The September 11 Incidence - Essay Example

The September 11 Incidence Introduction The September 11, 2001 plane crash on the World Trade Center in New York is one of the most tragic plane crashes in world history. The event claimed several lives and destroyed millions of dollars worth of properties (Gard 2). The event saw two U.S. commercial planes crash on the twin tower building simultaneously, according to a television footage released minutes after the crash. Subsequent investigations revealed that it was a terrorist attack (Bodden 6). It was considered so after Osama Bin Laden made a pronouncement that the attack had been organized by the Al-Qaida terrorist group under his leadership (Posner 63). However, despite the blame being directed to Al-Qaida terrorist groups, some experts are skeptical of the position arguing that the incidence was an inside job and was therefore stage-managed, providing evidence to assert their argument (Fetzer Par. 1). The purpose of this paper is to examine why the attack on 9/11 on World Trade Center is considered duplicity and not a terrorist attack as was alleged by President Bush’s administration. It will also discuss the limitations associated with such opposing views, my understanding of the incidence, as well as why I consider my understanding better than the opposing views. Summary of opposing positions Those who opposed the argument that the incidence of September 11 was a terrorist attack mainly claim that the incidence was an inside job, stage-managed by the Bush administration (Fetzer Par. 2). They argue that the whole incidence was a video fakery that the Bush administration used to deceive the masses after stage-managing the incidence in order to get support for waging war against Al-Qaida in Afghanistan and Iraq (Fetzer Par. 4). After conducting a thorough analysis on the incidence, no evidence could be found to link Muslims to the attack. This is due to the fact that the government has since failed to provide concrete evidence to show that the alleged hijackers did board the planes according to Elias Davidsson (Fetzer Par. 6). After conducting an analysis on the alleged phone calls made prior to the incidence, none could actually be authenticated as David Ray Griffin argues that the alleged phone calls were faked (Fetzer Par. 7). The government’s failure to produce the remaining parts of the four planes for inspection also raises questions. This is also the case with the envelop which has never been produced by the government since the incidence occurred (Fetzer Par. 8). In addition, they questions why there was too much delay in the deregistration of the corresponding flights such as Flights 11 and 77, which was effected in 2002 and Flights 93 and 175 deregistered four years after the incidence in 2005. Limitations of opposing views The opposing view appears to have several limitations, which makes their credibility questionable. Claiming that the whole incidence was stage managed in itself is a clear fallacy. For instance, the theorists fail to prove that the video footage was indeed a fakery in line with their claim. This is because they only try to make comparisons using the previous incidences without concentrating on the September 11 incidence. Furthermore, it may not be practicals for a rational person of George Bush’s caliber to terrorize his own people in the name of looking for a way of attacking other countries (Caraley 66). As a result of the incidence, several lives were lost and millions of people traumatized, its impact on the economy being tremendous. Certainly, this argument becomes a fallacy because it lacks evidence. Elias Davidson’s argument that no evidence has been provided to prove that Muslims actually committed that crime is limited to the extent that Osama bin Laden, the leader of the Al-Qaida group claimed responsibility for the attacks immediately after the incidence which show that Muslims actually committed the crime (Langley 43). Furthermore, Osama tried to call for all Muslim faithfuls to fight the US using any means possible (Langley 46). The fakery of phone calls by opponents is also limited in that they have not provided evidence to prove that the phone calls were indeed, faked. Furthermore, deregistration of the corresponding Flights must have been done procedurally; therefore it does not make the incidence a fakery. My understanding of the issue I am fully convinced that the September 11 incidence was an act of terrorism. This is because even before the incidence occurred, the US was already at war with the Bush administration based on his policies on Muslim countries, beginning with his support for Israel’s invasion of Palestine (Langley 31). This might have angered the Muslim community and the only way was to react by attacking the US, which they effectively executed under the leadership of Osama bin laden. Furthermore, Osama clearly claimed responsibility for the attacks immediately after the incidence, showing that the incidence was not stage managed, but was instead an act of terrorism. Moreover, some of the suspects of the attacks have been convicted for planning the attacks where they have defended their action terming it ‘blessed’ and ‘great’ according to CNN Justice (par. 1). One such convict, according to CNN Justice, is Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay. Certainly, they could not have sworn with such strong words if they could not have participated in the act. Reasons why my understanding is better than the opposing views’ understanding I believe any allegation should have facts to either prove of dispel an allegation. As such, I consider my understanding better than those of the opposing views do since mine are based on facts, and not mere allegations of the opposing views aimed at benefiting the political class. For instance, the US being a peaceful country that opposes acts of terrorism could not have used such a barbaric act to terrorize its own people as alleged by the opposing views (Langley 92). The US as a superpower has been at the forefront in advocating for peace and security in the whole continent. As such, it was not practicable for the government to compromise its peace for political gain as alleged by opposing view. Furthermore, the masterminds of the attack have also claimed responsibility for carrying out the attack with some swearing in bold daylight they actually planned the attack (Hunter Par. 3). This is a fact that cannot be disputed by anyone. Therefore, it would be important that the opposing side table facts rather than mere allegations to prove their point that the incidence was a fakery. Conclusion It is true that the 9/11 incidence is an issue creating a dilemma in the political circles throughout US and beyond. This is because some people have considered the incidence as a mere fakery by Bush Administrations so as to instill fear in American citizens so as to support his political policies such as attacking Afghanistan and Iraq something they argue would never have happened. Nevertheless, these arguments have many limitations since they lack strong evidence to support these allegations. For instance, the opposing view has failed to show clearly how bush administration organized and excited the act. They rather rely only on past incidences and photos, which certainly are not convincing. All that having been said, irrespective of the position taken, it has to be acknowledged that the 9/11 incidence was very tragic leading to the loss of thousands of innocent lives as well as properties worth millions of shillings. Leaders and the US citizens must understand that terrorism is a reality and take every precaution possible at preventing any terrorist attack in the country. This would see the US become a very secure country to live in and do business. Work Cited Bodden, Valerie. The 9/11 Terror Attacks. Makato, MN: The Creative Company. 2007 Print. Caraley, Dometrios. September 11, terrorist attacks, and U.S. foreign policy. New York, NY: Academy of Political Science. 2002 Print. CNN Justice. Gitmo Prisoners Defend Blessed 9/11 Attack. March 10, 2009. Web. 2 Nov. 2012: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-03-10/justice/gitmo.terror.prisoners_1_terror-attacks-civilians-al-qaeda-terror-network?_s=PM:CRIME Fetzer, Jim. Inside Job: More Proof of 9/11 Duplicity. Veterans Today: Military & Foreign Journal. July 11, 2011. Web. 2 Nov. 2012: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/11/inside-job-more-proof-of-911-duplicity/ Gard, Carolyn. The Attack on the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. New York, NY: The Rosen Publishing Group. 2003 Print. Hunter, Brock M. Did the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US accomplish any goals? September 14, 2010: Web. 2 Nov. 2012: http://www.helium.com/debates/403089-did-the-911-terrorist-attacks-on-the-us-accomplish-any-goals/side_by_side Langley, Andrew. September 11: Attack on America. Minneapolis, MN: capstone, 2006 Print. Posner, Richard. Preventing Surprise Attacks: Intelligence Reform in the Wake of 9/11. Lanham, ML: Rowman & Littlefield. 2005 Print. Read More