Flight 93 hijacker: 'Shall we finish it off?'

[Midav]

Flight 93 hijacker: 'Shall we finish it off?'
9/11 report reveals who was at controls before crash
Thursday, July 22, 2004 Posted: 10:30 PM EDT (0230 GMT)

(CNN) -- Who actually put United Flight 93 into a death dive, causing it to slam into the Pennsylvania countryside on September 11, 2001, is revealed in the 9/11 commission report released Thursday.

The passenger revolt began at 9:57 a.m., nearly 30 minutes after the four terrorists aboard launched their takeover of the Boeing 757 loaded with more than 11,000 gallons of jet fuel.

As passengers charged the cockpit door, terrorist hijacker Ziad Jarrah began rolling the plane to the left and right, "attempting to knock the passengers off balance," the 9/11 commission report said. Jarrah told another hijacker in the cockpit to block the door.

By 9:59 a.m., Jarrah changed tactics and "pitched the nose of the airplane up and down to disrupt the assault."

"The [flight] recorder captured the sounds of loud thumps, crashes, shouts and breaking glass and plates. At 10:00:03 a.m., Jarrah stabilized the airplane," the report says.

"Five seconds later, Jarrah asked, 'Is that it? Shall we finish it off?' A hijacker responded, 'No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off.' "

Jarrah resumed pitching the plane up and down.

"In the cockpit. If we don't, we'll die," a passenger is heard saying.

"Sixteen seconds later, a passenger yelled, 'Roll it!' " the report says.

By 10:01 a.m., Jarrah stopped his violent maneuvers and said, "Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!"

According to the report, he then asked another hijacker in the cockpit, "Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?"

"Yes, put it in it, and pull it down," the other responded.

The passengers continued with their assault, trying to break through the cockpit door. At 10:02 a.m. and 23 seconds, a hijacker said, "Pull it down! Pull it down!"

"The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them," the report concludes.

"The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right. The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting, 'Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest.'

"With the sounds of the passenger counter-attack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20 minutes' flying time from Washington, D.C."

Struggle in the cockpit
The report says Jarrah intended to fly the plane into the White House or the U.S. Capitol. "He was defeated by the alerted, unarmed passengers of United 93," the report says.

The battle aboard the plane was burned into history by the story of one passenger, Todd Beamer, who used an onboard phone to call the FBI. At the end of his call, the operator overhead him say to other passengers, "Let's roll."

He and other passengers had learned of the attacks in New York and Washington after placing calls to loved ones.

In the weeks and months after the attacks, there were reports that officials believed passengers had overtaken the plane, forcing it to crash in the field in Pennsylvania. However, last year, officials began backing away from that theory.

Thursday's report gives no indication that passengers ever broke through the cockpit door, but it makes clear that passengers' actions thwarted the plans of the terrorists.

The report also gives harrowing details of the moments just before and after the plane was hijacked.

The plane, which had left Newark, New Jersey, for Los Angeles, California, at 8:42 a.m. carrying 37 passengers and seven crew members, received a warning from United flight dispatcher Ed Ballinger at 9:24 a.m.: "Beware any cockpit intrusion -- two a/c [aircraft] hit World Trade Center."

The message was sent by Ballinger to several aircraft to alert them of potential terrorists.

Two minutes later, at 9:26 a.m., pilot Jason Dahl appeared to be puzzled by the message and responded, "Ed, confirm latest mssg plz -- Jason."

"The hijackers attacked at 9:28," the report says. "While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent, the FAA's air traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio transmissions from the aircraft.

"During the first broadcast, the captain or first officer could be heard declaring 'Mayday' amid the sounds of a physical struggle in the cockpit. The second transmission, 35 seconds later, indicated that the fight was continuing. The captain or first officer could be heard shouting: 'Hey get out of here -- get out of here -- get out of here.' "

At 9:32 a.m., the report says, a hijacker "made or attempted to make the following announcement to the passengers of Flight 93: 'Ladies and gentlemen: Here the captain, please sit down keep remaining sitting. We have a bomb on board. So, sit.' "

The report also says a woman, most likely a flight attendant, was being held captive in the cockpit. "She struggled with one of the hijackers who killed or otherwise silenced her," it says.

The report says at least 10 passengers and two crew members contacted family, friends or others on the ground. They reported the hijackers were wearing red bandanas, forced passengers to the back of the plane and claimed a bomb was aboard, according to the report.

Flight 93 was the only hijacked plane that day with four hijackers aboard. All other flights had five hijackers.

The report says a man who was denied entry and detained in Florida a month before the attacks possibly was supposed to have been the fifth hijacker aboard Flight 93.

"The operative likely intended to round out the team for this flight, Mohamed al Kahtani, had been refused entry by a suspicious immigration inspector at Florida's Orlando International Airport in August," the report says.

Al Kahtani is currently being held at the detainee center at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

May Allah see that these terrorist ****ers burn in all eternal hell. May their cries be unheard of in hell. May their daily food intake cncompass nothing but pig intestines.

RIP to the passengers of 9-11-2001. Screw the other terrorist pig ****ers.

[Fargin]

"Let's roll"

Some gave all RIP

[agcsy]

RIP. Allah is great all right. When it comes to terrorism.

[Vance]

Does anyone have a link to the audio?

[Sayeret]

RIP

Close to the top of this link is a link of a video showing what happened on Flight 93.

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/videos500251.shtml#

[SeanAshi]

Does anyone have a link to the audio?I believe the FAA and NTSP never release them.

[Herrmannek]

Just imagine you would be on that Plane going up and down and knowing nothing good is going to meet you... horrible death

[mobster]

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v323/viewimage/heroes_lg2.jpg

[oldsoak]

:(

[mobster]

I'm telling you, we didn't deserve this. All the people that died, all the heartbreak, it was murder. I will spend the rest of my life praying the ones who were responsible die a horrible death, because they do deserve it. Not one of the people in those buildings had anything to do with war, or government. Just regular Americans going to work.
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v323/viewimage/Eagle.jpg

[n4292936]

too right Mobster :( . I honestly agree 100%. :)
On the other hand, those several million civilians that the US has killed as casualties of war since WW2 were all f***ing terrorists who got what was coming to them. The flip side of the coin is a bitch isnt it :hug:

[shrek]

Hey n4292936:

Please show me evidence of the "milliona of civilians that the US has killed!!!!!

[Herrmannek]

Hey n4292936:

Please show me evidence of the "milliona of civilians that the US has killed!!!!!

Milion is quite probable number, but killed isn't murdered..we also don't know how many people was saved and i'm sure that number is more than mere milion...

[ZaakM433]

the millions of deliberately targeted (not splashy) civvies by the us military... plz do tell?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

too right Mobster :( . I honestly agree 100%. :)
On the other hand, those several million civilians that the US has killed as casualties of war since WW2 were all f***ing terrorists who got what was coming to them. The flip side of the coin is a bitch isnt it :hug:

n4292936 the only bitch here is you. What kind of thing to say is that? Please do not hijack another thread and turn it into a tired "the US is evil" thread filled with backhanded statements alluding to the fact that the US deserved what it got.

For you to equate the intentional murder of innocents with the accidental deaths of civilians in war is beneath contempt. The murder of civilians is SOP for terrorists - it is not for the US military. If it were, my guess is that you wouldn't feel quite so free to voice your opinion here, as they'd be coming to get you.

[Deuterium]

too right Mobster :( . I honestly agree 100%. :)
On the other hand, those several million civilians that the US has killed as casualties of war since WW2 were all f***ing terrorists who got what was coming to them. The flip side of the coin is a bitch isnt it :hug:

Okay I delve into your philosophical discussion. I would ask you first to state your sources on the claim that SEVERAL MILLION civilians the US has killed. I think you are blatantly wrong on this point.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

OK I apologize for using the "B" word. This word was used in error, and was due to my extreme emotional distress caused by an inflammatory posting. I had not had my morning coffee, and was very crabby.

But I maintain that you cannot have it both ways. Either terrorism is good, or it's not. Either America is a terrorist nation, or it's not.

I do not believe it is. If others do, instead of using innuendo and vague statements, they should state their positions clearly.

[aartamen]

We just should have hit them sooner. You won't believe how sick I felt throughout the 2000-2001 (pre 9/11). There were Congressional commissions (Bremer's and another) there were books, and radio shows. The board WAS blinking red. I was certain that the attack would be nuclear and could not undersatand why the gov-t is doing exactly nothing about it.

[BlackRain]

n4292936

You are a liar.

Post some credial facts on the "millions" of civilians killed by the USA since the end of WWII.

By the way, what country do you live in? I see that you are afraid to post it.

[Tane Angle]

On the other hand, those several million civilians that the US has killed as casualties of war since WW2 were all f***ing terrorists who got what was coming to them. The flip side of the coin is a bitch isnt it

I think I gotta disagree with this one, sorry bud. The intendional killing of civilians by the US (say, My Lai) would be equivalent to the intentional killing of civilians on 9/11. The US has not intentionally killed millions of civilians. If you mean accidental deaths and collateral damage, while they are tragic, they are not intentional killings of civilians. Take shooting a missile at a building and accidentally killing a civilian in the street below. That isn't even equivalent to the 18 March, 1983 US Embassy bombing in Beirut because the attackers were glad to have had the added bonus of having killed civilians in addition to their intelligence agency targets. The US doesn't take pleasure in having killed civilians, accidentally or intentionally. Besides isolated and rare horrors like My Lai, not since the Indian Wars of the 1800s has the US had something even remotely close to being equivalent to the intentional killings of civilians on 9/11 and in other true terrorist attacks.

In short, 9/11 wasn't the flip side of the coin at all.

aartamen, there is a thread about the pre-9/11 months down the main page a little, it might be on page 2 by now, if you're interested in it. If you have something to add to it, by all means.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[aartamen]

Besides isolated and rare horrors like My Lai, not since the Indian Wars of the 1800s has the US had something even remotely close to being equivalent to the intentional killings of civilians on 9/11 and in other true terrorist attacks.

I have to point out that WWII did see massive and intentional use of US firepower (air) to kill non-combatants. It's not a matter of speculation even. I happen to believe it was fully justified, but it was what it was.
I have to also point out that the 9/11 terrorists were neither German nor Japanese. As it happens to be they were primarily Saudy and Yemeny. And the US never killed any of those in any appreciable numbers. We did not kill that many arabs or Muslims in general. Not in the grand scheme of things.
At least 3 million people (civilans primarily) perished in Congo wars just recently, somewhere near million in Rwanda and who knows how many, but at least a million in Sudan. That's just last decade or two.
The Arab extremists have a particular ideological and cultural problem with the US. And it does not matter to them whom we kill and how many. They want us out of the ME. And that includes Israel. And in order to achieve that goal they would do anything.

[n4292936]

n4292936

You are a liar.

Post some credial facts on the "millions" of civilians killed by the USA since the end of WWII.

By the way, what country do you live in? I see that you are afraid to post it.
Yes, you are right, I was in fact lying about the more than 1 million Vietnamese civilians who were killed and the couple million Koreans that have been killed, and the several thousands of civilians from other countries who have also died, albeit in the absence of malicious intent. :roll: I'm not rewriting history
Read my country location again braniac.
Tane you're right. I was playing around more than writing with serious intent. I don't think that America either deserved 9-11 or that it was really the flip side of the coin at all. I just take offence to the glib gloosy view some people take of America's historical interaction with the rest of the world. What I wrote, as I think most people will agree, did in fact occur - though the level of intent is of course debatable. Fighter pilots in Korea did have permission to attack columns of refugees fleeing south though this was ostensibly because we believed that infiltrators may be using those columns, and the policy of carpet bombing for the last 50 years has indeed reaped a rather large harvest of "collateral damage" ala civilian deaths. Many of the wars in which this happened were of course necessary - Korea for example, and certainly the first Gulf War and A-stan as well. However, many people loose sight all too easily of why some people in the world in fact do think that 9-11 was the flip side of the coin. I was simply offering an alternative perspective.... and for those who wish to stand up and fight for America, either in forums or on land, that is a perspective you should be intimately familiar with. I wasn't trying to start a flame war here, though in retrospect that was the obvious consequence :P
Think of it this way. Imagine a dog in a pound vigorously scratching away at its chin. The pound is very crowded though so each time the dog scratches it also hits another dog wallking by... its purely accidental of course but sooner or later one of the other dogs is going to bite it back out of frustration.
Its absolutely true that accidental civilian casualties aren't qualitatively similar to target casualties, and im sorry if my sarcastic post implied that and that it was taken so seriously. It was meant to be philosophically provocative not overtly inflammatory - thanks for picking up on that Deuterium. Still.... I do enjoy being an agitator

[Operation Ivy]

:(

American Girls and American Guys
We'll always stand up and salute
We'll always recognize
When we see Ole Glory Flying
There's a lot of men dead
So we can sleep in peace at night
When we lay down our head

My daddy served in the army
Where he lost his right eye
But he flew a flag out in our yard
Till the day that he died
He wanted my mother, my brother, my sister and me
To grow up and live happy
In the land of the free.

Now this nation that I love
Has fallen under attack
A mighty sucker punch came flying in
From somewhere in the back
Soon as we could see clearly
Through our big black eye
Man, we lit up your world
Like the 4th of July

Hey Uncle Sam
Put your name at the top of his list
And the Statue of Liberty
Started shaking her fist
And the eagle will fly
And there's gonna be hell
When you hear Mother Freedom
Start ringing her bell
And itll feel like the whole wide world is raining down on you
Ahhh Brought to you Courtesy of the Red White and Blue

Ohhh Justice will be served
And the battle will rage
This big dog will fight
When you rattle his cage
And you'll be sorry that you messed with
The U.S. of A.
'Cause we'll put a boot in your ass
It's the American way

Hey Uncle Sam
Put your name at the top of his list
And the Statue of Liberty
Started shaking her fist
And the eagle will fly
And there's gonna be hell
When you hear Mother Freedom
Start ringing her bell
And itll feel like the whole wide world is raining down on you
Brought to you Courtesy of the Red White and Blue

Uhhh Ohhh
Of the Red, White and Blue
Ohhh Ohh Oh
Of My Red, White and Blue

[BlackRain]

n4292936

You are a liar.

Post some credial facts on the "millions" of civilians killed by the USA since the end of WWII.

By the way, what country do you live in? I see that you are afraid to post it.
Yes, you are right, I was in fact lying about the more than 1 million Vietnamese civilians who were killed and the couple million Koreans that have been killed, and the several thousands of civilians from other countries who have also died, albeit in the absence of malicious intent. :roll: I'm not rewriting history
Read my country location again braniac..

What is you historical source that states the USA killed 1 million Viet civilians and the couple of million Koreans and others?

You country location is ambigious, do you mean that live Australia? Austria or the US?

You are lying about US troops killing 1 million civilians. You implication is that most US soldiers are war criminals.

1) Did you know about one particular 1950 massacre in Seoul by North Koreans in which 128,936 civilians were killed?

2) "The U.S. Army, in November 1951, cited U.N. figures saying 25,575 South Korean civilians were killed during the communist occupation of South Korea. But the South Korean government later put that toll at 129,000."

3) Gilbert, History of the Twentieth Century: 26,000 South Korean civilians executed by North Koreans within their zone of conquest, 1950.

4) A U.S. Army war crimes report later estimated the Taejon dead at 5,000 to 7,500, including businessmen, police and other government employees, and 42 American prisoners of war. Many had been severely beaten and mutilated, it said.

Perhaps you are siding with the North Korean's version of truth?

[n4292936]

What is you historical source that states the USA killed 1 million Viet civilians and the couple of million Koreans and others?Its widely accepted that casualties from both the Vietnam War and the Korean War were each in the millions. The majority of those casualties were not combatant deaths (a "feeling lucky" search on Google for example displayed this http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/korea.htm)


You country location is ambigious, do you mean that live Australia? Austria or the US? Australia and America, not that its the least bit relevant


You are lying about US troops killing 1 million civilians. You implication is that most US soldiers are war criminals. Lets not be childish and start calling each other names mmmkay. The implication would only be that US military staff were war criminals only if the killing was intentional. Read my above post again and decide for yourself.


1) Did you know about one particular 1950 massacre in Seoul by North Koreans in which 128,936 civilians were killed?

2) "The U.S. Army, in November 1951, cited U.N. figures saying 25,575 South Korean civilians were killed during the communist occupation of South Korea. But the South Korean government later put that toll at 129,000."

3) Gilbert, History of the Twentieth Century: 26,000 South Korean civilians executed by North Koreans within their zone of conquest, 1950.

4) A U.S. Army war crimes report later estimated the Taejon dead at 5,000 to 7,500, including businessmen, police and other government employees, and 42 American prisoners of war. Many had been severely beaten and mutilated, it said. Im not doubting any of those but the DPRK isnt the topic of discussion

[BlackRain]

Lets not be childish and start calling each other names mmmkay. The implication would only be that US military staff were war criminals of the killing was intentional. Read my above post again and decide for yourself.


Yes, it is widely believed that there were many civilian deaths due to the Korean and Vietnamese wars.

However, you statement clearly points the finger at the USA for the intentional killing of millions of Korean civilians.


On the other hand, those several million civilians that the US has killed as casualties of war since WW2 were all f***ing terrorists who got what was coming to them. The flip side of the coin is a bitch isnt it

I still challange you to prove that this is a fact from any reputable source.

If you can't do that. Show me a source that states the US military command staff ordered the killings of millions of civilians.

We both know that you can't.

[n4292936]

please allow me to quote myself
What I wrote, as I think most people will agree, did in fact occur - though the level of intent is of course debatable. Fighter pilots in Korea did have permission to attack columns of refugees fleeing south though this was ostensibly because we believed that infiltrators may be using those columns, and the policy of carpet bombing for the last 50 years has indeed reaped a rather large harvest of "collateral damage" ala civilian deaths. Many of the wars in which this happened were of course necessary - Korea for example, and certainly the first Gulf War and A-stan as well. However, many people loose sight all too easily of why some people in the world in fact do think that 9-11 was the flip side of the coin. I was simply offering an alternative perspective.... and for those who wish to stand up and fight for America, either in forums or on land, that is a perspective you should be intimately familiar with. I wasn't trying to start a flame war here, though in retrospect that was the obvious consequence
Think of it this way. Imagine a dog in a pound vigorously scratching away at its chin. The pound is very crowded though so each time the dog scratches it also hits another dog wallking by... its purely accidental of course but sooner or later one of the other dogs is going to bite it back out of frustration.
Its absolutely true that accidental civilian casualties aren't qualitatively similar to target casualties, and im sorry if my sarcastic post implied that and that it was taken so seriously. It was meant to be philosophically provocative not overtly inflammatory - thanks for picking up on that Deuterium. Still.... I do enjoy being an agitator
Im going to let you do your own research on the number of accidental civilian deaths attributable to American military power since WW2. Im not your librarian, but here is a very small sample, focusing on but a single incident in a single war.
http://www.koreanwar-educator.org/topics/nogun_ri/no_gunri_index.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,421126,00.html


and from James Webb

The Bridge at No Gun Ri
October 6, 1999



I do not know what happened to the civilians at the bridge near the village of No Gun Ri, although it seems clear from recent Associated Press reports that many of them died in the early days of the Korean War as their country was being ripped apart by a communist invasion and the U.S.Army was thrown into disarray.

An official investigation into the incident, in which members of the U.S. Seventh Cavalry Regiment are alleged to have gunned down hundreds of Korean refugees, is forthcoming. Piercing questions will be asked, and from the gauzy memories of five decades ago some answers will be given. Did the refugees die from American bombs and bullets? If so, were the deaths deliberate? If they were, were they the result of battlefield realities that left them caught in the middle? Were the American soldiers ordered to keep refugees off the road and away from the bridge so that a retreating army could move south before it was annihilated? Were the refugees attempting to move, by day or night, into the American perimeters. Or were the American soldiers simply having a little target practice, shooting off precious ammunition to see if they might kill a woman here and a kid there as the world was falling down upon their heads?

And another question, of present-day interest: Is some team of lawyers trying to squeeze millions out of a long-ago tragedy of the sort that seems always to accompany battles fought where other people live?

Far More Brutal

For all the talk of civilian casualties in Vietnam, the war in Korea was far more brutal. More than two million Korean civilians perished during the three years of fighting, amounting to some 70%, of the overall death toll. The massive, sudden invasion from the north flattened every major city, threw hundreds of thousands of refugees onto the roads, and left little time for American and South Korean forces to reconstruct firm lines of defense. A retreat was underway in 100-degree heat as the military sought to regroup far to the south, around the port city of Pusan. North Korean soldiers dressed in the white robes of farmers frequently mixed among the refugee columns in order to disrupt American and South Korean units. The Army's logistical lines were extended and often interrupted. Hospital care and even medevacs for the wounded were usually out of the question. Whole companies ceased to exist, and officer casualties were particularly high.

The casualty figures provide the starkest evidence of the intensity and confusion of that first month. In July 1950 the U.S. Army lost 2,834 soldiers killed (including those who died while captured or missing) vs., 2,486 wounded, probably the highest killed-to-wounded ratio since the Civil War. (Ratios by the end of the war were one killed for every four wounded.) We do know that during this period American air craft deliberately strafed columns of refugees on the roads. We know also that the soldiers at No Gun Ri were given orders that no refugees were to cross their lines, and that they were to fire at those who attempted to do so, using "discretion in the case of women and children."

Such orders, excised from the chaos that created their necessity, fall heavily on the minds and consciences of those who have never been called upon to make the Hobson's choice of combat: Do I protect my men and lose my innocence? Or do I keep my innocence and lose my men? This thin, unbreachable line separates those who went to war from those who stayed behind. America is a lovely place to have such debates as we sit in brightly lit offices next to our computers under the whir of air conditioners and HEPA filters and sip on herbal tea or Snapple. What is a war crime? On whom shall we pass judgment as we peer back through the mists of history? Were civilians killed? Is that enough for condemnation? What standard shall we in our wisdom erect for those who had little hope of even seeing tomorrow when the world turned suddenly ugly and they pressed their faces far into the dirt while the mortars twirled overhead and the bullets kicked up dust spots near their eyes.

So, test yourself. Your men are dying. The lines are shrinking. You are running out of food and even ammunition, trying to hold a position for a day or two as your army shrinks ever nearer to Pusan. Civilians are everywhere, thousands upon thousands of them. They are starving and they are afraid, and some of them are in fact not civilians. They clog the roads as the trucks and jeeps stall in the heat, trying to wend past them. They want to go to Pusan, too. They want to sleep inside your perimeter. They need your food. They dream of your protection. But the only true protection you can give them is to defeat the invading enemy. If you take even 10, you will be unable to care for your own people. And if you take 10, you will be besieged by 10,000. You have a mission to perform. But they are desperate, and you cannot speak their language. They are going to swarm your perimeter. When they come, what do you do?

Is deliberately killing a civilian a war crime? It certainly wasn't when we fire bombed Dresden and Tokyo, taking hundreds of thousands of lives in the name a "breaking the enemy's will to fight". Perhaps the greatest anomaly of recent times is that death delivered by a bomb earns one an air medal, while when it comes at the end of a gun it earns one a trip to jail.

Protocols of War

And yet, most importantly, we are nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles that we proudly carry to the battlefield. The wanton use of force, and especially the deliberate killing of any soldier or civilian who is under one's actual control is, indeed a crime. This was the distinction in My Lai, for despite the unassailable fact that most of the villagers killed in the massacre were part of a highly organized communist cadre, they were under the physical control of the soldiers who killed them. In other circumstances, had any of these same villagers ignored the rigid protocols of war understood by both sides, such as moving near an American perimeter at night, running from a combat patrol or signaling with lamps after dark, they would have been killed with impunity. Every American who fought in such highly contested civilian areas has his own memories. Few of them are happy. But wars in populated areas can not be fought without such rules.

Those who struggled daily -- and nightly -- with these, incredible moral distinctions were rewarded upon their return from Vietnam with the same vitriol that is now being directed at the soldiers who fought at No Gun Ri. One hopes for a greater sense of wisdom as the facts are assessed and judgments are made. Otherwise, the only lessons seem to be: Make sure you fight in a popular war. Make sure you use bombs instead of bullets. And make sure you win.



James Webb was an Assistant Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Navy in the Reagan Administration.

[Fargin]

Just imagine you would be on that Plane going up and down and knowing nothing good is going to meet you... horrible death
They did indeed die a horribled death, but after learning what happened with the other flights, they refused to be used as a weapon and saved the White House.

[Laworkerbee]

n4292936

Think its fun to stir up the nest on your summer vacation and mock the deaths of thousands of my fellow citizens eh?.

Pray to god we never meet and that I never find you.

[n4292936]

at the moment im living at 23 glasshouse view court, Buderim, QLD Australia. Come pay me a visit tough guy, I'll be in the states later this year if you can't make it now rofl
dont be such a tool. I enjoy being an agitator in the sense of one who disrupts mental complacency or offers a unpopular perspective purely to instigate discussion. I think, though, that I'm going to develop a comedy routine and deliver it on your front door step - it'll be funny I promise.

mock the deaths of thousands of my fellow citizens did you even read my first post in this thread? I believe it included my sincere appreciation of Mobsters comment - and the bit of agitation that has you frothing at the mouth.

[BlackRain]

Typical ... keep changing your story.

First, you said intentional deaths now you changed it to accidental. What's the matter can't find any data to back up you lies?

Any way, the incident you posted does not support your allegations of "millions" killed nor does it reflect your altered reality of US military command ordering the deaths of millions.

Nice try...

[n4292936]

try not to fabricate the history of a thread BlackRain. I used the word intentional once in this entire thread and that was when I said "The implication would only be that US military staff were war criminals only if the killing was intentional."
do me a favour and point out where i wrote that the US military command ordered civilian casualties. Like I said, i'm not your librarian, go find out for yourself how many civilian casualties have occured during US military campaigns. Inclduing Vietnam and Korea alone, the figure is in the millions - do the research yourself.
I have yet to say in this thread that America is evil because of it, or that those millions of casualties were intentional. There has been more than one incident where such civilian deaths were intentional but it has not been standard practice for the US military to exact such measures in the last quarter of a century - nor do its past actions necessarily make it an evil nation. I dont beleive it to be so. Try reading a post accurately before commiting fingers to keys mmkay.

[Tane Angle]

Ok, let's please keep it civil and lay off the man. What he said was for the sake of starting discussion, no? Sometimes it is good to have someone say something like upsetting, because it can be very thought-provoking. Thank you.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[usa320]

Lets Roll.

[BadKarma26]

Hard to plead the case that Islam is a religion of peace with so many incidents contradicting it. Reading that article makes me want to beat the $hit out of an Arab. Sorry :(

[Kilgor]

I wouldnt say Islam is a violent religion, but it seems more open to such acts and like nearly all religions its intollerant and narrow minded.

Some of its core values are in contrast with western values, the treatment of woman is one. Too hungover to think of others though. :(

[n4292936]

Kilgor, I'd agree with your post but would add that much of the philosophy bound with Judeo-Christian teachings is likewise at odds with western thought - especially its roots. Without wishing to instigate a debate about the relative merits of a hemispheres religions I think it should suffice to say that what sets Islam apart is that in addition to the spiritual aspects which are largely concordant with other western religions, it is also a political religion. A politicised religion that has taken root in an area which has not undergone a cultural/political renaissance, similar to what was seen in Europe and America from the 1600 onwards, has formed the basis of the militant islam we see today. Were roles reversed and Islam the religion of America and Christendom the realm of arabs, i suspect the situation would not be too far from present day circumstances... To answer that question though one must know the answer to the question of whether it is culture or religion that dictates the course of a society's development... or neither. Its a pretty convoluted problem really.

[Midav]

I wonder about something. Most any time when something is posted about 9-11-01, someone has to make a comment about "all the people" the US has killed.

As was pointed out, the US did not intentionally go out and kill millions of people. That is the biggest difference between what happened on 9-11-01 and about the wars before and since that date (I agree WW II was a total war, but all parties were guilty).

I just would like to know where it actually came down that US soldiers were told to intentionally slaughter civilians. Now, hold on. I am not referring to individual acts or small groups that got orders from some officer.

I speak of whole armies marching down, which received permission from either Congress or the President himself to butcher civilians.

Please. I am not being smart assed. I am just curious. Maybe I can learn something about history I never heard of to date. I also was not "indoctrinated" in the US school system. Rather, I went through the European school system (German to be exact).

Upon individual military related targets that had to be blown up, resulting in collateral damage, that is war. Much like the attack on the Pentagon. That is war.

However, the means of attacking the Pentagon, for instance, was wrong (not like the whole attack was wrong anyway imo.....).

On the other hand, what military related threats were the WTC? Or the passenger aircraft? That's what makes me the most angry, just thinking of the people aboard those planes, knowing they will die.

However, this is war and the tactics that our enemies use.

And, those are the tactics that US forces are not using. That is the difference.

[martinexsquaddie]

lets see september 11 1973 chile usa backs a coup results in at least 3000 deaths but they were commies so does'nt count :(
indonesia usa backed coup massive deathtoll
central south america and africa and Iran the USA propped up and backed leaders who the term scum was invented for :( even when the populence overthrew them went back for a second term the contras anyone?
Terrorist attacks have been launched against cuba from USA soil and americans backed and supplied weapons to the IRA .
yes september 11 was horrible no it was'nt the worst mankind was capable of unfortunatly :(
The victims of september 11 did'nt deserve to die.
But an awful lot of people not in the USA saw it as a justified attack against america if you look at the American states covert actions and not so covert actions since 1945. That America brings freedom and liberty is a rather sick joke.
Personally Nobody deserved september 11 but "the war on terror" is a bit strange from a country that supported pol pot :( ( the UK goverment hardly has clean hands but did force a military junta form power in south america rather than help install them :roll: )

[Midav]

lets see september 11 1973 chile usa backs a coup results in at least 3000 deaths but they were commies so does'nt count :(
indonesia usa backed coup massive deathtoll
central south america and africa and Iran the USA propped up and backed leaders who the term scum was invented for :( even when the populence overthrew them went back for a second term the contras anyone?
Terrorist attacks have been launched against cuba from USA soil and americans backed and supplied weapons to the IRA .
yes september 11 was horrible no it was'nt the worst mankind was capable of unfortunatly :(
The victims of september 11 did'nt deserve to die.
But an awful lot of people not in the USA saw it as a justified attack against america if you look at the American states covert actions and not so covert actions since 1945. That America brings freedom and liberty is a rather sick joke.
Personally Nobody deserved september 11 but "the war on terror" is a bit strange from a country that supported pol pot :( ( the UK goverment hardly has clean hands but did force a military junta form power in south america rather than help install them :roll: )

No, of course the US government is not innocent. However, I am taking this into context of US soldiers being ordered to do these actions.

Did I not make that clear enough? Also, in certain cases, what actions were there during the cold war? How many US soldiers were involved with pol pot?

The US does bring freedom and liberty, matter of fact, even after 1945. Look at most of Europe now and other nations. However, yes, the US has screwed up, too.

The problem with people like you and I, martinexsquaddie, you rather only see the bad and I rather only see the good.

[martinexsquaddie]

Midav I don't argue the Usa is as evil as the old soviet union now they were real bastards :( .
but the question why do people hate us americans ask themselves?
with out apprantly knowing whats been done in there name.
One question since 1946 which country has USA policy succesfully turned into a democracy?

[Midav]

Midav I don't argue the Usa is as evil as the old soviet union now they were real bastards :( .
but the question why do people hate us americans ask themselves?
with out apprantly knowing whats been done in there name.
One question since 1946 which country has USA policy succesfully turned into a democracy?

South Korea. Germany. Taiwan (can be argued), Iraq (still pending heh), are off the top of my head. Yes, I realize there were many nations involved, however, the large driving force was the US.

"Freie bahn dem Marshall plan" was a logo I read a lot in German history books for instance.

Also, I don't know what it is why so many people hate us Americans. When I lived overseas, I had problems for being who I was.

A lot of it is passed down from the parents to the children. No one, and I mean no one can tell me that young kids are born to hate the US. That is passed down from their parents and many don't even know why they hate the US, just that they are supposed to.

I lived through it most of my life.

[martinexsquaddie]

both south korea and Taiwan have been pretty brutal dictarorships :(
Panama oh wait pineapple face was you guy before he went bad :(
philliphines oh wait marcos was your bloke as well :(

[Midav]

Considering I didn't mention two of those nations and the other two are your opinion on things, guess there isn't much I can do in this here debate....

Cheers!

[ctcboy]

Midav
The thing I always find interesting is that Americans find it neccesary to enagage in this debate from either side. It is as if they feel the need to either justify their anger of the attck or to prove the opposite. I believe that n4292936 suggesting that this is the "flip side of the coin" to America's killing of civilians is an example of this. I would suggest that the desire for this kind of debate is missplaced here. It only serves to cloud our understanding of what should be blatantly obvious.
America was attacked on 9/11 in an extremely brutal manner. Their choosen method of attack was and is clearly unnaceptable. They are very clearly the enemy. Wether one feels that the attacks were completely unjustified or totaly justified or any point between should be irrelevant.
They are the enemy[b] and they need to be hunted down and destroyed.
This does not mean that Americans should not revue and debate their current and past foreign policies. They absolutely should. However whatever knowldege that may be gained from this debate should never change our basic understanding that the attack was unacceptable.

[Midav]

DP

[Midav]

?
Midav
The thing I always find interesting is that Americans find it neccesary to enagage in this debate from either side. It is as if they feel the need to either justify their anger of the attck or to prove the opposite. I believe that n4292936 suggesting that this is the "flip side of the coin" to America's killing of civilians is an example of this. I would suggest that the desire for this kind of debate is missplaced here. It only serves to cloud our understanding of what should be blatantly obvious.
America was attacked on 9/11 in an extremely brutal manner. Their choosen method of attack was and is clearly unnaceptable. They are very clearly the enemy. Wether one feels that the attacks were completely unjustified or totaly justified or any point between should be irrelevant.
They are the enemy[b] and they need to be hunted down and destroyed.
This does not mean that Americans should not revue and debate their current and past foreign policies. They absolutely should. However whatever knowldege that may be gained from this debate should never change our basic understanding that the attack was unacceptable.

I already have posted my replies.

Now, what did the US do to the Saudi's, since the great majority were from SA, Bin Laden being one himself?