Plot to blow-up Burj Dubai

[kellydale2003 2,276]

I wasn't saying it was true and that it was 100% correct - (and I meant the construction of the WTC) I was just stating that there's no doubt that they atleast hesitated or denied someone that looks like there from the middle east. Law or no Law the government will most likely agree for what they think is the "best". I agree with you on the sterotyping. I don't see muslims often even though I live in downtown city of 750,000 people.

Ironic that a couple years ago we had a 7/11 bombing here in Winnipeg. Coincidentally it was runned by Persians that looked Arabian or Muslim. But I have a lot of respect for them - There not ALL terrorists. It's like saying all the Americans are dumb as George Bush (which is not true).

EDIT: Wow - this actually reached a second page!

[Odainsaker 2,137]

Originally posted by: masochist

What I'm wondering is what purpose would blowing up the Burj Dubai fulfill? With the WTC, I could see it being a message to the US for meddling in the issues of other countries (as Osama Bin Laden is apt to remind us every single year). But what was UAE doing other than developing an expensive (and already collapsing) tourist and business trap? What message would blowing up the world's tallest building send, other than the same one that a pre-school bully sends to a kid making a tall tower with blocks? It makes no sense....quote>

The Gulf States have tended to be relatively friendly with the U.S., been more open to slow Western influences, and straddle the world's nervous oil network. Remember, the Islamist terrorists are not just at war with the U.S., whom they view as the horned head of the beast, but with the very idea of Western modernization, which makes the ultimate target their own people at home. Ignore all the rallying rhetoric about fighting colonial imperialism or devoting life according to the Koran;  a closed society traumatized with constant strife and bombs falling everywhere is their ideal world, as like the dystopian Oceania in Orwell's 1984, an ignorant people kept under constant paranoid fear of siege is the one upon which a power-hungry revolutionary leadership can exact total control. Gaza Strip under lockdown, lawlessly destitute Somalia, genocidal Sudan full of refugees, even war-wracked Afghanistan...these are not merely battlefields, they are model societies into which they want to drag their own people. Even Iran, which is no innocent when it comes to clamping down upon its own people and is quite happy to see terrorists go after the West, is itself afraid of them.

[kellydale2003 2,276]

I have no pity for the Somolian Government - They chose oil over their own people and now are paying the price. It's all about the hostility and fear which creates conflicts and tension inbetween multiple countries. I pretty much doubt that the gulf states and USA will actually be fully friendly considering the history between Cuba and USA. For now it's quiet down there - Bolivia will soon speak up to their issue they've been having and countries will most likely try remain neutral but be forced to choose a side because of trade.

What's more important? Oil, or Food Imports? One of the other will have to go. They pick oil they lose their economy, pick food and they go broke. One chain reaction after another is not intended but rathar forced. Something like the cold war will eventually happen - UAE will probably start rivalry against the other countries that are planning attacks. UAE will ask for back-up from someone - And that someone will have history with another country (etc, etc) and voila! Another war.

[(x+x 20]

blowing the world's tallest tower???!!!, that's insane, maybe they want to build another building there,i mean after all, they have a lot of time, or maybe it's a terrorist blow-up, who knows, maybe this report that says that they are going to blow up burj dubai is just a vocer for a terrorism issue, or maybe it's because of the financial problems, because of the world crisis, and pleas, don't say muslim terrorists, terrorists have no relegious, they just say they are muslim to say that they have a cause that is to searce the god will, wich it's not true, they are not searving any will, they ae a bunch of criminals, i guess that terrorists, made a plan for the world crisis, by attaking the U.S. financial towers, and the other blowing ups, and now, the burj dubai ,

[(x+x 20]

western world, have a very very wronng idea about us, i mean arab, our image for you is that we are a bunch of terrorists, like in iraq for example, it's true that thjere's some terrorists there, but who dies there every day, are people who deffend for their coutry, you calls us terrorists, while bush is killing thousends of people every day, what can you call him???!!! our image to the world is that wr are a bunch of loosers, unuducated, wars, killing, and all that, yeah maybe some arab countries have wars, and those countires are sudan, palastine, iraq, and another note, about palastine, isralien are killing palastenian every day, and they call us terrorists, because they deffend them selfs, and trying to taketheir lands back , and die with honor maybe,

[(x+x 20]

don't get me wrong, i'm offending anybudy, and i dont mean to offend isralian if there is some here,

[Odainsaker 2,137]

Originally posted by: kellydale2003
I pretty much doubt that the gulf states and USA will actually be fully friendly considering the history between Cuba and USA. For now it's quiet down there - Bolivia will soon speak up to their issue they've been having and countries will most likely try remain neutral but be forced to choose a side because of trade.quote>

 

Errr, just to clarify, by "Gulf States," I meant the Persian Gulf States (often understood as the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia) rather than the Gulf of Mexico.  The UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar are tiny states, emirates, and sheikdoms grown rich off oil trade revenue, are increasingly more closely tied into the global trading networks, are constructing glittering mega skylines, and host several strategic U.S. military bases under a variety of umbrella security agreements.  Singapores of the Middle East is actually not that far off the mark.

Still, they are not entirely democratic, have murky financial ties through their institutions into dangerous groups, have condemnable treatment of foreign guest workers, and have to play the geopolitical balancing act between the Arab states on one side of the gulf and Persian heavywieght Iran on the other while keeping the West's guildsmen happy.  Still, their prosperity allows them to present a more moderate and modernizing face in the Middle East...perhaps only so long as the oil money doesn't run out, which is why some believe increasing the still-lackluster trading relations among the Middle East states in order to improve their internal consumer economies and their citizens' own investments is a key to strengthening and eventually democratizing their societies.  Of course, that is also the very heart of Western modernization, and as such is the target of the radical extremists seeking instead to create their own slave societies.



A society building Cloud City has no need of radical killers hiding in caves.  How could they not be tempted to strike back?
 

[thepokemaniac 18]

Originally posted by: (x+x²²/x

western world, have a very very wronng idea about us, i mean arab, our image for you is that we are a bunch of terrorists, like in iraq for example, it's true that thjere's some terrorists there, but who dies there every day, are people who deffend for their coutry, you calls us terrorists, while bush is killing thousends of people every day, what can you call him???!!! our image to the world is that wr are a bunch of loosers, unuducated, wars, killing, and all that, yeah maybe some arab countries have wars, and those countires are sudan, palastine, iraq, and another note, about palastine, isralien are killing palastenian every day, and they call us terrorists, because they deffend them selfs, and trying to taketheir lands back , and die with honor maybe,

quote>

Im glad you can see throught the bias western media into the eyes of a Palestinian! Which is true, we[Palestinians] need our land back! The Israeli government is taking it, and destroying our towns and land! For instance, some of the land my family ownes in the West Bank was taken by the military to build an army base. Its just all wrong, and unfair.

But woa! This topic is really evolving from a simple(or not) discussion about a plot to destroy the tallest building on earth, to a frindly polititcal debate!

[Kryptowhite 9]

Originally posted by: (x+x²²/x

western world, have a very very wronng idea about us, i mean arab, our image for you is that we are a bunch of terrorists, like in iraq for example, it's true that thjere's some terrorists there, but who dies there every day, are people who deffend for their coutry, you calls us terrorists, while bush is killing thousends of people every day, what can you call him???!!! our image to the world is that wr are a bunch of loosers, unuducated, wars, killing, and all that, yeah maybe some arab countries have wars, and those countires are sudan, palastine, iraq, and another note, about palastine, isralien are killing palastenian every day, and they call us terrorists, because they deffend them selfs, and trying to taketheir lands back , and die with honor maybe,

quote>

You do make a good case. People in the middle east have every right to fight to defend themselves.

Unfortuantly, defend themselves from what? Most civilian deaths since Hussien was removed have been the result of suicide bombings and truck bombings and whatnot. I looked for a figure, but I could not find one, however, i'd guess that about 75% of civilian deaths in Iraq are the result of guerilla fighters and about 25% from US troops. The only time a US troop would kill an iraqi citizen is accidentally during an air strike [and if im correct, warning is sent out before the air strike? or is that not true], if the civilian wanders into the line of fire [which would be their own fault.] or if the civilian attacks the soldier [their own fault]. So, using the excuse of "defending their people" is not going to cut it for guerilla fighters in Iraq, because they represent a bigger threat nowadays to their people than US soldiers. 

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: x+2x²+x³

you calls us terrorists, while bush is killing thousends of people every day, what can you call him???!!!quote>

George Bush hasn't been our president in over half a year now.

And, a lot of people here didn't like him either. His approval rating towards the end of his presidency was staggeringly low.

Nevertheless, if one is a terrorist for killing terrorists, than there truly is no winning. We could pull all our troops out of the middle east and cease fighting them, but then they would only grow stronger be better able to attack us and our allies at home, and more innocent Americans and Europeans would die at their hands. Is that really the better option?

isralien are killing palastenian every day, and they call us terrorists, because they deffend them selfs, and trying to taketheir lands back , and die with honor maybe,quote>

The situation in Israel/Palestine isn't that simple. Both groups have an ancestral claim to that territory. The Jews were there first. Then they got kicked out and the Muslims moved in, and stayed there for centuries. Now the Jews are back in town and the Muslims are understandably displeased.

The problem is that up and giving one side total control and making the other side obey or go away is not a viable option no matter which side is given which role, and the two groups are utterly unwilling to compromise.

Combine that with the fact that the Muslim side uses tactics which get them labeled as terrorists by many in the western world but viewed as heroes fighting valiantly by many in the middle east and the situation becomes even more hopeless, because it's just too polarized. You end up with the unstoppable force versus the immovable object.

And it's dangerous because the potential for it to escalate drastically is always insidiously lurking. Israel has nukes, as do many other countries in the west. No middle eastern countires have nukes (yet, anyway) unless you count Pakistan, but you can see why a nuke getting into the hands of terrorists is a matter of great concern. Because we know they're lunatics and the prospect of mutually assured destruction isn't going to stop them, especially since there is no Republic of Terrorististan whose cities you can nuke in response. Not being a soveriegn entity greatly protects them that way.

[citiesxlfan42 27]

Bringing the topic back to it's title, I say that I'm sad that there are people that are people in this world who want to kill other humans and thier innocent creations. That's just sick. The fact that the U. A. E. (I have to do a project on Dubai and the U. A. E. this is gold!) is part of arabia is just sad. People now attack themselves!? What world do we live in!? 

[Odainsaker 2,137]

Ah Israel...what a can of worms...they could disappear tomorrow, and the U.S. could pull out of every interest it has overseas, and yet I suspect little would change. Suicide bombers would still be generated out of the corners of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and even the emigre communties in Europe. Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq would still be overrun by competing tribal warlords. Factional infighting would continue in Palestine and even spread into Lebanon. Hotels and nightclubs in distant Indonesia would still get blown up. Some new great grievance would be siezed upon in order to rally the nationalist militancy. Israel is the convenient proxy, no doubt because it has indeed been as militantly unjust as the rest, but it is no longer and hasn't been for a long time the root issue. The dangerous reality is that despite the recent U.S. invasions and Israeli incursions, the number one killer of Muslims in the strife torn regions of the Middle East, Africa, and Southwestern Asia is not the West, but, instead other Muslims.

What is sad is that technocrat negotiators from the West Bank and Israel have this week finally released a detailed plan for how Palestine could be divided into two functioning states, with painful and complicated concessions on both sides. I don't expect this to go anywhere, because the technocrats are not the politicians who would have the ultimate say, and the compromises would destroy Netanyahu's right-wing extremist coalition of suicide settlers, while the West Bank authority would physically not survive the suicide bombers of its own militant wings. Meanwhile, the populace is still sold to the mistaken idea that pure absolute justice for their own side for the many unfair wrongs they have received can still somehow be achieved outright. Except in the real world, Israel is not going to disappear tomorrow, and neither are the Palestinians, and the best justice that can be hoped for now is for each side to leave each other alone. But I said this was now a proxy war...there are those whose interests are in continuing the strife, either to mollify their own dissatisfied populations, maintain their own militant power base, clandestinely hit back at unreachable enemies, or even to forward their own End Times religious agenda. They will continue to promote the fiction of all-or-nothing victory, all-or-nothing justice, and all-or-nothing politics, and instead of ever getting the promised all, the people are merely getting nothing. The more isolated and desperate the siege, the greater the insane radical control.

[fukuda 351]

Im glad you can see throught the bias western media into the eyes of a Palestinian! quote>

Media and public opinion has always been biased towards palestine here, I've even heard people calling Hamas "heroes" *ugh*

[thepokemaniac 18]

Originally posted by: fukuda

Im glad you can see throught the bias western media into the eyes of a Palestinian! quote>

Media and public opinion has always been biased towards palestine here, I've even heard people calling Hamas "heroes" *ugh*quote>

By "here" are you refering to the US, Canada, or Europe? Because in the US, its very bias toward Israel. I can differ with the statement "public opinion has always been bias towards Palestine here" because of all the scrutiny we get because of some stupid guys who blow themselves up. In Europe, it tends to be more pro-Palestinian, but in America, its the opposite.

[Jamonbread 222]

Canada is very pro Israel too. Hamas is considered a terrorist here too. I dunno, both are in the wrong and both are in the right. I might be biased with canadian media but I kinda feel sorry for the Israelis. Being Jewish hasnt been all that easy and they're one country is being attacked. On the other hand, what is happening to the Palestinians is wrong too.

BTW you guys kind of proved yourself but I said attack by plane and all the recent terrorists I hear about are arab . Although the media probably plays a big part in that.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Kryptowhite 9]

Originally posted by: Jamonbread

Canada is very pro Israel too. Hamas is considered a terrorist here too. I dunno, both are in the wrong and both are in the right. I might be biased with canadian media but I kinda feel sorry for the Israelis. Being Jewish hasnt been all that easy and they're one country is being attacked. On the other hand, what is happening to the Palestinians is wrong too.

BTW you guys kind of proved yourself but I said attack by plane and all the recent terrorists I hear about are arab . Although the media probably plays a big part in that.quote>

Well, 1 out of every 500 or so terrorist attacks actually involve a plane so...i can only think of 3....[if you clump 9/11 together as one attack]

[Patricius Maximus 236]

Let's not use oversimplifing, emotive terms such as "terrorists" to describe every Musilim guerilla. A terrorist is a person who uses the tactic of terrorism, that is an attempt to achieve an objective by means of instilling terror in the civillian population.

While I do agree that there are many guerillas and other rogues that are terrorists, it is to the West's detriment to label every guerilla group they don't like "terrorists". We should be more objective, and less subjective. We also need to be more rational about the defense of our fellow citizens (of whatever country you live in, mine happens to be Canada).

Also keep in mind that terrorism is not simply the killing of civillians, as it seems to be made out to be now -- it is the instilling of terror in civilians, often by killing some of them in the process.

I tend to separate the "terrorist" organizations by their objectives and tactics. For instance, Hamas is an Islamic fundamentalist guerilla group which seeks the destruction of the Israeli state and a restoration of Islamic rule there. Al-Qaeda is an5 Islamic fundamentalist guerilla group which seeks the restoration of the Caliphate under Sharia law, and removal of all Western forces via the tactic of terrorism.

Historically, using American examples, General Sherman in his march across the south used the tactic of terrorism, in addition to the "scorched-earth" tactic, in order to win the Civil War there. George Washington, the great American hero and founder, when he ordered the Iroquois raids in 1779, authorized the use of terrorism to stop the Indian raids into American land.

These are just a few examples.

In the Israeli-Palestinian issue, it is very complex. My inclination would be to give the land to the Jews, since they were there before the Musilims were. But there is also a theological aspect to it as well -- the same spot where the Jewish God told them is the promised land is the same spot Mohammed ascended into heaven. Religious wars are often fought with great vigour, and this one is no exception.

It is impossible to compromise because both sides want the entire piece of land, and will not be satisfied with half of it. The best solution is to leave it to the two parties to solve it, and not to meddle in their affairs like every American president since 1948 has done.

[Danlikebooks 6]

Originally posted by: thepokemaniac

Originally posted by: kellydale2003

Yeah - 2012 (No conspiracy intended) there's probably going to be some terrorist threat at the New World Trade Center.

If there's a crowd (which consists of 3 or more people lol) - There's always going to be secuirty issues. I have no doubt that even islamic or middle east races are not allowed to work at the World Trade Center complex.

This is how World Wars start - everyone feels threatened and defensively hostile. Eventually attacks will break out and everyone will have their own allies and all fight each other. When you read about the cold war and the world wars its really dumb how each country helped each other to fight another country, but really everyone was transporting weapons to each other. Even opposing countries somehow ended up trading weapons through other countries!

The Human race is dumb - We all can't learn from out mistakes because it's a new generation faced with the same problems that conclude the same results.

quote>

How do you know that no people of Islamic descent can work at the world trade center in 2012? Technichly, that is illegal to deny a job because of race, religion, etc., or at least I think so(correct me if I'm wrong). I'm sick of all this stereotyping of Arabs, Muslims, etc. because its just not right, and its all just because of some stupid terrorist who tag themselves as Muslims, fighting for Jihad. As a Muslim, I do not even consider them true Muslims, because of their actions. Im not saying that you specifically stereotyped at all, just making a separate point.

quote>

The word "Islam" itself, stems from the Arabic word "Salaam", literally meaning peace.  So Islam = peace.  Transitively speaking, of course.

[kellydale2003 2,276]

All words and religions have a special meaning - disregarding their translative meaning it doesn't necesarily mean that they are what they're meant to be.

Even being somewhat politically translative doesn't exactly mean what they truly are.

For example: "Dominion of Canada" is Canada's Original name (Just like United States of America). Now speaking from the general English definition from "dominion" is translated to a ruler or governer of a country. But Canada isn't really ruled by an opposition or inheritance. Were actually democratic so our name "can" be decieving. This also goes for other meanings.

Try to remain neutral when talking about politics - otherwise you end up falling into lies from either opposing governments or groups. If they are correct it's best to remain neutral even though it seems right to side with the "good" guys. This is why I have nothing against Americans and Middle east countries. But yeah - just a few notes and what not.

I'm out of this discussion (too much text - so little time).

, kelly.

[thepokemaniac 18]

^^ I guess names can really be deceiving, especially when they are out of context.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

it is to the West's detriment to label every guerilla group they don't like "terrorists". We should be more objective, and less subjective. quote>

Well, it is a convenient label. It's also a loaded term due to its negative connotation. Nations have gained their independence through "terrorist" tactics (e.g., Ireland).

And you know what they say. "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

[Kryptowhite 9]

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

In the Israeli-Palestinian issue, it is very complex. My inclination would be to give the land to the Jews, since they were there before the Musilims were.

quote>

But then we'd have to give america back to the native americans,  Austrialia back to the Aboriginals, Africa back to the Chimpanzee....

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Kryptowhite

But then we'd have to give america back to the native americansquote>

Except that the American government isn't constantly invading and occupying teritory the natives believe is theirs, and the natives aren't launching rockets from Indian reservations or blowing themselves up in crowded restauraunts in Manhattan. There's no conflict, so nothing needs resolving.

Besides, only about 1% of the population of the US is of native descent. For such a small minority, having everyone else up and leave, giving the entire country, nay, the entire continent (Canada and Latin America would have to get on board with this, too) back to them would be ridiculous. The number of Palestineans and the number of Israelis are far more equal.

[(x+x 20]

you were saying that palastine was owned by jews in past, you said many centeries ago, BUT, we are living in toaday, not in yesterday, what happened is happened, if every country should takes her lands that they had in many centeries ago, so red indians, should take america back, so as the inkas, and the turkich , should get the half of europe, and arab should take spain back, is that right?, does this seems resenebal?

what happened in past is history, we are in the 21st centery, in 2009,

[(x+x 20]

sorry for not reading all the comments,

[Kryptowhite 9]

Originally posted by: (x+x²²/x

you were saying that palastine was owned by jews in past, you said many centeries ago, BUT, we are living in toaday, not in yesterday, what happened is happened, if every country should takes her lands that they had in many centeries ago, so red indians, should take america back, so as the inkas, and the turkich , should get the half of europe, and arab should take spain back, is that right?, does this seems resenebal?

what happened in past is history, we are in the 21st centery, in 2009,

quote>

im curious. You are Palastinean, no?

Why do you believe that Palastineans have more claim to the land than Jews? I honestly have never heard in the media or in school what the Palastinean arguement is, other than that muslims have some religious significance in Jerusalem, but from my understanding, all religions are allowed to visit Jerusalem [GO Saladin! ]

[Jazzmaster 716]

In any case, all I can really say about the subject is that terrorism plots such as these are nothing really new...

Much like Hurricanes make such consistent landfall in the state of Florida, enormous masses of steel, glass and concrete shooting up thousands of feet into the sky have been prominent terrorist targets for quite a while now.  I even remember, after the 9/11 attacks, there was several rumors circulating of plots to target the Sears Tower (not the Willis Tower ).  So it's no suprise they'd target the Burj Dubai...I mean they've probably conetemplated The Empire State Building, The Petronas Towers, the Bank of China....it's nothing new!

oh btw look what my avatar is.....lol

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: (x²+2x³+x⁴)/x

you were saying that palastine was owned by jews in past, you said many centeries ago, BUT, we are living in toaday, not in yesterday, what happened is happened, if every country should takes her lands that they had in many centeries ago, so red indians, should take america back, so as the inkas, and the turkich , should get the half of europe, and arab should take spain back, is that right?, does this seems resenebal?

what happened in past is history, we are in the 21st centery, in 2009,

quote>

Okay, but in the same vein, you cold make the argument that Isreal was owned by Palistineans in the past. But that was way back in 1948. What happened in the past is history, this is the 21st century now.

Besides.... The English began conquering Ireland as early as 1171. The Irish did not regain their independence untl 1916 (and, according to some, they still do not fully have it). So one can hardly say there's any sort of implied statute of limitations on rightful ownership of territory, anyway. How long the territiory has been in the control of "foreign" people does not matter so much as does the collective opinion of the current residents of the territory. There are no Moors in Spain who want it back in their control. And the people of Northern Ireland have thus far preffered to stay part of the UK moreso than not (despite attempts in the past of some radicals to recapture it through terrorism).

[(x+x 20]

m curious. You are Palastinean, no? (posted by Kryptowhite)

no i'm not palastinian, i'm tunisian, but i'm arab too,