Talk:Reactions to the September 11 attacks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Muslim celebrations[edit]

Footnote 26. is a dead link. Besides this, there is no mention of this newsartcle on the ARD Homepage. I think ist is fake and should be deleted and so should the paragraph which refers to the footnote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.127.115.146 (talk) 18:23, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 26. is a dead link. Besides this, there is no mention of this newsartcle on the ARD Homepage. I think ist is fake and should be deleted and so should the paragraph which refers to the footnote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnheuserBusch (talk • contribs) 18:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged Palestinian celebrations? Alleged? There is nothing alleged about it. Those celebrations occured, and sticking alleged in front Palestinian Celebrations seems to be intended to shield a particular group from well-deserved criticism.74.141.154.28 (talk) 21:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also assuming this was true: said, "The woman seen cheering (Nawal Abdel Fatah) stated afterwards that she was offered cake if she celebrated on camera" Lets assume that was true. That would mean the person offering cake was celebrating and others joined in with his celebration. If the person joins in or not is still up to them. if someone died would they still feel like celebrating? Clearly they did. That still means a celebration no matter how you look at it. All she proves with this statement is the mechanics of how all celebrations start.


Also, from the video I will link the statement from one of those celebrating stated, "This is a sweet from Osama bin Laden"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-9JpRytCx0&google_comment_id=z12qgrdxtzbwdntvd23egl4a0n30vnrd3
--OxAO (talk) 18:02, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The archive page for the TV report moved to a new location; I updated the link. The Panorama/Das Erste investigation found exactly what's stated and attributed in the article, and what was also reported at the time by Der Spiegel (an additional source which I added): that the celebrations in Jerusalem were isolated in a largely quiet street, and that the woman shown in the footage claimed later that she was offered cake to celebrate. Both Der Spiegel (Germany's most widely circulated weekly news magazine) and Das Erste (Germany's second largest public broadcaster) are reliable sources. Unfortunately the video link to the ARD report is no longer available, but the text is. If the reports are accurate, it's still possible that some individuals who were incited to celebrate knew what they were celebrating, of course.--Eloquence* 22:12, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All that proves is a man did help start the celebration it doesn't mean there wasn't a celebration. You never heard of the expression "the life of the party" it means an individual that gets the celebration started. Also, in the video above a British journalist in the same video shown one man saying, "This is a sweet from Osama bin Laden"
--OxAO (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Extra content[edit]

I believe extra content can be derived from the following source - [1]. JaakobouChalk Talk 10:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Where is the blood donation content and why was it removed? JaakobouChalk Talk 10:19, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a lot of stuff has come from that I think already, there could well be more (it seems to be quite a good round up). As for the blood content, I have no idea where or when that went. I wouldn't have a problem with a line to the effect "Yasser Arafat made a public show of donating blood, although it was later suggested that no actual blood was taken" (or - "that it had been set up for the cameras"). Please don't reinsert it though as a way of having a go at Arafat for being a fraud or whatever. PR games and photo-ops like that are pretty frequent in the real world and are often done for good motives, eg to be genuinely symbolic of sympathy/empathy or, where it would help, pour encourager les autres. Let's just state the facts and people can make their own mind up either way, yes? --Nickhh (talk) 12:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The blood donation content was never added to this article (as far as I remember). Like Nickhh, I'm OK with adding the content as long as it's not undue weight. Imad marie (talk) 05:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mind the question, but why wasn't it added in the merger? JaakobouChalk Talk 06:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you directing the question to me? Well as far as I remember no one in the merge discussion suggested to add this particular material, and I don't have an answer why no one suggested that. Imad marie (talk) 16:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nawal Abdel Fatah[edit]

There is something I do not understand. THe article claims that "the woman seen cheering (Nawal Abdel Fatah) stated afterwards that she was offered cake if she celebrated on camera", while "The Independent" quotes her when she is quoted saying: "America is the head of the snake; America always stands by Israel in its war against us" [2]. I wonder which story is the correct one.Jeff5102 (talk) 11:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The translation links don't seem to be working so I can't get into the Spiegel piece, but going from the extracts I'm not sure there's necessarily a contradiction, is there? Having said that quotes and attribution often get mangled and confused as they pass through the news media (it's likely the quotes originally came from wire copy). I'm not sure any of us are going to able to judge that though either way. If it's been reported in a reliable source, we just have to take what they say. --Nickhh (talk) 14:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you admit that "quotes and attribution often get mangled and confused as they pass through the news media" why would you keep that sentence in at all? This is very revealing of the contriving that is going on to make this article PC, i.e. overly protective of the Muslim reaction. It is such a strange thing to do. Pointing out positive reaction from the Muslim world does not imply that every Muslim was glad it happened. But to ignore the source of this attack is to alter reality and protect a group that treats women like chattel, etc. --User:Susan.dicey.k (talk) 14:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page fully protected[edit]

Page fully protected per recent edit warring. Hash it out here, folks. Tan | 39 16:50, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico should be under Western world[edit]

BREAKING NEWS: Mexico is a Western country, just like the rest of Latin America. It shouldn't be under "Rest of the World" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.80.183.230 (talk) 16:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli reaction[edit]

I think we should add the Israeli reaction in more detail. Netanyahu, the former prime minister, replied: “It's very good.” Then he edited himself: “Well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.” Many viewed that as disrespectful given the tragedy [3] BrotherSulayman (talk) 12:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC) ion[reply]

How is Netanyahu's off-the-record reaction, who wasn't even Prime Minister back then, more important than the reaction of the actual prime Minister, let alone the whole people of Israel's reaction? A national day of mourning was declared. That can only be said of Israel and Ireland. Bootsielon (talk) 8:49, 2 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.134.66.0 (talk)

Talk about distorting, "BrotherSulayman". Netanyahu said "very good" and then edited him when asked HOW THE ATTACKS WOULD AFFECT THE US-ISRAEL RELATIONS. Some people are just seeking ways to delegitimise Israel at every possibility. Sheesh... Jewnited (talk) 18:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

western wolrd ??????[edit]

so cuba, mexico and israel are part of western world, interesting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasmanis (talk • contribs) 05:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Israel could arguably be placed into the "western world' but Cuba, most certainly not. Cuba is a dictatorship and does not share the same values as the West such as democracy and freedoms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.242.242 (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When did Japan become a part of the West? Whoever wrote this entry must have been using a different definition of the word "Western World" than the one that is commonly accepted.74.141.154.28 (talk) 21:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim celebrations in US?[edit]

I'm sure this is just Ann Coulter being her usual idiot self, but she claims there were pro-attack celebrations by Muslims in the US. Any actual evidence of this? --TheTruthiness (talk) 00:27, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That rude comment coming from a guy who says on their talk page 'Don't let grumpy users scare you off, Learn from others, Play nicely with others'. Wow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.145.142.85 (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not name call or act hostile toward others, as it is against Wiki's beliefs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.242.242 (talk) 16:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to disappoint the person smearing Ann Coulter, but CNN ran a report about "American" Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks74.141.154.28 (talk) 21:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Citation needed, there is nothing on CNN about it. All I can find are condemnations by Muslim leaders and candlelight vigils at mosques. BrotherSulayman (talk) 02:08, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Canada?[edit]

How come this article does not mention anything about Canada's reaction to September 11? Canada has done more than any other nation during these events. EelamStyleZ // TALK 02:09, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Western World: Australia citation[edit]

Citation 9 doesn't seem to mention anything about Australia's response to 9/11. It's a New York Times article about Kevin Rudd's victory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.198.150 (talk) 03:02, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey in Islamic World?[edit]

Turkey is not an islamic country, Turkey is a secular country therefore it should be included in the Rest of the world section — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.101.76.193 (talk) 00:16, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of Western world?[edit]

What is defining the Western World on this article? Bulgaria in 2001 was not in the European Union, so I don't see why it is in the Western World while also former Communist, also Orthodox Ukraine is in "rest of the world" '''tAD''' (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Reaction articles[edit]

See this discussion regarding "reaction" articles. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:14, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Reactions to the September 11 attacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:57, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article link not working, cannot find any other links/references[edit]

The external link for this quote, "North Korea: A spokesperson for the North Korean Foreign Ministry in Pyongyang was quoted by the state-run news agency KCNA as saying: "The very regretful and tragic incident reminds it once again of the gravity of terrorism. As a UN member, the DPRK is opposed to all forms of terrorism and whatever support to it... and this stance will remain unchanged." is not working. Neither can I find any other references or links to this statement. It might be advisable to remove it. 205.155.225.1 (talk) 23:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photo removed[edit]

How does one know that she is lighting a candle in memory of 9/11 alone .she may just be lighting a candle for some other purpose WP:OR.Now I can show a picture of any women lighting a candle and saying that it 9/11 or an earthquake or anything.Erikshah (talk) 02:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for WP:Third Opinion:@David J Johnson:-- What do you think? Based on here, the photographer says that this is a photo of a candle vigil on 911 in Tehran. Also Time magazing has used the picture as related to the report on lighting candles in memory of 911. This is a request for third opinion. KachaleMouferferee (talk) 16:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Celebration[edit]

@David J Johnson:, The article does not mention or give reference about any celebration in any place other than Palestine; and some leaders' expressing happiness is not celebration, is it? KachaleMouferferee (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should note that the offending lines already have a citation needed tag. Likewise your "edit" does nothing to improve the situation. Case closed. David J Johnson (talk) 16:17, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Mr. Johnson. You are right. | The case is closed, so I can't take it to the Court of Appeal. :-) (JK). KachaleMouferferee (talk) 16:25, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Third Opinion[edit]

Pinging admins; not needed anymore-- Would one of you please settle this dispute in accordance with WP:Third_opinion? Based on which policy or guideline does this user revert the edit (the reverted edit was adding a picture with reference) and states that "We don't need [the] same image (which has been reverted before) on two articles."? I want an administrator to judge over this dispute for neutral dispute resolution. Thanks. If you don't want to provide the third opinion, please ask an administrator who is interested in doing so to do the job. Thanks a lot. KachaleMouferferee (talk) 15:49, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which policy or guideline requires us to avoid using the same picture (whose related claims have reference) in two articles? KachaleMouferferee (talk) 15:52, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This user, who has gone through at least two changes of User name before using the current name, appears to have WP:UNDUE emphasis on Iranian point of view. The picture, which has been deleted before by another editor, already appears in the Memorials and services for the September 11 attacks article. Other countries pictures could be added to the article(s) for balance, but Wikipedia is not a picture gallery. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 11:02, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have changed my username regularly for privacy and security reasons within Persian Wikipedia. This is not related to this issue and is not of anyone's business. The major problem is the tone of this user. "We do not want this or that." There is nothing called Iranian point of view; as Iran, except for some minority opinions which have led to nowhere except some court cases inside America, is not related to the matter. Moreover, I could agree that articles are not galleries; but I can't accept superior point of view. By the way, anyone can use the list of username changes and you have not discovered anything special. You should not read people's thoughts. And, we are all prone to neglect NPOV. The problem is rather something about your snobby snotty sort of behavior. Thanks. KachaleMouferferee (talk) 17:55, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You could simply say that the picture is more relevant to the article about memorials and not this article. But saying things as "last good" or such stuff is hidden insult. Regards to all. KachaleMouferferee (talk) 17:58, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not belong to me; nor does it belong to you. You are an editor and every other user is another editor, each having their own view. You use Royal we for pointing to your own opinion or understanding of the policies. I hereby admit that the picture is not related to the topic of the article and the case is closed.KachaleMouferferee (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

notice[edit]

hi,

I have noticed that a few people have been trying to politicize this page and direct attention towards the arab israeli conflict. Some users have deliberately tried to make a political statement by showing every other country in the muslim world as c ondemning the attacks execept for the Palestinian one, and listing it as 'Palestinians' with no flag. I am not taking sides in the arab israeli conflict but I wanted to point this disruptive editing out

Kawhilaugh42 (talk) 00:58, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In 2001, the PNA was not a recognized state. Palestinian celebrations were (as they were in 1990) very widely covered - and were in fact different from other Muslim regions. Icewhiz (talk) 03:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that was true, but now they are.Kawhilaugh42 (talk) 05:29, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The current situation is far from clear, however it is irrelevant - we treat state entities (or persons) as they were at the time - e.g. in Seven Years' War we don't go about treating the United States as a bona-fida state (nor do we treat George Washington as anything other than colonial Colonel Washington). Icewhiz (talk) 12:06, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The current situation is far from clear" are you good bro?

Kawhilaugh42 (talk) 21:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccessible sources for Leftist Reactions[edit]

Sources 7 and 8 require some sort of subscription to access the website (ProQuest), so I've added the verification needed template to that area. If someone is able to find an alternative source that would be very appreciated, especially as I somewhat doubt the authenticity of those claims.

I recall in September 2001 you had to hop on train of the War, or your point got removed. The term "leftist" was not used, it bluntly was: war or shut up. Mr. Bush Jr. had the desired answers ready and the 30 years of prelude - at that time known in the educated coastal areas - ceased to exist. I can't say if people changed in the days of 11 to 13 September. They disappeared from the media.--77.173.226.152 (talk) 23:00, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan reaction sentence fragment[edit]

The section on Taiwan's reaction ends with a nonsense sentence fragment: "It also stated that Bush's proclamation that the U.S. would do 'whatever it took to help Taiwan defend herself.'" Additionally, the sources cited for the Taiwan reaction do not state that Taiwan made any comment about U.S. support for Taiwan. The sentence fragment should be removed from the article. 61.216.137.191 (talk) 00:29, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Flag: Please, remove this unwanted "Reactions" page[edit]

As you may know, "Reactions" sectors or columns, or even pages, and especially their list format and flags, are despised by many editors as unencyclopedic quotefarms sourced to primary sources such as Twitter, news channels, etc. Also, Every major Office holder and politician have mourned the death. Thus, this "Reactions" page should be trimmed from the Wikipedia Encyclopedia. 2401:4900:44C1:CA63:B62:3931:3073:5F34 (talk) 07:09, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Information about Colombia[edit]

According to this book, on page 87, "Colombian President Andres Pastrana attended a Mass at the presidential palace in Bogota and invited all Colombians to observe a minute of prayer to coincide with a prayer service in the National Cathedral of Washington." Dat1 607 (talk) 19:55, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Reactions_to_the_September_11_attacks&oldid=1202150982"