Why did the Terrorist hit the Twin Towers?


B00Mer
#1
Why did the Terrorist hit the Twin Towers?

I want to know why the terrorists hit the twin towers. Was it a statement, or more economic.

The reason I ask this, is if they really wanted to effect the United States, they just need to hit 5 locations in Canada and the U.S. would be in a dark age.

2 hydroelectric power dams that supply most of New York Cities power and the east coast of the USA.

3 pipeline locations in Alberta and Sask that supply oil and gas to the United States.

Economic crisis complete.

So what was so significant about the twin towers, when their are other locations easier and would cause more economic damage?
Last edited by B00Mer; Oct 7th, 2008 at 04:02 PM..
 
Scott Free
#2
They looked like giant erections.

So not only did America have a giant hardon but it had two of them!

It was the obvious target for the zealot nut cases (they can understand cock). Only mudhammad can have two of those!

Hey, it's a theory
 
scratch
#3
IMPHO,

.....to demoralize.....to forever affect the American psyche.....

 
ahmadabdalrhman
#4
I THINK it because Twin Towers the usury center , IN THE WORLD . and the usury maximize the rich to gain ,
and maximize how have-not the pauperism ,
but I don't know if the autocracy
easy to Terrorist to did that ,
even the autocracy can it did the war ,
 
lone wolf
#5
They were in the way
 
shadowshiv
#6
To instill fear. They hit the places they did to show people that nowhere was truly safe, and that their next target could be anywhere.
 
Tonington
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

So what was so significant about the twin towers, when their are other locations easier and would cause more economic damage?

The twin towers of the World Trade center were a symbol. Destroying symbols is much worse. The pipelines can be rebuilt, the power supply, a little more difficult. But watching the symbolic destruction of the two towers, the collapse, it robbed Americans of their sense of security, and in some cases their better judgement, ie. the rush to war...
 
Colpy
#8
The towers were the target for three reasons, IMHO:

1. Islamist terrorists had failed in an earlier attempt at bringing them down.

2. The WTC was the symbol of American economic dominance of the world.

3. 50,000 people in one very vulnerable place, stacked vertically........the best target to cause the most carnage.
 
TenPenny
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

Why did the Terrorist hit the Twin Towers?

I want to know why the terrorists hit the twin towers. Was it a statement, or more economic.

The reason I ask this, is if they really wanted to effect the United States, they just need to hit 5 locations in Canada and the U.S. would be in a dark age.

2 hydroelectric power dams that supply most of New York Cities power and the east coast of the USA.

3 pipeline locations in Alberta and Sask that supply oil and gas to the United States.

Economic crisis complete.

So what was so significant about the twin towers, when their are other locations easier and would cause more economic damage?

If the terrorists had struck Canada, sure the US would suffer, but only to a minor degree, and then it would be forgotten.

Terrorism is psychological - hit somebody at home, when they're comfortable, and destroy their world. There are thousands of kids in NYC who are still traumatized by the idea that one of their parents went to work, just like always, and never came home. There are adults who now won't work in skyscrapers, because they're terrified.

It was a masterful ploy, to destroy the iconic towers that were a classic symbol of the NYC skyline, and the center of much of the financial world, and to make it such a psychological hit. It was such a blow to the psyche of the US that to this day, there are thousands of people who believe it was an inside job - and this belief is part of the coping mechanism - it's far easier to believe it was an inside job, than to accept how vulnerable you are.
 
Avro
#10
I think a bigger question is if terror is still a threat and they (the terrorists) live among us why are they not striking us now at the beginning of this economic crisis?

Is it because there is no threat
 
Walter
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by AvroView Post

if terror is still a threat and they (the terrorists) live among us why are they not striking us now at the beginning of this economic crisis?
Is it because there is no threat

Bush is keeping them occupied elsewhere. Thank-you W.
 
gopher
#12
here's why:


http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...rch_type=&aq=f
 
In Between Man
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Scott FreeView Post

They looked like giant erections.

So not only did America have a giant hardon but it had two of them!

It was the obvious target for the zealot nut cases (they can understand cock). Only mudhammad can have two of those!

Hey, it's a theory

LOL! Thanx for returning the laff!
 
In Between Man
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by ahmadabdalrhmanView Post

I THINK it because Twin Towers the usury center , IN THE WORLD . and the usury maximize the rich to gain ,
and maximize how have-not the pauperism ,
but I don't know if the autocracy
easy to Terrorist to did that ,
even the autocracy can it did the war ,

Finally!!!!! Somebody speak my language!!!!!!

Also think do you that US government wanted part of to see the US homeland a attack it's own against people?
 
Kreskin
#15
They were after the explosives-planting crews.
 
Scott Free
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by alleywayzalwayzView Post

LOL! Thanx for returning the laff!

np
 
Scott Free
#17
I submit the following evidence to further support my mudhammad ***** envy theory:

Pakistani muslim ***** jokes (source)

Popular internet jokes about Pakistani muslim *****'s, these are common things Pakistani women say to their men.

1. I've smoked fatter joints than that.
2. Ahh, it's cute.
3. I'm sorry.
4. Never mind, why bother.
5. Who circumcised you?
6. Why don't we just cuddle?
7. You know they have surgery to fix that.
8. It's more fun to look at.
9. Make it dance.
10. You know, there's a tower in Italy like that.
11. Can I paint a smiley face on that?
12. It looks like a nightcrawler.
13. Wow, and your feet are so big.
14. My last boyfriend was 4" bigger.
15. It's OK, we'll work around it.
16. Is this a mild or a spicy Slim Jim?
17. Eww, there's an inch worm on your thigh.
18. Will it squeak if I squeeze it?
19. Oh no, a flash headache.
20.(giggle and point)
21. Can I be honest with you?
22. My 8-year-old brother has one like that.
23. Let me go get my tweezers.
24. How sweet, you brought incense.
25. This explains your car.
26. You must be a growing boy.
27. Maybe if we water it, it'll grow.
28. Thanks, I needed a toothpick.
29. Are you one of those pygmies?
30. Have you ever thought of working in a sideshow?
31. Ever hear of Clearasil?
32. All right, a treasure hunt!
33. I didn't know they came that small.
34. Why is God punishing you?
35. At least this won't take long.
36. Let's just stick with your hand.
37. Do you need a splint to prop that up.
38. How interesting.
39. I never saw one like that before.
40. What do you call this?
41. But it still works right?
42. Damn I hate baby-sitting.
43. It looks so unused.
44. Do you take steroids?
45. I hear excessive masturbation shrinks your dick.
46. Maybe it looks better in natural light.
47. I think there's a ***** around here somewhere.
48. Why don't we skip right to the cigarettes?
49. Let me know when you're done.
50. Oh, I didn't know you were in an accident.
51. Did you date Lorena Bobbitt?
52. Aww, it's hiding.
53. Are you cold?
54. If you get me real drunk first.
55. Is that an optical illusion?
56. What is that?
57. Does this run in your family?
58. I'll go get the ketchup for your French fry.
59. Were you neutered?
60. It's a good thing you have so many other talents.
61. Does it come with an air pump?
62. So this is why you're supposed to judge people on personality.
63. Where are the puppet strings?
64. Look, it all fits in my mouth at once.
65. Deep throat???
66. Your big gun is more like a BB gun.
67. Can you get this pencil out of me now?
68. Do I hang my hat on it?
69. Look, it fits my Barbie clothes!
70. Don't hold back.

So, in summation, it seems very plausible the attack on the twin towers was an act of ***** envy.

I am presuming these jokes make it across the boarder into Afghanistan.
 
Spocq
#18
The Twin towers were the main hub of business which is the main thing that makes and keeps a country strong. Business is like the gears of a clock, it keeps a country ticking.
 
Spocq
#19
Scott Free: I see world peace is not beginning with you, more like you are promoting world war.
 
Scott Free
#20
I'm not particularly interested in throwing the gates of our civilization open to the barbarians - no.

I like all the love, peace, and granola in theory but I haven't seen any practical example of the concept in action. As far as I can see, going all the way back to antiquity, religiosity is the enemy of reason and welcoming it with open arms is foolish.

I don't rail against the moderate religionists, because they do not really believe, but it is the zealot that worries me. I don't want to see Europe become like Iran, that is, ceased with such religious fervour. England, for example, is hugely capable of a religious insanity the world can barely comprehend - we know this by their history. Is it possible for Islam to reignite that zealotry? I don't know but I do know it is foolish to tempt fate.

I will not submit to liberal notions of ethics when I see little evidence there is reason to.

I will confront religiosity whenever I can. If enough people do this perhaps any fires can be prevented from igniting.

Notice too that it is Islam not people that concerns me. I am not racist. Do not confuse dislike for religion as dislike for people. I do not like Christianity either but that doesn't mean I dislike its people.

Is this religious intolerance? I suppose but as history has so well demonstrated religion shouldn't be tolerated except in its most benign forms.

The notion of tolerance is acceptable to me when there is evidence something should be tolerated; there is no such evidence with religion, except as I said, when it is moderate.

Religion, when it would subjugate reason (the very cornerstone of our civilization) and replace it with the rantings of a madman from antiquity, then it is no longer tolerable.

I do not propose violence to oppose the lunatic but reason and firmness. When I see a ridiculous claim being made I will say so.

Again, is that intolerant?

I say it isn't given the evidence of what will happen if we keep our mouths shut.
 
Spocq
#21
I'm not saying to open our gates to those who want to harm us. I'm just saying don't torment them. All that we do to torment them adds to their anger making the situation worse. Also all that we do that shows respect will add to making the situation better. I believe the saying, "what we put in we get out", is true. There are many sayings that are similar that support this concept. Being disrespectful doesn't teach others to be respectful it teaches them to be disrespectful. If we want to teach them to be respectful then we need to be respectful.
 
Spocq
#22
Actually that last sentence should be:

Being disrespectful doesn't teach/incourage others to be respectful it teaches/incourages them to be disrespectful. If we are respectful towards others we teach/incourage them to be respectful.
Last edited by Spocq; Oct 8th, 2008 at 04:08 AM..
 
Scott Free
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by SpocqView Post

If we are respectful towards others we teach/incourage them to be respectful.

That is true only of children.


Everything I've studied has shown the opposite with adults.

So you'll have to show me some evidence.

Being kind to zealots only encourages them. That has been my experience from when I was one. It is kind to offer a brutal awakening. It was kind to me anyway.
Last edited by Scott Free; Oct 8th, 2008 at 04:52 AM..
 
MissAnnika
#24
the twin towers were in the way
 
Praxius
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

Why did the Terrorist hit the Twin Towers?

I want to know why the terrorists hit the twin towers. Was it a statement, or more economic.

The reason I ask this, is if they really wanted to effect the United States, they just need to hit 5 locations in Canada and the U.S. would be in a dark age.

2 hydroelectric power dams that supply most of New York Cities power and the east coast of the USA.

3 pipeline locations in Alberta and Sask that supply oil and gas to the United States.

Economic crisis complete.

So what was so significant about the twin towers, when their are other locations easier and would cause more economic damage?

Because they watched too much Fight Club and thought they could destroy the world's credit and drop it to Zero by leveling a few towers......



Seemed like a good idea on paper and in the movies.... but then again, many of them think Rambo could actually hit anything by shooting from the hip and spraying all over the place, thinking Alah would guide their bullets.......

That's one other theory of course.
 
Praxius
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

If the terrorists had struck Canada, sure the US would suffer, but only to a minor degree, and then it would be forgotten.

Terrorism is psychological - hit somebody at home, when they're comfortable, and destroy their world. There are thousands of kids in NYC who are still traumatized by the idea that one of their parents went to work, just like always, and never came home. There are adults who now won't work in skyscrapers, because they're terrified.

It was a masterful ploy, to destroy the iconic towers that were a classic symbol of the NYC skyline, and the center of much of the financial world, and to make it such a psychological hit. It was such a blow to the psyche of the US that to this day, there are thousands of people who believe it was an inside job - and this belief is part of the coping mechanism - it's far easier to believe it was an inside job, than to accept how vulnerable you are.

Oh I'm fully aware of how vulnerable we all are at any given time at any given place.... but I do have some slight skepticism in regards to Bush's involvement in it in some manner or another.....

I mean seriously..... buckets of warnings, clues and hints about the attack, when, where and by who were all over the place months before it happened..... and yet nothing was done...... either that was complete incompetence or it was involvement.

I'm not leaning one way or another at this time, and I'm not stating I believe in any paticular conspiracies..... but given the known information and evidence at this time..... neither can be ruled out.

I do fully believe that the Al'Q had their hands involved into this, and that Osama had some level of involvement...... but I also believe that Bush, although can be quite stupid on more occasions then not, had some part to play in this.

Either that or he's completely retarded and incompetent........
 
Praxius
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by alleywayzalwayzView Post

Finally!!!!! Somebody speak my language!!!!!!

Also think do you that US government wanted part of to see the US homeland a attack it's own against people?

Depends on the motive..... the US Government doesn't seem to have an issue of sending thousands of US soldiers to their deaths in a war that shouldn't have existed in the first place..... what makes you think they care about their civilians any differently?

Mind you, I am basing this on observations of action, not speculation, since the above is true...... they have yet to prove otherwise.
 
Nuggler
#28
Why did the Terrorist hit the Twin Towers?


Fortunately, since "he" vaporized, along with many thousands of UNFORTUNATE INNOCENTS, we will never know why "he" decided to fly, come along, navigate, the jet(s). (whomever "he" was)

A good bet would be, many Islamics pissed off at US foreign policy. But, that's just a short shot at it.

Do some reading for Christ's sake, it's all out there. Volumes have been written.

Quit trolling, stirring, and read instead.

WHY.......is the sky blue???
WHY...............did the chicken cross the road??
WHY...............were the Bin Ladens given take off permission and the rest of the skys kept empty, following 9/11??
Makes as much sense.




 
Praxius
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by Scott FreeView Post

That is true only of children.

Everything I've studied has shown the opposite with adults.

So you'll have to show me some evidence.

Being kind to zealots only encourages them. That has been my experience from when I was one. It is kind to offer a brutal awakening. It was kind to me anyway.

The first step is to understand why they maybe angry or wish to harm us.... what was the cause for them to direct their attention our way? What have we done to them to cause such hatred?

If nothing, then I can understand your position..... but you should be well aware that we are not innocent in this situation and some in our western worlds have on occasion, screwed them over, taken what we wanted, attempted to assemilate them, treat them as a lower level of human, helped establish oppressive dictators over them that suit our needs.... and so on and so forth.

Treating others with respect and being kind to others does pay off..... when you actually follow the practice as it should be followed.

It works both ways and we are not as innocent as many here would like to think we are.

Are they justified in their actions against us in regards to "Terrorist Attacks" and fighting us in Iraq/Afghanistan? On some level of mentality, yes..... while on many others, no.

Are we justified in invading Afghanistan and Iraq, displacing millions, killing hundreds/thousands in air strikes, forcing a totally different way of life on them yet again?

On some level of mentality, yes..... while on many others, no.

This is the conundrum we are all currently in..... each side feels they are justified in their actions based on previous offenses against them..... it's for retribution and revenge against those who have harmed us.

Keep it this way and it will never end..... hatred will always continue......

We should all be fully aware that you can not completely kill off the Taliban or the Al'Q..... just as they should be fully aware that they can not completely kill off all of us and our way of life.

It's simply a deadlock in which we are all guilty on some level or another for this situation, Us and them.

Many people have said in the past that "There is no substitute for Victory" and I completely disagree with that..... the best substitute for victory..... the thing that is much better then Victory..... is peace.

Peace Is Victory..... but when you use Victory to justify wiping out an entire culture or way of life..... that's not victory..... that's being a war monger and oppressive for your own selfish gains.
 
darkbeaver
#30
The Ultimate 9/11 'Truth' Showdown
David Ray Griffin vs. Matt Taibbi


Global Research, October 7, 2008
AlterNet.org

A poll of 17 countries that came out September of this year revealed that majorities in only nine of them "believe that al Qaeda was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States." A Zogby poll from 2006 found that in America, 42% of respondents believed the US government and 9/11 Commission "covered up" the events of 9/11. It's safe to say that at least tens of millions of Americans don't believe anything close to the official account offered by the 9/11 Commission, and that much of the outside world remains skeptical.
Over the years, AlterNet has run dozens of stories, mostly critical, of the 9/11 Truth Movement. Matt Taibbi has taken on the 9/11 Truth Movement head on in a series of articles, and most recently in his new book, The Great Derangement.
In April, I asked Taibbi if he would be interested in interviewing David Ray Griffin, a leading member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology at Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Graduate University and author of seven of books on 9/11, about his recent book, 9/11 Contradictions. After months of back and forths between them and some editorial delays, I'm pleased to share their written exchange -- all 24,000 words of it. What we have here are the preeminent writers on both sides of the 9/11 Truth argument; a one-of-a-kind debate. Because the questions and responses are quite long, I've woven them together in order. Enjoy. -- Jan Frel, AlterNet Senior Editor.

"It's very long but a very excellent execution of a chronic debunker, the man is flayed alive by Griffin in the most competent way. People who doubt the fact that 9/11 was an inside job have very little in the way of a future not filled with compromise of principles." DB

Last edited by darkbeaver; Oct 8th, 2008 at 09:22 AM..
 

Similar Threads

6
Twin bombings kill 64 in Baghdad
by Praxius | Feb 2nd, 2008
3
Twin bombings in Algeria kill at least 23
by CBC News | Apr 11th, 2007
6
What are Canadas twin cities??? (
by Semperfi_dani | Jun 23rd, 2006
47
Harper's Twin?
by Haggis McBagpipe | May 6th, 2005
no new posts