September 11th - Separating the Truth from the Lies

Discussion in 'Global Affairs' started by Mansoor Ali, May 1, 2004.

  1. Mansoor Ali

    Mansoor Ali New Member

    The official story is:

    1. On the morning of September 11th four Boeing passenger jets were hijacked within an hour by nineteen Arab terrorists armed with boxcutters.
    2. Pilots among these terrorists took control of the Boeings and changed course toward targets in New York City and Washington D.C.
    3. Two of the Boeings were deliberately crashed into the Twin Towers, causing raging fires within which melted the steel supporting structures, thereby causing the buildings to collapse completely.
    4. A third Boeing was deliberately crashed into the Pentagon.
    5. Passengers on the fourth plane overpowered the hijackers and caused the plane to crash in Pennsylvania.
    6. This was an attack on America and it was planned and directed by Usama bin Laden as the leader of Al-Qa'idah, a previously obscure international organization composed of Arabs.

    The official story provides almost nothing more. We are simply expected to believe it without question.

    A nation (and world) in shock largely accepted this story, since it did appear to provide some explanation. Even those who considered this explanation hard to believe were inclined to believe it because on September 11th there seemed no other explanation — and the President of the United States and all mainstream news sources in the U.S. were telling the world that this is how it was.

    However, the official story does not withstand critical examination. It is a deliberate lie, designed to fool the American people and the rest of the world.

    The official story expects us to believe that these alleged nineteen on-board hijackers acquired the necessary flying skills from training courses and flight manuals, flew them expertly to their targets and flying with the skill of a trained military pilot in the case of the jet which, allegedly, hit the Pentagon, met no opposition from the U.S. Air Force responsible for safeguarding America's airspace.

    If you examine the evidences, you can see that the attack on September 11th was carried out by the American Government.
     
  2. khattab

    khattab New Member

    I don`t know. Laters Osama Bin Laden was talking in a tape called 19 lions and saying that attack was carried out by 19 brave mujahideen.
     
  3. khattab

    khattab New Member

  4. Ghaznavi

    Ghaznavi New Member

    Tell me about Commander Khatab

    seems Chechen
     
  5. abu abdallah

    abu abdallah New Member

    After all this time you don't know about commander Khattab??? Where have you been?

    Khattab was from the Arabian Peninsula ("Saudi" Arabia) and he was the ameer of the foreign mujahideen in Chechnya before he was assassinated by poison 2 years ago.
     
    Abu Osaama likes this.
  6. Ghaznavi

    Ghaznavi New Member

    ok

    I did a HUGE assignment on Chechnya, and I never saw one site mention Commander Khattab,
     
  7. walid

    walid New Member

    khattab

    Ghaznavi brother khattab was one of the most amazing warriors of our time, he has appeared in numerous video's etc he was leader of the chechnyan mujhadeen,

    visit

    http://www.kavkazcenter.com/

    go to the english section and then video you will find numerous video clips see the janazah of khattab, this man is really well know!!
    May Allah give him paradise and may our sisters produce sons like khattab.

    There are many full length videos with him ambushing russians if you want copy then just give an address and it will be sent no money needed, these videos are very common and amazing to watch.
     
    Abu Osaama likes this.
  8. Mansoor Ali

    Mansoor Ali New Member

    Going back to the subject of September 11th - Separating the Truth from the Lies

    September 11th - The U.S. government not only let it happen but it was an "Inside Job". In viewing the events from the latter perspective, we find that more of the evidence fits in, and there are fewer unproductive "red herrings" to follow.

    Some of the key elements that support this view include:

    ***** The prior training of some of the hijackers at US military facilities.

    ***** The fact that the World Trade Centre towers collapsed as the result of controled demolitions.

    ***** The uniform demolition demonstrated in the Building7 (WTC7) collapse.

    ***** The fact that the Pentagon attack debris shows that what hit the Pentagon could not have been a Boeing 757, therefore not Flight77.

    ***** The Pentagon attack damage that could have only been caused by a warhead.

    ***** The roughly 20 m. long 1 m. diameter cylinder under the fuselage of the plane that hit the South Tower, which seems to launch a missile just before impact - even if it was a Boeing 767 - see Sept11th footage.

    ***** The fact that the anthrax in the Anthrax attacks was from the US Army's bio-weapons programme, and that it's targets in the Capitol were senators who opposed the Patriot Act, and caused such a stir that the Patriot Act was passed without it even being read.

    ***** The ongoing cover up of 9-11 by the President and Vice-President.

    ***** The fact that the nineteen hijackers were not on the passenger lists of the four flights.

    ***** The confiscation of the recorded conversations between air traffic controllers and the pilots of the hijacked planes. This includes most of the black box data, and the truncating of the only voice data that they did allow to be heard.

    ***** The fact that profits of millions of dollars in trading during the last week of the World Trade Centre in American airlines & United Airlines lead directly into the hands of high ranking CIA officials.

    ***** The fact that Andrews air force base refused to scramble jets despite having a long notice of the hijacking of flight 77.

    ***** The fact that President Bush was informed of the second plane crashing into the World Trade Centre while he was at an elementary school in Sarasota, Florida, and when he knew America was under attack and he could be the next target he carried on talking to children for around another 20 minutes.

    ***** The fact that engineers/forensic analysts were forbidden to interview witnesses, examine the disaster site & request vital information.

    ***** The fact that the U.S Air Force delayed in scrambling jets after being informed of the hijackings, and once the jet fighters were up in the air they flew at a fraction of their top speed.

    An Inside Job means that 9/11 was planned and staged by elements of the US government and military.
     
  9. Mansoor Ali

    Mansoor Ali New Member

    Using jet fuel to melt steel is impossible. Ironworkers use acetylene torches, bottled oxygen, electric arcs from generators, electric furnaces, and other elaborate tricks, but what did these hijackers use? Jet fuel!

    Let us consider: One plane full of jet fuel hit the north tower at around 8:45 a.m., and the fuel fire burned for a while with bright flames and black smoke. We can see pictures of smoke and flames shooting from the windows.

    Then by 9:03 a.m. (which time was marked by the second plane's collision with the south tower), the flame was mostly gone and only black smoke continued to pour from the building. That would indicate that the first fire had died down, but something was still burning inefficiently, leaving soot (carbon) in the smoke. A fire with soot in the smoke is either low temperature or starved for oxygen -- or both.

    But by 10:29 a.m., the steel supports in the building melted, causing a chain reaction within the structure that brought the building to the ground.

    And with less fuel to feed the fire, the south tower collapsed only 47 minutes after the plane collision, again with complete destruction. This is only roughly half the time it took to destroy the north tower.

    Many the elements of the 9-11 story are easily shown to be physically impossible:

    >>> Kersosene (jet fuel) cannot melt steel.

    >>>The color of the fireball in the Pentagon attack which is too "hot" to be from jet fuel (kerosene) or from an office fire.

    >>>The core of the fire in the Pentagon attack went on for days, which is too "hot" to be from jet fuel (kerosene) or from an office fire.

    >>>The damage in the PentagonAttackDamage which is too deep and colimated to be caused by jet fuel from an airliner crash, or from an office fire.

    >>>The cell phones calls from an airplane at any significant altitude are physically impossible.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    13. Exterior columns; 17. Interior columns; 20. Usable office space

    the biggest hole in the official story about the Twin Towers: the manner of their destruction.

    both towers stood for 45 to 90 minutes after impact. The official explanation, parroted faithfully by the mainstream media, is that the towers collapsed because burning jet fuel caused the steel girders supporting them to melt.

    Much of the jet fuel was consumed immediately in the fireballs which erupted when the planes hit the towers. Furthermore, most of the jet fuel which managed to enter the towers was consumed within ten minutes.

    Jet fuel burning in air (especially in an enclosed space within a building, where there is much smoke and little available oxygen) can't melt steel.

    It is unlikely that the resulting structural weakness would be completely symmetrical .

    Irregularity in an uncontrolled collapse would have produced the kind of collapse in which concrete and steel girders would have rained down over a wide area. This did not happen.

    The plane hit the second tower toward a corner and comparatively little of the jet fuel entered the building, most being consumed in the fireball outside the tower.

    Since the plane and its fuel initially shared a common trajectory, after impact the metallic components of the plane followed much the same path as the jet fuel. This path was through one corner of the South Tower. The steel beams bearing most of the load were located in the center of the tower, and thus most of the metal from the plane would not have hit the central steel beams, which would thus have remained largely undamaged by the impact.

    The fire in the South Tower was thus less intense than that in the North Tower. But the South Tower collapsed first, at 9:59 a.m., 56 minutes after impact, whereas the North Tower collapsed at 10:29 a.m., 1 hour and 44 minutes after impact.

    Or, put another way, had the fires been the cause of the collapse then the South Tower, hit after the North Tower, and subjected to a less intense fire, would have collapsed after the North Tower collapsed.

    The platters were constructed of webs of steel trusses. Radial trusses ran from the perimeter of the floor to the central columns, and concentric rings of trusses connected the radial trusses, forming a pattern like a spider web.

    all the joints between the platter and the central columns would have to be heated at the same rate in order to collapse at the same time — and at the same rate as the joints with the outer columns on all sides.

    Neither the plane impact nor the fire damaged the two towers sufficiently to account for their collapse.
     
  10. Mansoor Ali

    Mansoor Ali New Member

    According to the official story, AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757, took off from Dulles Airport in northern Virginia at 8:10 a.m bound for Los Angeles, with between 50 and 58 passengers. It flew west for about 45 minutes, making a curious detour to the north, west and south, before turning around and flying for another 45 minutes back to Washington. Why hijackers would allow a jet which they planned to crash into a target in Washington to fly for 45 minutes away from its target is not explained. Why did they not commandeer the plane ten minutes after takeoff when the plane was only ten minutes flying time from its intended target? The official story ignores this question, as it does all other questions.

    As flight 77 approached the Pentagon it executed a 270-degree 7,000-foot descent over Washington while flying at 500 mph. It approached the Pentagon on a horizontal trajectory so low that it clipped the power lines across the street then (so the story goes) it smashed into an outer wall of the Pentagon.

    We were told (and, of course, expected to believe without question) that this maneuver was executed by an Arab pilot, Hani Hanjour, who in August 2001 was judged by the chief flight instructor at Bowie's Maryland Freeway Airport as not having the piloting skills required to fly solo a Cessna 172 propeller driven airplane.

    here is a picture of the Pentagon crash site taken about two hours after the impace, with the fire still burning. Can you see any remains of the approximately 100 tons of metal (including engines, wings and tail section) which makes up a Boeing 757?

    [​IMG]

    What happened to the wings of the Boeing? Presumably the wings, with their engines attached, would have sheared off when they hit the sections of the building (to the left and right of the hole in the side of the building) which are obviously still standing, with many wing and tail fragments ending up on the lawn in front of the Pentagon.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    the Boeing 757 (allegedly) smashed through and disappeared inside the building (leaving nothing of itself for investigators to find).

    [​IMG]

    ***The damage to the Pentagon is not severe enough to have been caused by the impact of a 100-ton aircraft with a wingspan of 38 meters travelling at a speed of at least 250 mph.
    ***Not only is there no debris on the lawn in front of the wall but the grass shows no sign of having been burnt from the incineration of massive quantities of fuel from the (alleged) plane's ruptured tanks.
    ***In any aircraft crash, no matter how horrific, there are always recognizable sections of the fuselage remaining.
    ***Photos of the crash site reveal windows just above the entrance hole in which the glass is unbroken.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?
     
  11. khattab

    khattab New Member

    If the ones who carried the attack were mossad or cia agents, why did osama bin laden praised them? Al Jazeera aired a footage called 19 Lions and in that video you could see some mujahideen having some training in Afghanistan.

    Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people. [Quran 9:14]

    I don`t know if those mujahideen were from Al Qeada but they were mujahideen, even osama stated that they were brave mujahideen. How did they brake 2 huge buildings only with 2 planes....Yes that`s really hard to tell but Quran has a word for that:

    "You did not kill them, rather Allah killed them."

    "And you did not hit (shoot) when you hit, however, Allah hit."

    Maybe they destroyed the buldings with Allah's help....And why would USA do it to itself? September 11 caused USA a HUGE loss. If they wanted to could still attack Afghanistan. Didn`t they attack Iraq while the whole world was against them, they could attack Afghanistan without and excuse too. I don`t believe they would hit their own buildings and cause so much damage just to invade afghanistan.
     
    bastian00 likes this.
  12. aziz22

    aziz22 New Member

    well as far as i know the so called "bush administration" want to sweep islam from this very earth which is impossible.Islam will ever be there as Allah has promised us.Nothing will conquer islam.Those against islam will Almighty Allah will pay them.No matter time will tell.
     
  13. abu abdallah

    abu abdallah New Member

    There will always be those who hold on to conspiracy theories, basing their views on unconfirmed and doubtful "facts"...

    Like in "Saudi" Arabia, every time that the Mujahideen hit a kaafir compound and kill Americans, the government always claims that only innocent Muslim bystanders were killed, and so many of the general public say: "The Mossad did it"... "the Zionists did it"... "the CIA did it"...

    And like those who said that the Palestinian boy "Muhammad ad-Durrah" was killed not by Zionist soldiers but by Palestinian snipers hiding in a nearby building"!

    And there are hundereds of other examples....

    This is a psychological disease that affects many Muslims. I have said this before and I will say it again: Anyone who has looked into the nature of al-Qa'eda and the statements of Shaykh Usamah bin Ladin (hafidhahullah wa-nasarah) will clearly see that it was the Mujahideen who were responsible for the raids on New York and Washington.

    Too many of the Muslims have this inferiority complex which makes them think that the Mujahideen are incapable of achieving anything in the way of military operations. Just think, if all of this was a Jewish conspiracy, then what were Usamah bin Laden and the Mujahideen doing all this time? Why have they not clearly and repeatedly denied their involvement in the raids?

    (If you are going to quote the alleged statement of Bin Laden to al-Jazeera shortly after Sep 11 in which he "categorically denied" involvement and said that Mulla Umar doesn't allow these operations, then this alleged statement is both questionable in its authenticity as well as being contradictory to tens of other clear statements (audio and video) affirming al-Qa'eda's responsibility for the attacks.)

    Before anyone starts referring to his "facts" or "evidences", then let him remember that there are so many other conspiracy theorists out there, each of whom have their own "facts" and "evidences" for their theories which all contradict each other! If we were to believe all of them then it means that we are very confused indeed!

    In conclusion, I think brother "khattab's" statement best sums up the issue when he said: "And why would USA do it to itself? September 11 caused USA a HUGE loss. If they wanted to could still attack Afghanistan. Didn`t they attack Iraq while the whole world was against them, they could attack Afghanistan without and excuse too. I don`t believe they would hit their own buildings and cause so much damage just to invade afghanistan."
     
    bastian00 and 'Umar like this.
  14. Ghaznavi

    Ghaznavi New Member

    well whatever happened it was justified
     
    bastian00 likes this.
  15. abu abdallah

    abu abdallah New Member

    Regarding the exact nature of Usamah bin Ladin's involvement with the raids on NY and Washington, he expressed it clearly in the Oct 2001 interview with al-Jazeera's Tayseer Allouni:

    "Tayseer Allouni: Sheikh, those who follow your statements and speeches may link your threats to what happened in America. To quote one of your latest statements: "I swear that America won't enjoy security before we live it for real in Palestine." It is easy for anyone following developments to link the acts to your threats.

    Bin Laden: It is easy to link them.

    We have agitated for this for years and we have issued statements and fatwas to that effect. This appeared in the investigations into the four young men who destroyed the American center in Ulayya in Riyadh, as disclosed and published by the Saudi government. The [Saudis] reported that they were influenced by some of the fatwas and statements that we issued. Also, apart from that, incitement continues in many meetings and has been published in the media. If they mean, or if you mean, that there is a link as a result of our incitement, then it is true. We incite because incitement is our duty today. God assigned incitement to the best of all mankind, Mohammed, who said, "Fight for the sake of God. Assign this to no one but yourself, and incite the faithful." [Bin Laden recites verses from the Quran.] This is a true response. We have incited battle against Americans and Jews. This is true."

    So Usamah was not directly behind the actual planning and organisation of the operation, because that is not his role!

    This was the job of the operational planning wing of al-Qa'eda. It seems (and Allah knows better) that it was Khaled Shaykh Muhammad who played a main role in the organisation of the operation.

    However, in a statement made by Usamah bin Ladin last year (I think it was on the first anniversary of the raids) he mentioned that he knew several of the nineteen Mujahideen who took part in the raids, and that they trained in his camps in Afghanistan.

    If one understands something of the nature of al-Qa'eda's network, then he will understand what Usamah's role was and always has been. He is (to borrow the kuffaar's terminology) a kind of "spiritual leader" or "ideologue"... and it is his deputies who carry out their various roles: media, training, finance, preparation, implementation etc.

    So anyone who says that Usamah ibn Ladin had nothing at all to do with the raids, then he is ignorant of the nature of al-Qa'eda. People who don't have any idea about Usamah and the nature of al-Qa'eda shouldn't try to comment on them.
     
    bastian00 and 'Umar like this.
  16. Ghaznavi

    Ghaznavi New Member

    interesting...
     
  17. Mansoor Ali

    Mansoor Ali New Member

    Someone said: "And why would USA do it to itself?

    WOULD THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT MURDER AMERICAN CITIZENS?

    The Answer is "Yes".

    In 1961, military strategists considered plans to create terrorist actions which would alarm the American population and encourage them to support a military attack on Cuba.

    Under consideration in "Operation Northwoods" were plans:

    * to create "a series of well-coordinated incidents" in or around the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to include inciting riots, blowing up ammunition stores, aircraft and ships.

    * to "develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington."

    * to explode bombs in carefully chosen locations along with the release of "prepared documents" pointing to Cuban complicity.

    * to use fake Russian aircraft to harass civilian airliners.

    * to make "Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft" even to simulating the shooting down of a civilian airliner.

    We now see that creating crises to further political goals is a methodology well understood and used.

    The World Trade Centre/Pentagon attacks provided the perfect excuse to launch the pre-laid plans for military attacks against Afghanistan.

    The two towers fell in a similar, uniform manner.

    *** The collapse of the two towers was too methodical to be a chance result of airplanes colliding with the structures. After the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosives inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse.

    *** The collapse could only occur with immense planning by a highly skilled group of craftsmen educated in the unique skill of demolishing buildings by strategically placing explosives within the building. This requires many experts, much time and significant access to the buildings beforehand.

    *** In addition, the towers came down long after the planes struck. To suggest that fuel dumping from the airplanes caused a fire hot enough to melt the inner structure is ridiculous.

    *** So, why was it necessary to implode the whole structure? To eliminate evidence, before the forensic specialists could get in to examine the evidence.

    This was a highly skilled endeavor by a large group of well-trained people with access to the buildings, the airplanes and the explosives.
     
  18. Mansoor Ali

    Mansoor Ali New Member

  19. Mansoor Ali

    Mansoor Ali New Member

    (I'm sorry if my earlier message appeared twice)
    EVIDENCE OF BOMBS IN THE WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS COLLAPSE
    The video evidence that the World Trade Center towers were demolished is compelling. Consider the following frames which show two distinct lines of explosives detonating across the east face of the south tower.
    [​IMG]
    Frame 147 shows a row of explosives detonating right across the east face at the 79th floor.
    Frame 203 shows a row of explosives detonating right across the east face at the 75th floor.

    The middle photos show the dust cloud from the explosions outlined in red.

    The end photos show the relative positions of the two lines of dust and debris.

    It has been claimed that the explosions of dust that span the east face of the tower, were caused by air being forced from the windows as the floors above collapsed. This explanation is obviously incorrect. If it was correct, such lines of dust would have been expelled from the windows of each floor in succession. That is, we would have seen such lines of dust expelled from floors 79, 78, 77, 76 and 75 in succession, but what we observe is an explosion of dust at floor 79, no new clouds of dust for a few floors, then another (larger) explosion of dust at floor 75.

    The second line of explosives is much more powerful than the first, but the dust cloud from the first line of explosives, and the dust and debris from the upper floor collapse, initially obscure this.

    The dust due to the visible explosions is a whitish grey. The dust from the demolition of the upper section (which is disintegrating as it falls) is dark grey. One wonders what caused this difference.
    [​IMG]
    In the video, it is clear that the top 30 or so floors have snapped off and are toppling eastward. In the above frames, we follow the north-east corner of the tower as this 30 floor section descends. Using the north-east corner as a reference, I have outlined in red, the progress of this 30 floor section as it descends.

    The first thing to note, is that the top section itself must be disintegrating, otherwise (as the above frames show) the top section would have extended far into parts of the building that are clearly, as yet, unaffected by the collapse.

    But what could possibly cause the top section to disintegrate? And in fact, what could possibly cause the top section to almost entirely disintegrate, before the lower section begins to collapse?

    You have to realize that most of the top section had not been affected by the aircraft strike or fires and was thus still the same immensely strong structure that had supported the building for some 30 years. If this section was going to fall at all, this section would fall as one piece (like a tree in the forest). Unless, of course, this section had been laced with explosives and was undergoing a controlled demolition of its own, just a few moments before the lower part of the building was demolished.
    [​IMG]
    The North Tower
    [​IMG]
    In the following set of frames showing the North Tower collapse, pay close attention to the horizontal explosions of dust and debris that occur just above the red line marked on the above photograph.
    [​IMG]
    again, note that the second layer of explosions is much more powerful than the first and that the dust cloud from the first initially obscures that of the second. Also, note the large orange areas of hot gas from the explosions. Recall, that this was nearly 2 hours after the aircraft struck the building, so there would be essentially no flammable material left on the floors from which the flash emanates (as the fire would have already consumed it all).
    Note that the horizontal explosions of dust on the leftmost side of the tower are already visible and expanding in the first frame. These continue their expansion through frame nine and subsequent frames. Similarly, explosions of dust become apparent across the entire width of both (visible) faces of the tower, however, between frames 001 and 009 the television mast on top of the tower makes no downward movement at all. This shows that the horizontal explosions of dust and debris precede the collapse and thus cannot be the cause of it (in fact, it is these explosions that initiate the collapse).
    [​IMG]
    That the horizontal explosions of dust precede the collapse is vividly expressed by the above animated graphic which alternates the first and ninth frames. This clearly shows that the explosions of dust were not caused by air being forced from the windows as the floors above collapsed (this was a ridiculous assertion anyway).

    Since the visible evidence points to only two layers of explosives per tower, one has to conclude that the aircraft were directed to hit particular floors. There was however, a quantity of laughable, obviously manufactured evidence, indicating that this was an attempt to frame the Arabs.

    Of course the visible explosions (or at least their dust clouds) are only part of the story, as the main weight supporting columns in the central core also had to be weakened before the towers would collapse in the way they did. But what is visible, is more than enough evidence, to conclude that the towers were deliberately demolished. [​IMG]
    The above animated graphic alternates the first and 67th frames. It shows a classic controlled demolition of a 12 story building (the top 12 stories of the North Tower). Strange how the roofline collapses so evenly.
     
  20. walid

    walid New Member

    9/11

    :twisted: Mansoor Ali

    You are wasting our time and hogging this board with the same repeated rubbish whic you have been doing for the last several months.
    This leads me to believe,

    1. you have some sort of compulsive disorder
    2. you are working for the kuffar trying to cause confusion within the ummah by propogating opinions which are incorrect, these are only creating doubts and is a form of dis-information often employed by the secutiy services.

    Briefly,metal does not melt but does soften under heat and as a result of the heavy loads on the towers catastropic failure occured.
    No explosives were used the a mount of smoke and fire is consistant with a fuel ignition. An explosion using commercial explosive would have put the fire out as it would deprive the fuel of oxygen. also you really expect us to believe explosives were set off at exactly the time and location of the collision? Also where was the supersonic bang that follows high explosives?
    Listen inorder to cause a demolition of buildings using explosive charges it would take TONS of explosives which would have to be drilled and tamped into the correct areas all the charges would have to be joined using det-cord. This takes days to do using a large team of enigeers. not something you could do secretly!!!! or using a couple of bags of fertiliser. So that theory is laughable!!!

    Planes are made of Aluminium which is likely to disentigrate when impacted into a soilid object like the pentagon whci was designed to be bomb proof but not anti-kinetic missle proof. also over 100+ top military officals were killed in that attack.



    I am an engineer and know the facts you are trying to make fools of muslims because are we not capable of doing this? why are we all so backward that only the jews and yanks can do this.

    You are trying very hard to be-little us i.e. Is it that only the non-muslims who can change history and we are the little folk who just watch the world go by and say yes sir, yes sir.

    Don't insult us you have no idea and obviously have never seen the 19 martyers video which is 1hour long arabic with english sub titles and has the will of several of the attackers before conducting the operation. What they did changed the world, the u.s with all it's techology could not prevent determined belivers. note this could not happen without the will of Allah, it is something you will not undestand as you do not have the a spitiual dimension to life i.e the unseen. thus you are trying to explain it using kuffar standards of reasoning.

    Please stop your propoganda campaign as you are annyoning many of us. OBL and his team knew what they were doing and planned it several years in advance when he told clinton that he would take the war to america, this was after the u.s fired 70 cruise missles at him while he was in afghanistan.

    So stop hogging the board!!! :evil:
     
    bastian00 and 'Umar like this.

Share This Page