Flight 11 at 8:45 a.m. A third building, 7 World Trade Center (7 WTC) collapsed at 5:20 p.m., after being heavily damaged by debris from the Twin Towers when they fell and subsequent fires.]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks#Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center

3.

collapsed due to structural failure on the day of the attack

Think about it.

5. Look here.

A Debris from the plane.

One of the engines

Satelite view.

Try to see the debris

How did the plane vanish good?
[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]In the case of the other three incidents, the seismic studies produced by Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory have proved to be a reliable and often quoted source of some hard 9-11 facts, not least of which has been the precise time of each event. Its findings in respect of the Pentagon attack are cited less frequently. The findings are available at: [/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]http://www.mgs.md.gov/esic/publications/download/911pentagon.pdf[/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]. Of the Pentagon attack the scientists conclude:[/FONT] [/FONT]

[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]"There appears to be strong seismic signals around 09:38:52 at station MVL (Millersville, Pa; Δ = 139 km), but the signals are too high frequency (5-10 Hz) and too high amplitude (328 nm/s at 139 km). Hence, it appears to be noise perhaps due to electrical disturbances. Otherwise, there are no clear and consistent seismic wave arrivals in this time window".[/FONT] [/FONT]​

[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif] [/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]Despite a major signal at 9.38 in the Washington area, this is not believed to be a genuine seismic reading. We might conclude therefore that the events at the Pentagon generated no seismic activity whatsoever. Yet a major impact or a big explosion would certainly be expected to register. Taken at face value, the seismic study informs us that there was no substantial impact and no big explosion. I am ill-qualified to question the author's judgement regarding the possible 'electrical disturbances', but cannot help wondering what may have given rise to these disturbances, if that is what they were.[/FONT] [/FONT]
[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]The seismic data is potentially very valuable, but on this occasion I believe the Earth Observatory has let us down in one crucial respect. The problem concerns the time window alluded to in the final sentence of the above quote. For some reason the Earth Observatory decided to analyse only data that related to the period 09.36.30 to 09.39.30, a rather narrow window of three minutes. Although most authorities now agree that the Pentagon attack occurred within these times, this has not always been the case. In the first few months after the incident it was not uncommon to see the time given as 09.42 and some reports even quoted as late as 09.45. It is unfortunate and frustrating that the Observatory chose not extend its study to cover a wider time window that incorporated these times. A twenty minute window between 9.30 and 9.50 would have been satisfactory. That it did not do so means that we must take these findings with caution.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]6. Look at above.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]7. I agree with you on the Blackbox. It seems covered up.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]8. So? Bodies wearnt found but there was enough evidence that United 93 crashed there. And they didnt use DNA sources but they traced phone calls and got information of who it is.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]9. Perfectly the building was halfy destroyed... so windows were broken there.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]10. Theres been reports of seeing Adolf Hitler.... But im sure hes dead. There are many others with the same name I mean...[/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Aquilus]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

Defenitly not. United States has nothing to do in the Arabic countryes. I think that they are only there because they are intrested in things thay can give money to them (oil).
I think Bush is the worst thing that has happened to USA.

Most people here in Argentina are against war, and all HATE Bush.

Agreed

 

[geancanach]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

1.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_93#Passenger_and_crew_phone_calls

2.

Three buildings in the World Trade Center Complex collapsed due to structural failure on the day of the attack. The south tower (2 WTC) fell at approximately 9:59 a.m., after burning for 58 minutes in a fire caused by the impact of United Airlines Flight 175 at 9:03 a.m. The north tower (1 WTC) fell at 10:28 a.m., after burning approximately 103 minutes in a fire caused by the impact of American Airlines Flight 11 at 8:45 a.m. A third building, 7 World Trade Center (7 WTC) collapsed at 5:20 p.m., after being heavily damaged by debris from the Twin Towers when they fell and subsequent fires.]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_attacks#Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center

3.
Think about it.

5. Look here.

A Debris from the plane.

One of the engines

Satelite view.

Try to see the debris

How did the plane vanish good?
[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]In the case of the other three incidents, the seismic studies produced by Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory have proved to be a reliable and often quoted source of some hard 9-11 facts, not least of which has been the precise time of each event. Its findings in respect of the Pentagon attack are cited less frequently. The findings are available at: [/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]http://www.mgs.md.gov/esic/publications/download/911pentagon.pdf[/FONT][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]. [/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]6. Look at above.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]7. I agree with you on the Blackbox. It seems covered up.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]8. So? Bodies wearnt found but there was enough evidence that United 93 crashed there. And they didnt use DNA sources but they traced phone calls and got information of who it is.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]9. Perfectly the building was halfy destroyed... so windows were broken there.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif][FONT=Callisto MT,Georgia,Book Antiqua,Palatino,Times New Roman,Serif]10. Theres been reports of seeing Adolf Hitler.... But im sure hes dead. There are many others with the same name I mean...[/FONT][/FONT]

to keep things simple as possible for anyone that is reading this debate but not posting; I am going to sidestep a bit and take a brief space here to cover a few basics (which will be frequently referred to in future, i'm sure)
the primary issue at the moment is whether the US government is telling the truth in it's report of the alledged Sept 11 terrorist attack on the US. In the interest of space, I am not going to post the entire report here, but will provide a link so that anyone can feel free to check it themselves, for I will often quote parts of it.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.htm
and for those that arent quite familiar with the specs, an airline's 'black box' is actually 2 seperate boxes, the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and the Flight Data Recorder (FDR). Also they are not black as the name implies, but flourescent orange; thus making them easier to locate at a crash scene.

1)

Shortly thereafter, the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones. These calls between family, friends, and colleagues took place until the end of the flight and provided those on the ground with firsthand accounts. They enabled the passengers to gain critical information, including the news that two aircraft had slammed into the World Trade Center.77

again, i will point out the oficial report does specify the use of cellular phones
2) the collapse, at near free-fall speed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n8xgwHBLYY
3)has anyone ever been able to point out precisely what structural flaw? it's never been quite clear (esp since the WTC was specifically designed to withstand, among other things, mpacts from planes
4) ????
5) interestingly, not even slightly singed considering the fireball shown in the impact photo.
about the engine. Flight 77 was equipped with 2 Rolls Royce RB-211 jet engines, 9 feet in diameter, 12 feet long, composed of titanium and steel, weight 6 tons. the piece shown there was only 6-feet in diameter, and according to John W. Brown, a spokesman for Rolls Royce, that is not any part of any Rolls Royce engine.
the satelite image with superimposed drawings; you should ask yourself about the lack of damage in the left engine's trajectory
and yes, we see debris in the impact photo, but nothing that can be clearly identified as a boeing 757
and here's something a bit interesting. now, i'm sure we can all agree that if terrorists attacked the pentagon, then it wouldn't really matter whit flight they used, there would be no need for the gov't to lie. it would be just as much an outrage regardless. therefore, the gov't would have no need to the public about which flight it was. Now, they claim that it was flight 77, but there is something they failed to release. flight 77 never even took off on Sept 11, 2001

source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics http://www.bts.gov/xml/ontimesummarystatistics/src/dstat/OntimeSummaryDepaturesData.xml
btw, the same holds true for American Airlines flight 11, which alledgedly crashed into the north tower of the WTC

6) see above
7) So i guess the only things left here are what and why?
8)

Matching remains with victims of the Pennsylvania and Pentagon crashes was easier than the work in New York because authorities first traced all known victims through Pentagon records and passenger lists. Medical examiners then secured DNA from victims' personal items, such as hairbrushes, and matched it against bone and tissue fragments collected at the crash scenes, says Brion Smith, director of the military's DNA registry at the time. New York City officials were unable to complete a final list of those killed until January 2004.

yet the on-scene coroner directly contradicted this
9) see #5 about the satellite and superimposed drawings
10) but who is it claiming they see Adolf Hitler? surely not the BBC, which are the ones that tracked down the 'terrorists'

 

[Hanbit]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

1. They did use cell phones but they did use the Airphones too.

2. That only shows the tower falling. Not when it actually hit.

3. You never know when a building could collapse or not. Like the Titanic.

5. So... I didnt see a huge fireball from the plane in WTC I only saw flames like what happened in the pentagon. American 11 did NOT hit the WTC. It was founded on radar after the South Tower was hit.

7. Dunno

8. Still doesnt prove anything. Bodies can be vaporized.

 

[Joker Boy]

Re: Do you think we should of went to war with Iraq?

War with Afghanistan was fine and absolutely necessary. We were defending ourselves from attack and actually retaliating. Iraq was completely unesecary. Why? What did they do to us? Iraq was the very first time the US has ever gone out and ATTACKED another country before being attacked first. This is terrible. And the worst part is: WE HAVENT MADE ANY PROGRESS!

I believe that a military plane is what hit the pentagon, I dont care what else others say it may be. Look at that flame, look how fast its moving, would a Boeng 747 or whatever make a flame that big? NO. BIGGER. The FBI confiscated all tapes as part of thier "investigation," though they have released several of the WTC which WASN'T (as far as we know) them.