What's the hijacker alive theory?
- Thread starter abenja1
- Start date
-
- Tags
- conspiracy theories
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,354
If you need more, there's this: http://www.911myths.com/html/still_alive.html
I once debated a twoofer on this subject, and every point he raised was covered by that page, and more.
I once debated a twoofer on this subject, and every point he raised was covered by that page, and more.
The FBI had a list of suspects from the manifests almost immediately, but confirming these were their real identities took longer. So the first list they put out on September 14th contained names and a few biographical details only, no pictures.
They knew some of the hijackers were pilots. But which ones? Public record searches led them to people like Waleed Ahmed al-Shehri; a pilot, a similar name to one of the people on the passenger manifests (Waleed Mohamed al-Shehri), who had trained in Florida at a time when the first pilots were in the country.
The FBI weren't officially releasing pictures yet, but either some were leaked to the media, or the media uncovered them for themselves. On September 16th 2001 a CNN report ran some of these, with pictures of the wrong individuals for Wail al-Shehri, Abdulaziz al-Omari and Saeed al-Ghamdi. I believe the first one was of Waleed Ahmed al-Shehri, and all three men came forward in the next day or two to say they had seen their photos in the press but this was nothing to do with them.
There were several similar stories around at the time, though not so definitive. Like this, for instance:
This Salem Ibrahim Ahmed Alhazmi has a different name to the hijacker, and doesn't explain how he matches the suspect in any other way. So how can we tell it's the same man?
Notably all these stories appeared before the FBI released an official list of hijacker photos on September 27th. After that, nothing, at least as far as I know, so the whole thing was over in less than two weeks.
This was enough for the truthers to run with it, though, and they now not only repeat these old stories, but pretend they are solid proof. David Ray Griffin said in "The 9/11 Commission Report-Omissions and Distortions", ofor instance, that the hijacker identifications have been "shown to be incorrect". Nafeez Ahmed has claimed "it is now known that at least 10 of the 19 alleged hijackers are alive according to multiple, credible news accounts by the BBC, CNN, the Telegraph, the Independent, and other international media."
You won't see people like Griffin explain why the supposedly still-alive Saeed al-Ghamdi has appeared in at least two al Qaeda videos, though, including a video will where he says:
I've also never seen a truther book address the fact that in 2002 Saudi Arabia confirmed the US list:
They also have no explanation for media reports from families of people like Wail and Waleed al-Shehri, who even if they don't believe they were involved, still accept that they were involved. Other than the standard excuse of "well it must be a lie", that is.
But the reality is if you look at everything then there's plenty of evidence to support the FBI list, and extremely little to support the "still alive" claims. Most truthers know this, which is why they don't make such a big deal of it any more, and I think over time it'll just fade away. In the meantime, you'll find more points and sources for the above starting here.
They knew some of the hijackers were pilots. But which ones? Public record searches led them to people like Waleed Ahmed al-Shehri; a pilot, a similar name to one of the people on the passenger manifests (Waleed Mohamed al-Shehri), who had trained in Florida at a time when the first pilots were in the country.
The FBI weren't officially releasing pictures yet, but either some were leaked to the media, or the media uncovered them for themselves. On September 16th 2001 a CNN report ran some of these, with pictures of the wrong individuals for Wail al-Shehri, Abdulaziz al-Omari and Saeed al-Ghamdi. I believe the first one was of Waleed Ahmed al-Shehri, and all three men came forward in the next day or two to say they had seen their photos in the press but this was nothing to do with them.
There were several similar stories around at the time, though not so definitive. Like this, for instance:
This Salem Ibrahim Ahmed Alhazmi has a different name to the hijacker, and doesn't explain how he matches the suspect in any other way. So how can we tell it's the same man?
Notably all these stories appeared before the FBI released an official list of hijacker photos on September 27th. After that, nothing, at least as far as I know, so the whole thing was over in less than two weeks.
This was enough for the truthers to run with it, though, and they now not only repeat these old stories, but pretend they are solid proof. David Ray Griffin said in "The 9/11 Commission Report-Omissions and Distortions", ofor instance, that the hijacker identifications have been "shown to be incorrect". Nafeez Ahmed has claimed "it is now known that at least 10 of the 19 alleged hijackers are alive according to multiple, credible news accounts by the BBC, CNN, the Telegraph, the Independent, and other international media."
You won't see people like Griffin explain why the supposedly still-alive Saeed al-Ghamdi has appeared in at least two al Qaeda videos, though, including a video will where he says:
I've also never seen a truther book address the fact that in 2002 Saudi Arabia confirmed the US list:
They also have no explanation for media reports from families of people like Wail and Waleed al-Shehri, who even if they don't believe they were involved, still accept that they were involved. Other than the standard excuse of "well it must be a lie", that is.
But the reality is if you look at everything then there's plenty of evidence to support the FBI list, and extremely little to support the "still alive" claims. Most truthers know this, which is why they don't make such a big deal of it any more, and I think over time it'll just fade away. In the meantime, you'll find more points and sources for the above starting here.
Profanz
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2007
- Messages
- 932
None of the hijacker remains were DNA matched to their living family members as was done with 9/11 victims. For instance it is claimed all of the victims from the Pentagon were DNA identified and any remains that were left over that did not match were assumed to be the hijackers. Process of elimination. Another thing they did was match DNA to DNA the hijackers left behind in hotels or cars. But again the DNA from the hotel or car was never confirmed to be DNA from the identities said to be the hijackers. Just that the person who was in the car or the hotel was also on the plane. It is also unclear if any of the hijackers used stolen ID’s and which ones were stolen. It is also unclear if the pictures of all hijackers put in the paper shortly after 9/11 are actually pictures of the ones on the planes or pictures of identities they assumed. Just finding that the identities are dead or missing doesn’t mean they were on the plane. It could mean the identities were stolen from people already dead or killed by the real perpetrators. I’ve never seen a list of hijackers and how each and every one of them was individually positively identified.
You're stating that as a fact, but I think what you really mean is "I've not heard about it so I'm assuming it never happened", right?
Clippy
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2008
- Messages
- 608
Is there evidence that it happened? IIRC, the FBI turned down the offer from one of the families for a DNA sample. Would be interested to know what the most up to date info is on this DNA identification. Thanks.
Profanz
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2007
- Messages
- 932
Here is a question.
If the evil doers were able to fake so much in this inside job, what makes you think they couldn't simply fake the DNA matching for the hijackers?
It seems to me, the easiest thing in the world for the USG evil doers to do, would be to fake DNA result, to show a 100% match between the samples and the family members. So why didn't they?
Oh thats right, these super evil doers were also the DUMBEST ****ING CRIMINALS IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!!!!!
TAM
If the evil doers were able to fake so much in this inside job, what makes you think they couldn't simply fake the DNA matching for the hijackers?
It seems to me, the easiest thing in the world for the USG evil doers to do, would be to fake DNA result, to show a 100% match between the samples and the family members. So why didn't they?
Oh thats right, these super evil doers were also the DUMBEST ****ING CRIMINALS IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!!!!!
TAM
The CNN quote represents the situation in February 2003. If you're going to state as fact that "None of the hijacker remains were DNA matched to their living family members as was done with 9/11 victims" then you'll need something more up-to-date, otherwise this is no more than an assumption.
It's also an assumption that is questioned elsewhere. Matt Taibbi says in The Great Derangement, for example, that he asked Nail as-Jubier in the Saudi embassy in Washington about this, and was told: "For God's sake, they're all dead. We settled this question ages ago. We even have DNA tests to confirm it."
Now, maybe Taibbi's wrong. Maybe he misquoted him, maybe as-Jubier was referring to the general identification-by-exclusion in articles such as the one you quoted.
But on the other hand, maybe this is exactly what it seems, and further DNA tests have been carried out.
Either way, your saying "None of the hijacker remains were DNA matched to their living family members" doesn't make it so, and you'll need more than a 5-year-old article to prove that point.
Profanz
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2007
- Messages
- 932
Here is a question.
If the evil doers were able to fake so much in this inside job, what makes you think they couldn't simply fake the DNA matching for the hijackers?
It seems to me, the easiest thing in the world for the USG evil doers to do, would be to fake DNA result, to show a 100% match between the samples and the family members. So why didn't they?
Oh thats right, these super evil doers were also the DUMBEST ****ING CRIMINALS IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!!!!!
TAM
It seems to me that you have no positive identification of the hijackers so you are throwing a tantrum for lack of anything else.
Clippy
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2008
- Messages
- 608
Isn't the onus on you to provide evidence that it happened?
Well given it unlikely that Mike works for the NYC coroner, or the FBI, I suggest it is not upon him to prove it.
Since you are the one questioning it, the onus is either on you Clippy, or upon the FBI or Medical examiner, so why are you asking anyone else to prove it???
TAM
Since you are the one questioning it, the onus is either on you Clippy, or upon the FBI or Medical examiner, so why are you asking anyone else to prove it???
TAM
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 13,092
Let's see...
You all are the ones with all the stupid questions and assumptions. You all are the ones who question the "official story". You all are the ones who need to prove things. Anything. Anything at all. We're all done.
So, to answer yet another stupid question...
Nope.
Onus of proof is still on you. And lack of proof is still your hallmark.
"Hallmark Twoofers: When you can't be bothered to send the minimally required."
"The hijackers are still alive!" is a popular Truther claim because it sounds so dramatic and revealing. It implies all kinds of possibilities (that the planes were not hijacked; that the planes didn't crash; that the hijackers were actually people other than islamic terrorists; that the hijackers were misidentified) without specifying which of them is being claimed. Naturally, the people raising the claim want to suggest one of the first three conclusions.
I've found the best counter-argument is "No, the hijackers are dead. We know this because the hijackers by definition were aboard aircraft that crashed with no survivors."
Do not efforts to get you to discuss the question in terms of "are the hijackers alive or not?" by arguing "what about [name]?" and similar things. Just keep pointing out, "Hijackers have to be aboard a plane to hijack it. The planes crashed. All aboard were killed. Therefore the hijackers are not alive." Repeat it until they have to (a) admit that they're actually claiming that there were no hijackers on the planes (e.g. remote control planes) and/or the planes did not crash, or (b) clarify that what they are actually claiming is that people who were identified as hijackers turned out not to be hijackers at all.
That claim (b), even if it were true, is a lot less dramatic -- instead of "the hijackers are alive!" it's now "the hijackers were misidentified!" From there, it can be further explained that a few of the hijackers were misidentified during a short period of time immediately after the event.
In the end, through the power of clarity, the actual claim is usually revealed to be: "People with the same names as the hijackers are alive!" To which a reasonable answer is, "so what?"
Respectfully,
Myriad
I've found the best counter-argument is "No, the hijackers are dead. We know this because the hijackers by definition were aboard aircraft that crashed with no survivors."
Do not efforts to get you to discuss the question in terms of "are the hijackers alive or not?" by arguing "what about [name]?" and similar things. Just keep pointing out, "Hijackers have to be aboard a plane to hijack it. The planes crashed. All aboard were killed. Therefore the hijackers are not alive." Repeat it until they have to (a) admit that they're actually claiming that there were no hijackers on the planes (e.g. remote control planes) and/or the planes did not crash, or (b) clarify that what they are actually claiming is that people who were identified as hijackers turned out not to be hijackers at all.
That claim (b), even if it were true, is a lot less dramatic -- instead of "the hijackers are alive!" it's now "the hijackers were misidentified!" From there, it can be further explained that a few of the hijackers were misidentified during a short period of time immediately after the event.
In the end, through the power of clarity, the actual claim is usually revealed to be: "People with the same names as the hijackers are alive!" To which a reasonable answer is, "so what?"
Respectfully,
Myriad
Last edited:
Clippy
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2008
- Messages
- 608
Well given it unlikely that Mike works for the NYC coroner, or the FBI, I suggest it is not upon him to prove it.
Since you are the one questioning it, the onus is either on you Clippy, or upon the FBI or Medical examiner, so why are you asking anyone else to prove it???
TAM
Profanz made a falsifiable assertion based on a news article. Do you expect a new article coming out every year that updates the fact that nothing is new? It's funny how stroppy debunkers get when asked for evidence that supports the official version.
ETA: T.A.M., I'm not calling you stroppy.
Last edited:
Clippy and Profanz, are any of the hijackers alive? How could they be, since in order to be hijackers they had to be aboard the planes, and the planes crashed with no survivors?
Respectfully,
Myriad
Clippy
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2008
- Messages
- 608
The issue here is whether the DNA samples match the names given. If not, then those identified as the hijackers may still be alive.
To answer the question in the subject, the hijackers are alive theory is wrong and really a cowards way for some in the bowel movement to claim there were no planes without having to say it. Saying there were remote controlled planes has been shown time and again to be impossible so the idiots that claim the hijackers are alive are really no planers at heart like KT, wood, Fetzer, Renyolds, Web Fairy, Nico Haupt, Dylan Avery (unless he recanted about the hijackers being alive), etc...
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
This is incorrect. One passenger on Flight 77 - a two year old girl - was never DNA matched because nothing of her was ever recovered.
And we know who was on the aircraft because of the flight manifests. It's called collaborating evidence.
It was unclear about two days after 9/11. Seriously, when will you people catch up with the rest of the world? The FBI long ago determined that all of the 9/11 hijackers operated under their own names, with legitimate passports.
Again, get with today. CNN jumped the gun on the photographs. They were never official identification. The FBI released photographs on September 27th. They were confirmed identities of the confirmed hijackers. No assumption.
This is nonsense.
Let's look over the chain of evidence for some of the hijackers shall we?
1. Evidence from friends and family of Radicalisation.
2. Evidence of training in Al Qaeda terrorist camps.
3. Evidence of being selected for the "Planes Operation".
4. Evidence of training for "Planes Operation" and creation of martyr videos.
5. Evidence of entry into USA and link up with other members of "Planes Operation".
6. Evidence of purchasing of tickets for one of the hijacked flights on 9/11.
7. Evidence of having boarded one of the flights on 9/11.
8. Evidence of having been one of those that hijacked the aircraft.
9. Evidence that the aircraft was deliberately crashed into the target.
10. Evidence that the individual is now deceased.
That's not assumption, that's a chain of evidence that leads to a single undeniable conclusion. Several of the hijackers have this much evidence. If some of them were the real article that renders any "inside job" or "stolen identity" argument moot.