Talk:September 11 attacks/Archive 9

message: Is there a reliable, objective source to substantiate this broad, inflammatory statement?
"In numerous cities of the Islamic world, in 2002, 2003 and again in 2004, the anniversary of the attacks, September 11, has been celebrated with crowded streets filled with dancing chanting men and celebratory gunfire, documented at al-Jazeera and very briefly in the Western media."
*Links mentioning "celebration" of 911 attacks: [www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/968195/posts], , , . The particular reference I found was to a celebration in London on Sep 11 2004 , which contains: The London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reported that the extremist Islamic movement Al-Muhajiroun had announced a convention in London, titled "The Choice is in Your Hands: Either You're with the Muslims or with the Infidels," to mark the third anniversary of the September 11 attacks. The organization had planned a similar anniversary event a year ago, called "The Magnificent 19 [Suicide Attackers]," but had cancelled it at the last minute. I couldn't find anything mentioning dancing in the streets, however. Matt Stan 20:24, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celebrating 9/11 

message: Ramzi Binalshibh's name is misspelled "Binalsibh" in two places on the page.
No it's not "misspelled" - It is inconsistent. ;) WhisperToMe 19:48, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ramzi Binalshibh 

message: The allegations that "all member of the bin Laden family" and other Saudis were ferried out of the USA during the three day flight ban following 9/11 are inaccurate. 
"Civilian air travel across the United States was—for the first time ever—suspended almost totally for three days, with numerous locations and events affected by closures, postponements, cancellations, and evacuations. However, according to the controversial political commentator Michael Moore in his film Fahrenheit 9/11, there was during this time an airlift to Saudi Arabia of all members of the bin Laden family in the USA at the time, leading to claims that potentiallly useful witnesses had been allowed by the US government to escape investigation"
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flight.htm
But the key point is that the Saudis mentioned in these accounts were not flown out of the country — they were assembled at locations from which they could be conveniently flown out of the country once regular airline travel resumed. 
........
No news account had a flight of Saudis leaving the U.S. until after the resumption of normal air traffic. The earliest date posited for a flight bearing bin Laden family members leaving the U.S. was September 14, a date by which the resumption of air travel had already begun:
*OK, but the point that should be made is that the Bin Ladens were "rescued" by the US authorities and allowed to go to Saudi Arabia at the request of a high ranking Saudi official, rather than being treated as potential witnesses in a regular murder enquiry. It is usual, I understand, in a murder enquiry, for potential witnesses to be asked to remain available to police in case they have information that might be useful, such as, in this case, the location of their relative. Whether they flew straight to Saudi Arabia or whether they were flown first to some assembly point while everyone else in the US was grounded is perhaps useful to know, but it doesn't detract from the main point being made here. Matt Stan 20:37, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michael Moore's allegations 

message: I deleted the section on war crimes. If anyone disagrees with me, I hope you will discuss it and provide some authority specifically stating that the attacks were a war crime. Also see the material in my previous comments, from the Red Cross.
I forgot to sign that.
Maurreen 04:19, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  War Crimes, Part 3 

message: There have been alot of annoying anonymous reverts regarding this link. 
* 911Truth.org is a campaign to educate the public about the Sept. 11th coverup. 
* 911Truth.org is a website that states that there is a coverup of the true cause of 9/11 by the U.S. Government.
It is neutral to describe the website that states that there is a U.S. government coverup of the true cause of 9/11.    It is not neutral to refer to a campaign to educate the public about "the Sept. 11th coverup." The factual basis of a Bush administration cover-up is not a neutral fact. (I wish it was; I'd like to hear it). It is an opinion. Why is this such a difficult concept? Wikipedia shouldn't take a position on whether or not there is a U.S. government cover-up. Wikipedia can report facts related to the purported cover-up. Let's report facts and stop the silly revert war over the description of this link. Alberuni 21:16, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  www.911truth.org 

message: Why is this page being moved now? I don't recall a poll to move this back... WhisperToMe 01:14, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this a problem? It looks like a redirect from WTC attacks with no change in content here.  Alberuni 01:27, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It still is a problem because it ruins all of the redirects. If one wants to change the title of a popular article, he or she should ask around first. WhisperToMe 01:32, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: As for the title itself, September 11 consisted of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Pennsylvania incidents. WhisperToMe 01:57, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "World Trade Center attacks"