It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
No, none of the hijackers have turned up alive. Not one. Yes, in the days after 9/11, the FBI had a couple pictures of men with almost the same name as the hijackers in use. HOWEVER, that was corrected within a week of 9/11 and of the 19 as identified by the FBI two weeks after 9/11...NONE are alive.
Several major news organizations wrongly identified at least four pilots of Middle Eastern descent as likely hijackers. Two of the wrongly suspected pilots had Arabic names similar to those of two dead hijackers. A pilot living next door to one of them became a third wrong suspect. A pilot with the same last name became the fourth wrong suspect -- even though he'd been dead for a year. [Wall Street Journal]
the only people that do not accept this are people like you reading outdated and false information on conspiracy sites.
The FBI has named five hijackers on board Flight 11, whereas Ms Sweeney spotted only four. Also, the seat numbers she gave were different from those registered in the hijackers' names. [BBC News]
CNN reported that the men who hijacked the aircraft used phony IDs containing the names of real people living in Arab nations in the middle east.
The Saudi Airlines pilot, Saeed Al-Ghamdi, 25, and Abdulaziz Al-Omari, an engineer from Riyadh, are furious that the hijackers' "personal details" - including name, place, date of birth and occupation - matched their own. [Telegraph]
In September 2002, [FBI Director Robert Mueller] told CNN twice that there is "no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers." [Insight]
We are told that the group that planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks were highly trained (possibly by the CIA) experts, with knowledge of how to steal identities and forge fake IDs, yet at the same time we are being told that these men were incapable of correctly filling in US visa applications.
We are also being told that they spent the night before the attack getting drunk in bars, making noise, screaming insults at the "infidels", and doing everything they could to attract attention to themselves. They used the credit cards issued in their stolen names, allowed their driver's licenses with the stolen names to be photocopied, and used public library computers to send emails back and forth using their stolen names signed to unencrypted messages about their plans to steal aircraft and crash them into buildings, then decorated their apartments with absurdly obvious props such as a crop dusting manual to the point where the whole affair reads like a low budget "B" detective movie from the 1930s.
In short, these men did everything they could to make sure everyone knew who they were, or more to the point, who they were pretending to be.
Many of the investigators believe that some of the initial clues that were uncovered about the terrorists' identities and preparations, such as flight manuals, were meant to be found. A former high-level intelligence official told me, "Whatever trail was left was left deliberately-for the F.B.I. to chase." [The New Yorker]
We don't know who planned 9/11 attacks.
But we do know who they wanted us to think they were.
We do know who they intended America to blame for the attacks.
Tracking the 19 Hijackers
What are they up to now?
At least 9 of them survived 9/11
A former high-level intelligence official told me, "Whatever trail was left
was left deliberately--for the F.B.I. to chase." New Yorker 10/1/01 by Seymour Hersh
MANY 9-11 "HIJACKERS" ARE STILL ALIVE.
The world's media has reported that many of the so-called hijackers "fingered" by the FBI are still alive. For example the BBC (British Broadcasting Cooperation) carried this report:
Good for you! your information is correct, I thought ATS had rules on people who deliberately post false information. He could have google that information in seconds but chose not to.
Then you might want to step back and consider that maybe I have my facts straight. I have that BBC article on my favorites...as well as the articles that cleared up the intial misunderstandings....something you seem to lack.
A five-year-old story (which would be the BBC story dated 23Sep2001) from our archive has been the subject of some recent editorial discussion here. The story, written in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, was about confusion at the time surrounding the names and identities of some of the hijackers. This confusion was widely reported and was also acknowledged by the FBI.
The story has been cited ever since by some as evidence that the 9/11 attacks were part of a US government conspiracy.
We later reported on the list of hijackers, thereby superseding the earlier report. In the intervening years we have also reported in detail on the investigation into the attacks, the 9/11 commission and its report.
We’ve carried the full report, executive summary and main findings and, as part of the recent fifth anniversary coverage, a detailed guide to what’s known about what happened on the day. But conspiracy theories have persisted. The confusion over names and identities we reported back in 2001 may have arisen because these were common Arabic and Islamic names
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) — Saudi Arabia acknowledged for the first time that 15 of the Sept. 11 suicide hijackers were Saudi citizens, but said Wednesday that the oil-rich kingdom bears no responsibility for their actions
(AP) The FBI has resolved questions about the identities of the 19 hijackers involved in the Sept. 11 attacks and has discovered places outside the United States where the conspiracy was planned, FBI Director Robert Mueller said Friday
Saudi Arabian officials and others have questioned whether some of the hijackers identified by the FBI in the weeks after the attacks used stolen identifications. Mueller said those questions have been answered
We at this point definitely know the 19 hijackers who were responsible," he said. "We have been successful in working with our foreign counterparts in identifying places where the conspiracy we believe was hatched as well as others who may have been involved in the conspiracy
Originally posted by WonderwomanUSA
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
Well you just showed how BBC sold out to the United States corporate proganda machines, nothing new here. BBC said they were confused, lol, like when they reported WTC 7, twenty min before it exploded to dust. I supposes they were confused then to. You can keep reading that garbage and you can believe in what you want, however you will not convert me to become ignorant, and uninformed, sorry you wasted so much time presenting another BBC lie.
This column is really most unsatisfying. It seems to be political spin. Real journalism would be to further investigate the issues raised. For instance, who are the men you pictured in the article? What is their current status?
Changing the photo caption at this late date seems to be inappropriate. This redaction of a historical and controversial news article smacks of Big Brother and the Ministry of Truth.
This has never struck us as an idea that made much sense, especially if you believe the US Government were behind 9/11. If you were constructing a fake terrorist attack because you wanted to attack Afghanistan, or Iraq, then wouldn’t you involve a few Afghans or Iraqis? But no, we’re supposed to believe that they made them inconvenient Saudis, instead.
Originally posted by rich23
reply to post by jdub89
First, this is well off-topic.
Second, that video is the dumbest I've seen in a long time. Why? The annotations say "this can only mean that the plane fired missiles into the building". (My emphasis)
No. It could mean a variety of things, among them possibly a static discharge between the plane and building. I don't know what it means, but I do know that missiles are NOT the only conclusion to be drawn from this, and I think they're probably the most preposterous. Why, if you're about to crash a 500mph airliner into the building, would you fire a missile at the very last second?
I think I'd go with the theory that it was a light effect from a holographic projection before I went with "airliners fired missiles". And while I have a lot of respect for John Lear (now, sadly, banned from this forum), I'm far from convinced by the holographic projection hypothesis.
The video you posted then loops this footage with an increasingly distorted loop of "Kashmir" (WHY do people have to have music soundtracks? Does everything have to have dumb MTV production values?) and I stopped viewing. If I missed anything... I don't care.
Funny how you have seemed to miss all the threads where the molten metal has been discussed appearantly. But, to recap, we know that there were fires in the bottom of the pile, we know that air was able to enter the bottom of the pile through the subway tunnels, we know that there was tons of aluminum used in the construction of the towers, and we know that the fires in the base of the pile were hot enough to melt aluminum. No thermite, no C-4, no Semtex, no super secret moose and squirrel Hush A Bombs needed.
Originally posted by outsider13
[This is the first time I have ever heard anyone claim that the molten metal in the WTC wreckage was aluminum. How do you know it was aluminum? From what I understand, aluminum does not glow red when molten. I'd really like to know where you got this information, because I've been hearing and reading over and over again that molten steel was found at the WTC wreckage and seen pouring out of the side of the building, tons of it in fact, and the official explanation of jet-fuel fires cannot account for a single drop of it.