jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (54 posts)

Who's fault is it that the 911 attacks took place?

  1. rhamson profile image75
    rhamsonposted 3 years ago

    I know this is an incendiary topic especially today but the question is always overlooked because of the provocative nature it instills in all of us. I am not asking this question for the sake of denigrating the memory of the poor victims in the attack. But unless the question is asked, no one will begin understanding the causes and effects it has ingrained in our society.  There is a famous quote attributed to George Santayana that states "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it".

    1. wilderness profile image94
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Are you asking for the root of the problem with Islam, or the more immediate question of who allowed it?

      I think Islam is seeing a very fundamental change, and that change is being brought on by the outside world.  That world has developed, materially, emotionally and ethically, far beyond the world of Islam and the followers of that religion want those improvements.  It is not so much that the outside world interferes directly in their lives (although they do in many cases) it is that it exists, and it is superior in most ways to what Islam has to offer to nearly everyone not at the top.  The people want what the west has.

      The PTB in the Islamic world, however, see the change as a huge threat to their power, and it is.  Those PTB will fight back, and as violence is the lifestyle there, it is with violence that the fight will take place then.

      So if you want to assign "blame" to someone, assign it to the peoples of the near east that see their countries changing and aren't real sure how to handle it.  Whether to embrace it with open arms or whether to fight it tooth and toenail.  If embraced they stand to gain in most ways but they will have to deny the "truths" of their religion to do so.  A choice that we of the west do not truly understand.

      1. John Holden profile image59
        John Holdenposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        In what way will they gain?
        Maybe they don't see becoming colony of the US as a gain!

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Equalization of the sexes.
          More material things
          More freedom to do as they please
          Do you need more examples to understand the comment?

          I don't imagine they do want to be a colony, but then a desire to become a colony is not what they are either requesting or fighting for (the people, not the PTB).  Just having the benefits of western social structures and laws, not always understanding the price that will be paid in their own social structures and beliefs for having those things.

          1. John Holden profile image59
            John Holdenposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            The sexes are pretty equal as it is, some may say more equal than in Christian countries.
            Why would desiring more material things be a gain?
            We could all do with more freedom to do as we please. The Koran gives a lot of freedom. The fact that their leaders don't always follow their religion is no worse than our leaders saying that they follow Christ but then go off in a totally different direction.

            I think the problem is that they understand full well the price that will be paid - and they don't want to pay it.

      2. rhamson profile image75
        rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I did not ask what organization or religion was at fault specifically but moreover what began the ball rolling. It has been a festering source for conflict from the beginning of time. The British who partitioned the area created a minefield of hurt and stomped on feelings. The US intervened with more partitioning and broken promises let alone supporting characters like Arafat who by some accounts played both sides in getting rich and screwing his own people. Many seem to want to jump to the end of the crisis with claiming that the attacks were unwarranted and blame the Islamic Terrorists for out of the blue attacking us. Festering wounds were never settled and overlooked on a historic scale yet we claim the attacks were not warranted. Now we have to escalate everything because we won't deal with the terrorists that the neglected past has created. It is a vicious cycle no one seems to be serious in addressing.

        1. wilderness profile image94
          wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          What you are pointing at are contributing factors at best, artificial reasons used in propaganda campaigns more likely.

          The west has not treated the area well, but that is not the root of the problem.  At it's root is a poor, repressed and rigidly controlled people looking across the ocean and liking what they see.

          The powerful radical Islamists behind 911 don't care that we bought oil, they don't care that the area was "partitioned" (whatever you mean by that).  They care that they are losing control over the man in the street and will not allow that to happen if they can help it.

          The attacks were quite warranted in that they help prove the evil inherent in the west (In Allah's name we destroy evil!) and help bring the people together in hate.  The west has become a scapegoat to the radicals, just as the Jews did for Hitler, with the added complication that the west is also what the man in the street is looking at and wanting.

        2. HowardBThiname profile image90
          HowardBThinameposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          The partitioning of the Ottoman Empire was necessary to break up its massive aggression tendencies.

          Yes, there are festering wounds, but they were brought on by Muslim aggression and it's up to Islam and its adherents to move their religion into the 21st Century.

          1. wilderness profile image94
            wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            "...move their religion into the 21st Century."  That's a big part of what I'm trying to say as well.  Christianity matured and civilized itself as the world it existed in also matured, but Islam has not.  It remains stuck in medieval times for far too many adherents and it shows in the societies with a high percentage of Muslims.

            So Christianity has matured, allowing a much higher standard of living and level of freedom to it's believers.  Muslims want that standard of living and freedom.  Except for the PTB, who already have it and won't let it spread.

            1. rhamson profile image75
              rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              You seem to dissect the problem away from the whole. That being the religious aspect but ignoring the cultural one. These two have been interconnected for centuries. To say that they have to get with the times is telling them to divorce who they are as a society. The other thing is that the radical Muslims are not part of the giant society that lives and works in peace. To change the radicals mind through some type of updating is not addressing the many that are happy with their culture and religion. Two many facets to divide in IMHO.

              1. wilderness profile image94
                wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                The culture IS Islam, just as you say.

                But I'm not saying they should change the culture - it is the people of the culture that are making the change.  And even they don't really want the change - they just want the goodies that goes with such a change.  They want their cake and eat it too.

                Doesn't work, of course, and those in control know that.  With the goodies comes the change and with that comes a huge loss of power for the controlling factions.  So demonize the west in a futile effort to make their people think that what they ask for is a bad thing.  Attack the west at every opportunity, with both propaganda and violence.  Make the west the enemy, not the evils inherent in the religion they rule by.

          2. rhamson profile image75
            rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Your statement seems to absolve the west from its meddling in the regions affairs. Is it Muslim against Muslim aggression you refer too or is it Muslim against western influences? If it was Muslim against Muslim aggression how has it manifested itself and which countries are you referring too?

    2. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It's the fault of the terrorists.   Period.   
      I'm always amazed when people try to find reasons for crimes in order to turn those reasons into excuses.
      Or perhaps you didn't mean it that way......
      At any rate,  I answered your question definitively and simply since you asked it that way,  knowing that, yes, the question the way you posed it is indeed incendiary because it hints at blaming....who? what?.....America for being attacked!   
      IF..........you want to discuss the underlying history of the terrorists, including indoctrination into Islam, then okay.    I will even go so far as to say that America should've already learned from 9/11 to PROFILE Muslims as they enter or ask to enter our Country,  plus PROFILE Muslim citizens here if necessary.   Remember the Boston bombings.    Any patriotic person wouldn't mind being asked questions about their views if need be!    If the Fort Hood terrorist had been scrutinized more strongly and if people hadn't been afraid of sounding and looking "intolerant"  then maybe all his soldier victims would be alive today.

      It blows my mind that people are more afraid of looking/sounding "intolerant" than they are afraid of being killed by radical Islamists.

      If America as a whole would admit that this Nation is a Christian Nation fundamentally,  and realize that Islam is directly opposed to Christianity fundamentally,  then our Nation would be much more secure.    But no, "civil rights" activists don't give a hoot about America in the long run;  they only care about who and how many people they can force to listen to their egotistical hogwash agenda.
      No, I'm not saying that Muslims should all be denied access to American citizenship, nor that an American citizen shouldn't be allowed to switch to Islam if they so desire.   But we really really do need to understand the difference between an American Nation and an Islamic one.    And I believe that if they really understood the difference, they would NOT switch,  nor would foreign Muslims even want to become American citizens.
      One's religious beliefs DO play a role in their alliance to a Country.

      1. rhamson profile image75
        rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Period is a great way to end a conversation. You seem unable to want to go back to the beginning of the troubles so I can accept your answer from where it picked up. Thank you for your input, period.

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Nope, it didn't end the conversation;  you'll surely notice that I did converse further after that;   it simply ended your question of whose fault the terrorist acts were.   Your question was like blaming a little ol' lady for getting mugged by saying she shouldn't have been in that specific area,  when in fact the mugging is the fault of the muggers, period.

          1. John Holden profile image59
            John Holdenposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Brenda, I'm glad that you realise that the blame lies with the terrorists and not Islam.

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Indeed I do.
              Even though Islam is the underlying factor!    But the responsibility, the blame, always goes to the person or persons who committed the act UNLESS that person is a little child or is mentally disabled etc.    That is, I believe, a universal fact.

              1. John Holden profile image59
                John Holdenposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Oh dear, you should have stopped at the first line and then my new found respect for you would have remained intact.

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Not my problem.
                  My respect for your wording was low, simply because I could see that you were trying to lead my answer to your own conclusion.   Didn't work, did it?

                  1. John Holden profile image59
                    John Holdenposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    No, I genuilly believed that you were placing responsibility at the door of terrorists, not Islam.

              2. rhamson profile image75
                rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Islam is the vehicle by which the radicals drummed up the fervor for terrorism. If it were not so, all Islamists would be deemed terrorists.

                1. John Holden profile image59
                  John Holdenposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Just as Christian radicals do, but we don't blame the whole of Christianity for the transgessions of the few do we.

          2. rhamson profile image75
            rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            You still don't get it. What if the little old lady robbed you first and the police would do nothing to remedy the crime?

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              lol If the little old lady robbed somebody,  then she should be held accountable for it.   Then if her victim mugged HER,  THEY should be held accountable for their own actions just like she should be.    Two wrongs don't make a right.   Even police officers surely could believe that a little ol' lady COULD rob someone!   Sometimes justice takes time.  But vengeance, even for an actual occurence, is supposed to be left up our legal system.
              AND I think you may have the entire concept wrong anyway.   Remember that most terrorists target places or groups of people and don't care if they're innocent people, indiscriminately killing whoever,  and then they run (either by actually running or by "escaping" through suicide) so that they don't have to face their victims and the justice system.   Their motivation is, in the cases I've mentioned, radical Islam,  instead of any righteous vengeance,  because America hasn't done anything to them!    Can you not see the difference?    They're basically "mad at the world",  and I mean the Christian world in general,   for undue reasons,  and they kill innocents instead of fighting our military etc.

              1. rhamson profile image75
                rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                How does that brain of yours work? You have ignored the facts of the analogy and turned them around to fit into your argument. The little old lady did get away with it and the police ignored the justice in it all, ie. the 1947 partition in Palestine which formed Israel was the robbery. The police were the UN and US who aided and abetted the crime. They (the UN and US) ignored any and all efforts to receive any compensation or justice for the crime and carried on like they were supposed to just swallow the whole mess. WE created the mess and wonder why the people who were robbed didn't just go away. This anger and injustice has festered and created the terrorist to respond. Local warlords were able to tie the whole thing to Islam for a few radicals who believe they are doing the right thing in Jihad. Harry Truman knew this would be a huge mistake as he saw the British Empire lose ground and influence in the region and we were just sticking our noses where it did not belong. I hope you can follow along and where is that quote in the Koran you referred to? I would like to read it as I am a great student of the bible and Koran and would like to know where you found that.

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  So you're blaming Israel?
                  Ah.   Now we get to the heart of it.
                  It is as I said---people will come up with any excuse to place blame on others for the acts of terrorists who indiscriminately killed people on 9/11, and at Fort Hood, and in Boston, etc.   Amazing.

                  1. rhamson profile image75
                    rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Amazing is that you have equated what I said to Israel! Who put the whole thing into motion should be the question. Magnificent is all I can say. "Indiscriminately killed people" is how you describe the retaliation for over 60 years of ignoring the root problem? Blame is something you think will establish an answer to abate the question. Because a great injustice was perpetrated on the US we should be absolved of our own history of actions against the people in the region? This is why the trouble will persist and ignorance will reign over the solution.

        2. rhamson profile image75
          rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          " If America as a whole would admit that this Nation is a Christian Nation fundamentally,  and realize that Islam is directly opposed to Christianity fundamentally,  then our Nation would be much more secure."

          You need to read up a little more about our founding fathers feelings of our nation being a "Christian Nation". And you might read a little of the Koran as it states very clearly the importance of Christianity and Christ's role in the end of days.

          1. 0
            Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Um, no I don't.   I've read it all.
            You might read the Bible;  it's my understanding that that's where the idea of Islam came from,  a controversy that was used as greed and was expounded upon and used by Muhammad in order to try to claim the bloodline that the Bible says belonged to another lineage.

      2. Quilligrapher profile image88
        Quilligrapherposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Hello Ms. Durham. Nice to see you again.

        If I may, I would like to correct just one historically false claim within your post. America as a whole will probably never admit that this nation is a Christian nation because such a claim is false and it has no basis in fact. This country is not now and never was a Christian nation. This claim is a dishonest distortion of history. Its only purpose is to undermine the Constitution. The goal is to impose the religious beliefs of a handful of Christians onto the majority of Americans, who have declared by polls and by ballot their desire not to be subjected to the religious beliefs of others. It seems irrational for anyone to claim that the founding fathers wanted to establish a Christian nation but could not manage to write a constitution that would make their purpose clear to those who read it.

        Here are a few other facts to consider:

        The primary leaders among the “founding fathers” did not believe in the divinity of Jesus or the tenets of the many different Christian Bibles. They were mostly deists who publicly rejected the bible and all it contained while defending each citizen’s right to worship according to his/her own conscience. Thomas Jefferson wrote: "And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." {1}

        There are an extensive number of documents showing that George Washington was a non-believer but still attended services regularly with Martha, his wife. Bishop William White, a rector at the church attended by George Washington wrote, “truth requires me to say that Gen. Washington never received the communion in the churches of which I am the parochial minister.” {2}

        The historical record contains no proof to support the claim that the colonial population was overwhelmingly Christian.

        "Not only were a good many of the revolutionary leaders more deist than Christian," wrote Lynn R. Buzzard, executive director of the Christian Legal Society, "but the actual number of church members was rather small. Perhaps as few as five percent of the populace were church members in 1776’"{3}

        Written during the administration of George Washington and later ratified by John Adams, Article 11 of the Treaty with Tripoli declared in part that "the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion..." {4}

        In the end, Ms. Durham, you are free to believe whatever versions of history suit your purposes. However, a majority of Americans continue to stick with the established historical facts and are likely to continue to do so until you prove them wrong.

        It is always interesting for me to read your perspectives. Thank you kindly.
        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
        {1} Jefferson’s Letter to John Adam, (April 11, 1823).
        {2} Remsberg, John. Six Historic Americans p.104
        {3} Buzzard, Lynn R. Schools They Haven't Got a Prayer. Elgin, Illinois, David C. Cook Publishing, 1982, p. 81.
        {4} Miller, Hunter, Editor. Treaties and Other International Acts of the United States. Vol. 2, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1931, p. 365.

  2. 60
    TheWizardofWhimsyposted 3 years ago

    9/11 in a nutshell . . . (5 minutes)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p … rJiKbK0tVM

    1. Silverspeeder profile image61
      Silverspeederposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      + 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

  3. bBerean profile image60
    bBereanposted 3 years ago

    Looks like we have folks who on one hand are hoping to ascribe responsibility for 9/11 to the victims...America, and on the other hand absolve the true perpetrators, and the ideology which motivated them, of responsibility.  How twisted is that?

    1. Zelkiiro profile image82
      Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It's a bit of a two-way street, really. Allow me to explain:

      The terrorists are at fault because the only solution to their grievances, in their mind, was to slaughter thousands of innocent people unrelated to said grievances (and several dozen very related) in a flashy and symbolic act of destruction. Meticulous planning and obsessive attention to detail for the sake of a childish temper tantrum. These people were twisted as hell, and there's no reconciling that point.

      Our (do take note that this term is being used quite loosely) fault can be gleamed by taking a look at the targets of the attacks. If the terrorists truly hated us for our freedoms (what the hell does that even mean?), then why didn't they attack the White House itself, or the Lincoln Memorial, or any of the major historical landmarks of Philadelphia and Boston that represent said freedoms?

      Instead, they targeted the World Trade Center (the ultimate symbol of America's stranglehold on the world economy) and the Pentagon (the ultimate symbol of America's worldwide oppression). The terrorists don't hate us for our freedoms--that doesn't make sense in any way, shape, or form and you know it--they hate us because we've been playing World Police and sticking our noses into other nations' wars for the past 70 years. Of course, we average Americans had nothing to do with this, but as mentioned, the terrorists were kind of twisted and super pissed off, so I doubt that ever crossed their minds.

      1. rhamson profile image75
        rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Good post!

        1. maxoxam41 profile image80
          maxoxam41posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          We average Americans have nothing to do with it? Did we demonstrate? Did we ask for the president to be impeached? We are part of our president's decisions if we are ignoring to protest, if we take no actions!

          1. rhamson profile image75
            rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Most of America cannot accept that the inaction against our policy makers shows our complicity with their decisions and activities. We are constantly reminded by the presidents catch phrase of our interests are not met in allowing other countries to carry on their own business without our interference. What you have to ask is what the definition of those interests are and who makes them? Is the latest war in Syria a humanitarian action or does it allow us to dictate policy? The hundreds of thousands of people in the Sudan and Ruanda that were totally ignored shows the hypocrisy of the humanitarian response so it has to be something else. What other interests do we have in Syria other than to flex some military muscle and provide for the military industrial complex to cash in on another little dirty expensive war?

            1. Paraglider profile image87
              Paragliderposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              The outrage over chemical weapons is largely synthetic and cynical. Yes, they are nasty but so is being ripped apart by heavy ordnance. What real difference does it make? Except that chemical weapons are anti-personnel and don't do a lot of damage to infrastructure. So they don't result in big fat contracts to rebuild after it's all over. They are also cheap to make. Not much profit in them compared to conventional weapons. No, all in all, we can't allow their use - it's bad for business! Maybe that's why the Syrian war has been steered back to good old-fashioned carnage by guns missiles and bombs.

              And did everyone hear Mr Netenyahu, holder of a nuclear stockpile and deployer of white phosphorus against civilians, say that Syria must give up the chemical arsenal?

              1. Zelkiiro profile image82
                Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah, that is pretty funny.

                1. rhamson profile image75
                  rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Well they are our "friends" in the region.

  4. Seth Winter profile image82
    Seth Winterposted 3 years ago

    Can we blame anyone but ourselves?

    Let's face it, gone are the days where America's motto was "Walk softly, and carry a big stick." Now our motto can be something akin to "If your not good little children, the Monster under the bed known as America will get you."

    How many prisoners have we held at Gitmo with no trial or proof other then a word that they are a terrorist. In conditions that caused prisoners to attempt to kill themselves by starvation. Do you think any of the families of Gitmo members joined a terrorist group because good ol' Uncle Alibaba was trying to avoid rape in the showers while being force fed by guards who probably regularly abuse him?

    Or lets ignore Gitmo. Focus on civilian life-cost of our wars.

    http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

    125k civilians life cost from the Iraq War, any chance a family member of a deceased ever thought about joining up, strapping a bomb to their chest and trying to introduce themselves to a local Cafe? I read on wikileaks a few of our drone strikes had some seriously bad intel...we wiped out a wedding with one strike....wonder if that caused any hard feelings?

    So with all these people our wars and our claims for protecting freedom are harming, who caused things like 9/11?

    We have nobody to blame but ourselves.

  5. 60
    TheWizardofWhimsyposted 3 years ago

    I would place the blame for 9/11 on human apathy, poverty, ignorance,  religious fanaticism and hopeleness in the young.  Until we so called human beings recognize our responsibilties to each other, and the planet that sustains us, we will all remain at the mercy of terrorism and the fools who think dying for their ideological beliefs is the answer to all of our problems.

    1. Seth Winter profile image82
      Seth Winterposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      +1

  6. Reality Bytes profile image93
    Reality Bytesposted 3 years ago

    IMO, the overthrow of the Iranian government in 1953 was the beginning of the rift between the west and Islam.  The blowback from this incident is still being dealt with!


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Irani … '%C3%A9tat

    1. rhamson profile image75
      rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      We have not been limited to Iran by a long shot. Check these out.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_Uni … ge_actions

  7. crazyhorsesghost profile image86
    crazyhorsesghostposted 3 years ago

    http://s2.hubimg.com/u/8365965_f248.jpg

    You can scream conspiracy until you turn blue in the face.

    It was young militant Muslims mostly from Saudi Arabia that did the attacks on the morning of 9-11-2001.

    I don't believe the conspiracy stories that the US Government blew up the towers or building 6 or 7 or anything else.

    It was Muslim extremists with box cutters that took over those planes that morning and they attacked the US in a way it had never been attacked since the Japanese did it at Pearl Harbor. And the Muslim extremists will do it again unless we do something to them first. We must never let down our guard.

    We must never have another smoking hole in the ground of an American city.

    I have stood in Jerusalem and heard how they demostrate and scream for the blood of  American and Israel citizens. I for one will never believe anything but the truth and that is the plain and simple fact that we were attacked by an operation planned and carried out by Bin Laden and the stupid young men he got to carry out his attack. I wish they could have all been tried for their crimes and shot publicly. This is what should be done to them. I hope they all burn in hell for eternity.

    Muslims hate Christians and Jews. Thats a known fact. Try to preach about Jesus in Turkey or Saudi Arabia. They would kill you or throw you in jail where you would wish you were dead.

    I say never forget what was done to America on that bright blue sunny morning. Four friends of mine died that morning. I will never forget. I will never forgive the cowardly attack that was carried out on our American citizens. We should leave a few deep glowing holes in their cities.

    1. Zelkiiro profile image82
      Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      ...Which is why Christians and Jews are protected under Sharia Law as "fellow believers in the scriptures," I'm guessing?

    2. rhamson profile image75
      rhamsonposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I can understand your hurt and rage at what took place on 911. It does not however help to set things on a path to peace. Hating people for the reason you state does not make sense. Millions of Muslims live among us in peaceful and law abiding fashion while a handful drum up Jihad and death to those who don't believe. Governments such as are in Iran politically blend religion with propaganda to suit their own needs while if you talk to the average Iranian he holds no ill will towards America. Who are you when the prejudicial propaganda runs the media and leaders are looking for their agenda to be carried out? It is far easier to hate and blame. But when it comes to our government and what it tells us and chooses to leave out, I am hesitant to fall in line and not question their motives.

  8. maxoxam41 profile image80
    maxoxam41posted 3 years ago

    Reason says the US, Saudi Arabia and our sister Israel. -After all, aren't they buddies?- Emotions will say something else but I don't care. Facts speak louder.

 
working