A Guide for the Undecided. Brief Analysis of Common Theories Part 4: The Hijackers

ref

Master Poster
ref
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
2,685
Here comes the last part. after this I will be making some kind of a compilation. This part focuses on the hijackers. Not all claims are addressed, but some of the most common ones.

Once again, an "In Brief" section is provided with each claim. This gives a quick glimpse of the explanation behind any particular theory. Further readings are also linked with every claim.

Here goes part 4: The Hijackers.




The Hijackers

  • Claim: The passport of Satam al-Suqami couldn’t have survived the inferno and collapse. It was found in a grid search and it was in too good condition.
Discussed here:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/911_TerrTrav_Ch2.pdf
http://www.sacred-texts.com/ame/911/911tr/012604.htm
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/09/17/inv.investigation.terrorism/index.html
[FONT=&quot]http://www.911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html
[/FONT]

In Brief: Some reports have falsely claimed this was Atta’s passport. The passport never went through the inferno and collapse. A passerby in a suit picked it up and gave it to a NYPD detective Yuk H. Chin shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed. WTC 2 collapsed only shortly thereafter. Mr. Chin gave the passport further to the FBI on 9/11.

Lots of things from the planes ended up on the streets below before the collapses. Amongst them was a hijacker’s passport.
http://www.pbase.com/peteburke73/september_11&page=1

On September 18th a CNN report stated the following:

“Police and the FBI completed a grid search of area streets near the site of the World Trade Center looking for clues, said Barry Mawn, director of New York's FBI office. The searchers found several clues, he said, but would not elaborate. Last week, a passport belonging to one of the hijackers was found in the vicinity of Vesey Street, near the World Trade Center.”

The report first talked about a grid search, then in the next sentence it mentioned that the passport was found last week. This has lead to a false conclusion, that a grid search produced the passport finding.
​

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: Several of the hijackers are reported to be alive.
Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/still_alive.html
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/index.php?title=Hijackers
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html

In Brief: The story was first reported by the BBC and several other news agencies in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. BBC updated their story in 2006. The update clearly states:
​
“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. We later reported on the list of hijackers, thereby superseding the earlier report. The confusion over names and identities we reported back in 2001 may have arisen because these were common Arabic and Islamic names.”

The FBI and the 9/11 commission have confirmed, that the hijackers responsible for the attacks have been positively identified. There has been no issue of doubt raised by further reviews to the hijackers identities.

 If the alive theories were true, it would be easy to just go and interview them. This has not been done, but the issue has been avoided giving many excuses. This claim is still alive, the hijackers are not.
​


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The hijackers outwitted the most highly sophisticated military defence in the world. It could not have been possible without help, NORAD stand down order and distracting war games.
Discussed here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70300
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://www.911myths.com/html/stand_down.html

In Brief: North America is surrounded by an area called the Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) is responsible for the intercept of aircraft inside the ADIZ. All preparations were made only concerning aircraft entering the USA from outside its borders.
​
Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) and Transport Canada handle the ADIZ clearances, so a request for intercept from one of these agencies precedes any action by NORAD against civilian aircraft. NORAD do not directly monitor air traffic inside the ADIZ themselves.

None of the aircraft hijacked on September 11 entered the ADIZ zone surrounding North America. The hijackings took place inside continental USA. Prior to September 11, there was no formal system in place for military intercepts of civilian aircraft outside the ADIZ. From 1991 to 2001 only one military intercept occurred over continental USA airspace, the Payne Stewart flight. The intercept took 81 minutes and the aircraft transponder remained on at all times.

All four aircraft hijacked on September 11 had their transponders turned off. In order to identify the hijacked aircraft, Air Traffic Controllers had to first cross-reference all of the aircraft appearing on the secondary radar screen with their correlating reading on the primary screen. This is an enormous task.

Failure by NORAD to intercept the hijacked planes on 9/11 was not caused by any orders. It was a result of enormous workload, lack of preparation against attacks from inside continental USA, complicated operating procedures and lack of time.

The exercises occurring on September 11 that involved NORAD were “Vigilant Guardian” and “Global Guardian”.

These were command post exercises. This means that all the battle positions that are normally not filled were filled. It was a rapid transition from an exercise into a real world situation. When the first reports of a hijacking were given, a rapid clarification was made with the words “is this real-world or exercise?” Once this clarification had been made, the exercises posed no further hindrance to NORAD’s response. The exercises actually enhanced the response, since all staff positions were already filled.

Special thanks to Andrew Burfield for his extensive NORAD analysis.

​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The names of the hijackers do not appear on the passenger manifests.
Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/no_hijackers_on_the_manifests.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/official_manifest_images.html
http://graphics.boston.com/news/packages/underattack/images/aa_flight_11_manifest.gif
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/OG00010.html

In Brief: The hijackers do not appear on the victim lists put together by CNN. Those were not the official passenger manifests. CNN specifically states that the hijackers are not included.

But Boston Globe obtained passenger manifests of the flights that departed from Boston only a few days after the attacks. The hijackers are included there. The official and complete passenger manifests of all flights were released as part of the Moussaoui trial. They do include every hijacker and their seat positions.
​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The hijackers couldn’t have flown the planes into their targets.
Discussed here:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...skthepilot186/

In Brief: The manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes.

They were not expert pilots, but they had some extensive training with simulators and smaller planes. Landing a plane is difficult. Flying it into something is much easier. They had the skills to do that.
​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The hijackers were from a cave. They couldn’t have pulled this through.
Discussed here:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/28/AR2005042801315.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Participants_in_the_September_11%2C_2001_attacks

In Brief: Mohamed Atta, the pilot of flight 11, came from a middle-class household in Egypt. In Hamburg, Germany, he earned his master's degree in architecture.

Marwan al-Shehhi, the pilot of flight 175, was from the United Arab Emirates and had joined the UAE army. Later when in Germany, he enrolled in a university with a military scholarship.

Hani Hanjour, the pilot of the Pentagon plane, was a son of a businessman in Saudi Arabia. He first arrived to USA already in 1991.

Ziad Jarrah, the pilot of the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania, was a son of an industrious, wealthy family in Beirut. Jarrah moved to Germany and studied aerospace engineering at the University of Applied Sciences in Hamburg.

15 other hijackers joined the pilots aboard the four airplanes. All but one were from Saudi Arabia, most were from families headed by tradesmen and civil servants, well-off, but not wealthy.

As for the planners, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed completed a degree in mechanical engineering in 1986. Osama Bin Laden earned a degree in civil engineering in 1979.

Caves do not describe these people.
​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: There were no hijackers involved.
Discussed here:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://www.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/112901/12279-1.shtml
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-11-sept11-remains_x.htm
http://www.911myths.com/html/official_manifest_images.html
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011027flight931027p5.asp

In Brief: The hijackers and their identities have not been in any doubt since late 2001. The known identities have survived many reviews. And these people were really on board the planes.

In New York City, medical examiners used DNA that FBI had collected from tiny traces of skin on the steering wheels of vehicles hired by the hijackers and from hair samples recovered from their hotel rooms to match body parts with three of the 10 hijackers who crashed there. The enormous destruction of the towers has made further identifications impossible, only 58% of all WTC victims have been identified.

In the Pentagon and Pennsylvania cases, nine genetic profiles that matched no known victims were presumed to be hijacker remains. All the people on board the planes are known, all the people at the crash sites are known. There is no question that the 9 remaining people are the hijackers.

We have official manifests that include the hijackers. We have multiple telephone calls that confirm the existence of the hijackers. We have security camera images that show the hijackers. We have DNA identification of several of them. We have 9 extra people besides identified victims at two crash sites.

There were hijackers involved.

​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The hijackers were not even devoted followers of Islam. They enjoyed drinking and lap dances.
Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/strip_clubs.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/28/AR2005042801315.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,906442,00.html
http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Fouda.html

In Brief: At first, it must be said that the reliability of these behaviour statements is in question. In some reports the identification of the actual hijackers is questionable, while in other reports the description of the very same event varies from source to source.

Nonetheless, while this kind of behaviour seems rather suspicious, a deeper look reveals that terrorists do not always act like one would expect.

Different sources report the following:

“Ziad Jarrah came from a secular Muslim family that was easygoing -- the men drank whiskey and the women wore short skirts about town and bikinis at the beach.”

“Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was a frequent visitor to Manila's red light district, including its karaoke bars and mirrored go-go clubs, where he introduced himself to women as a wealthy businessman from Qatar.”

“They must have assumed that the purifying nature of their approaching martyrdom gave them some sort of cosmic dispensation.”

"Their sense of dispensation was derived directly from the idea that they were engaged in jihad (holy struggle). Now you know, in jihad there are certain liberties allowed. I believe they took the liberty of making their own interpretation of these dispensations or liberties granted to the one making jihad."

It would seem, that so-called errant western behaviour does not exclusively mean that you cannot be a terrorist at the same time. Their suicide mission might be interpreted as a purifying event, making their earlier behaviour less damaging. And you have to keep in mind, that Islamic Law condemns the killing of innocent civilians. They were not following the strict rules of their religion there either.

​
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Recommended reading for the interested:

 http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
http://www.911myths.com/
http://www.debunk911myths.org/
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=64


See also:
Part 1: WTC
Part 2: The Pentagon
Part 3: Flight 93

 
Last edited:
Strange events throw up seemingly strange results. Example the passport, possibly survived the crash collapse etc

A few years ago when the Space Shuttle Columbia broke up on re-entry. Three fully playable commercial CDs were recovered from the wreckage. Two by Deep Purple and a third by the Band Rainbow (who had some former members of Deep Purple in it)

Closer to home (the two towers) Not one toilet or bathroom fitting was recovered from the rubble of either building. This is pointed out not as a matter of trivalising the event, but to highlight the randomness of some situations
 
apathoid said:
Great job, Ref. A few more interesting links:

27 year airline Captain weighs in on the hijackers
Amateur pilot hits Pentagon thrice in a full-motion flight simulator
Zip file of actual passenger mainifests
Der Spiegel's piece on the zombie hijackers(oldie but goldie)
Cory Lidle's passport
Click to expand...

Thanks apathoid.

I was actually going to include the "another expert" link but I forgot. I mentioned the amateur hitting Pentagon in my Pentagon part, but I didn't link the actual video. It's good to have the actual video link here.

The zip file of the passenger manifests is actually the same one, that I linked from the original Moussaoui trial exhibit page.

Thanks for the tips. I will include updated link lists in my compilation post.
 
ref, excellent work as always.

MG1962 said:
Strange events throw up seemingly strange results. Example the passport, possibly survived the crash collapse etc

A few years ago when the Space Shuttle Columbia broke up on re-entry. Three fully playable commercial CDs were recovered from the wreckage. Two by Deep Purple and a third by the Band Rainbow (who had some former members of Deep Purple in it)
Click to expand...
This is true, but this isn't even the most startling example. Also recovered from Columbia was a flight data recorder, nearly intact and containing useful information. The recorders are ruggedized for use in space but not particularly "crash survivable," simply because there is nothing that can be expected to survive a disaster of that magnitude. Even if it did, the possibility of salvage is slim in general. Thus, we don't bother.

This recorder was instrumental in the Columbia Accident Investigation Report. It contained the best engineering data in the moments preceding breakup, since in ordinary operations this is not downlinked, but rather read out manually after the Shuttle returns to Earth.

Want an even more bizarre coincidence? Some worms used in in-flight experiments actually survived the disaster.

Bottom line, these things are complicated and random. The notion that passports and bandannas happened to survive the airliner crashes isn't the slightest bit implausible, no matter what the nutters say.
 
to the moderators

Please mods, put Ref's reference threads in the stickies so everyone can have quick access to them.

S'il-vous-plaît. :D

Great work Ref. :)
 
Maybe we could wait until I make the compilation post, where every part is included in the same post. Then if that qualifies for a sticky post, that's fine with me :)
 
On the extreme end of the "random" scale...

The famous A-Bomb Dome is Hiroshima was almost directly underneath the epicentre of the atomic bomb, and yet it remained standing and partially intact when all other buildings in the area were annihilated.

-Gumboot
 
[QUOTE="ref, post: 2382092, member: 13639"]

ref said:

The FBI and the 9/11 commission have confirmed, that the hijackers responsible for the attacks have been positively identified. There has been no issue of doubt raised by further reviews to the hijackers identities.
Click to expand...

Sure, now they are saying there is no issue of doubt. But that's now what they were saying before:

"FBI Director Robert Mueller has acknowledged that some of those behind last week's terror attacks may have stolen the identification of other people, and, according to at least one security expert, it may have been "relatively easy" based on their level of sophistication."

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/21/inv.id.theft/
Click to expand...
Was the BBC subjected to political pressure to revise or retract their story? It really doesn't matter. The FBI has never had anything to offer us other than nineteen identities, which they themselves have admitted and which common sense experience proves can be easily stolen. Therefore whether the individuals found in the original BBC story match up to the identities provided by the FBI is irrelevant; the FBI still has not shown that the people who boarded the planes were who they say they were.

The one piece of evidence that would clearly show us all who the hijackers were is the surveillance video footage of the boarding gates of all four planes. Where is that footage? That that footage has disappeared, or was never made, is almost as much of an improbable coincidence as Suqami's passport surviving the crash of AAL11.

ref said:
If the alive theories were true, it would be easy to just go and interview them. This has not been done, but the issue has been avoided giving many excuses. This claim is still alive, the hijackers are not.
Click to expand...

That's a lot of assumptions you're making. You seem to assume the rest of the world is just like the good old USA. Has the Saudi government, a very weak regime completely dependent on the support of the US and Israel, been pressured to keep a lid on this story? Have the "hijackers" themselves, and their families-- ordinary middle class people-- been subjected to any pressure or "suggestions" that they keep a low profile on this issue? Has that pressure perhaps been augmented with a little incentive, maybe a large cash payment if they keep quiet-- you know, the combined carrot and stick?

And who exactly is going to travel to the Middle East and track these guys down? CNN and FOX News, the two outlets who shamelessly ran the fraudulent "dancing Palestinians" footage over and over on 9/11?

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/...tles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=Go
Or would it be the other reputable institutions of the mainstream media, like CBS and NBC, all of whom are completely committed to the official story of 9/11, and all of whom ignored the story of the "still alive" hijackers in the first place?

ref said:
The hijackings took place inside continental USA. Prior to September 11, there was no formal system in place for military intercepts of civilian aircraft outside the ADIZ.
Click to expand...

Common sense suggests this is nonsense, and it is. Do you really think it never occurred to anyone that a plane could be commandeered within the US and flown into a sensitive target? The procedure, formal or not, went like this: When ATC notices a suspicious aircraft-- meaning NORDO, transponder off, or deviation of assigned route-- it is to immediately contact the military, who scramble a fighter jet. The fighter contacts ATC and is provided vectors to intercept the suspect aircraft. The fighter then "escorts" the aircraft, while awaiting potential orders to shoot down.

ref said:
All four aircraft hijacked on September 11 had their transponders turned off. In order to identify the hijacked aircraft, Air Traffic Controllers had to first cross-reference all of the aircraft appearing on the secondary radar screen with their correlating reading on the primary screen. This is an enormous task.
Click to expand...

You're completely wrong about everything here. First, UAL175 only turned off its transponder for 30 seconds, then squawked another discrete code for the rest of its flight.

Flight 175 stops transmitting its transponder signal. It is 50 miles north of New York City, headed toward Baltimore. [Guardian, 10/17/2001; Newsday, 9/10/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] However, the transponder is turned off for only about 30 seconds, and then changed to a signal that is not designated for any plane on that day. [Newsday, 9/10/2002] This “allow controllers to track the intruder easily, though they couldn’t identify it.” [Washington Post, 9/17/2001]
Click to expand...

ATC did not have to cross reference anything. A primary target screaming across a radar screen would stick out like a sore thumb, and indeed, controllers followed all four targets to their destinations. The only exception was AAL77, which disappeared for about 8.5 minutes immediately after the hijacking, to then reappear in Washington Center's airspace headed for DC.
Boston flight control radar sees Flight 11 making an unplanned 100-degree turn to the south (the plane is already way off course). Flight controllers never lose sight of the flight, though they can no longer determine altitude once the transponder is turned off. [Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/2001; Newhouse News Service, 1/25/2002; MSNBC, 9/11/2002] Before this turn, the FAA had tagged Flight 11’s radar dot for easy visibility and, at American Airlines headquarters at least, “All eyes watched as the plane headed south. On the screen, the plane showed a squiggly line after its turn near Albany, then it straightened.” [Wall Street Journal, 10/15/2001] Boston flight controller Mark Hodgkins later says, “I watched the target of American 11 the whole way down.” [ABC News, 9/6/2002]
Click to expand...
Washington flight control notices a new eastbound plane entering its radar with no radio contact and no transponder identification. They do not realize it is Flight 77. They are aware of the hijackings and crashes of Flights 11 and 175, yet they apparently fail to notify anyone about the unidentified plane. [Newsday, 9/23/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Another report says they never notice it, and it is only noticed when it enters radar coverage of Washington’s Dulles International Airport at 9:24 a.m. (see (9:24 a.m.) September 11, 2001). [Washington Post, 11/3/2001]
Click to expand...
The transponder signal from Flight 93 ceases. [CNN, 9/17/2001; MSNBC, 9/3/2002; MSNBC, 9/11/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] However, the plane can be—and is—tracked using primary radar by Cleveland flight controllers and at United headquarters. Altitude can no longer be determined, except by visual sightings from other aircraft. The plane’s speed begins to vary wildly, fluctuating between 600 and 400 mph before eventually settling around 400 mph. [Longman, 2002, pp. 77, 214; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]
Click to expand...
It should be noted that while the primary target for AAL77 was not positively identified, it was still a suspicious aircraft and should have, and probably did, trigger a call from ATC to the military.
ref said:
Failure by NORAD to intercept the hijacked planes on 9/11 was not caused by any orders.
Click to expand...

You're correct that the stand down was not ordered. It was carried out by a small number of officers within the NORAD command structure directed not by their military and civilian superiors, but by an outside conspiracy directed by a foreign nation. These officers chose to be loyal to that nation and not the USA. The numerous loyal soldiers within the NORAD structure were helpless to defend America from the attacks as all their actions were directed by this traitorous cabal within their command structure.

Finally, it should be noted that this is not the first time Americans were slaughtered while fighter jets that could have protected them were stood down. Four F-4 Phantoms from the Sixth Fleet were scrambled to defend the USS Liberty when it was attacked while sitting in international waters in the Mediterranean in 1967. Those fighters were mysteriously ordered to return to base, and the attack continued, killing 34 sailors on board the Liberty. [Assault on the Liberty, by James M. Ennes p. 76}
ref said:
Claim: The names of the hijackers do not appear on the passenger manifests.
Click to expand...

We have a double problem here. We do not know if the people who boarded the planes under the names of the alleged were who we think they were. We also do not know who exactly on the planes executed the hijacking. For example, it is possible that some of the hijackers were professional agents who had assumed the names of the Arabs whose identities had been stolen. Other hijackers may have boarded under their real names, as indicated by Betty Ong's call from AAL11. Still others may have been real Arabs who boarded the planes under their real names, but were only patsies who were manipulated into this position, who did not participate in the hijackings, and were in fact victimized by the real hijackers. This may have been the fate of Satam Suqami, again as indicated in Ong's call.

The point is that the defenders of the official story have never proven exactly who was on those planes, and even if they could, they have not proven who exactly among the passengers did the hijacking. It is therefore just as likely that the attacks were a professional job, framing the Arabs and al-Qaeda, as it is that the hijackers were the al-Qaeda Arabs themselves.

ref said:
In New York City, medical examiners used DNA that FBI had collected from tiny traces of skin on the steering wheels of vehicles hired by the hijackers and from hair samples recovered from their hotel rooms to match body parts with three of the 10 hijackers who crashed there.
Click to expand...

Please explain how matching DNA from the WTC wreckage to the steering wheel of a rented car shows that somebody participated in a hijacking.

ref said:
Claim: The hijackers were not even devoted followers of Islam. They enjoyed drinking and lap dances.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with Jihad or purifying struggle. It only means that the agents who had assumed the identies of the Arab patsies wanted to have a little fun while completing their sheep-dipping duties. Do you understand the concept of sheep-dipping? If not, you need to learn.

The whole saga of the "Arabs" running around the United States in the years before 9/11 reads like something from a Laurel and Hardy routine. There is reams of evidence that these people were not who they are claimed to have been. But you have to be willing to open your eyes and look.
 
A-Train said:
The one piece of evidence that would clearly show us all who the hijackers were is the surveillance video footage of the boarding gates of all four planes. Where is that footage? That that footage has disappeared, or was never made, is almost as much of an improbable coincidence as Suqami's passport surviving the crash of AAL11.
Click to expand...
What evidence do you have that there were security cameras at the boarding gates?

BTW, I'm still waiting for the "dozens" of manifests you claimed were in existence...
 
Heart of the Matter

Excellent, one-stop shopping guide for fence-sitters, Ref, although you really should add Apathoid's invaluable paper to your list of references. Remember, the hijackers are the heart of the matter. Notice how fiercely conspiracy liars will dispute any sanity concerning the existence and the identities of the actual perpetrators. All of their fantastic nonsense goes out the window once it has been established that real hijackers flew real planes into buildings.
 
pomeroo said:
Excellent, one-stop shopping guide for fence-sitters, Ref, although you really should add Apathoid's invaluable paper to your list of references. Remember, the hijackers are the heart of the matter. Notice how fiercely conspiracy liars will dispute any sanity concerning the existence and the identities of the actual perpetrators. All of their fantastic nonsense goes out the window once it has been established that real hijackers flew real planes into buildings.
Click to expand...

Thanks pomeroo. I will add the missing web links to the final summary version that sums the different parts together.
 
A-Train. Provide any piece of evidence, that your views are correct and the ones I stated are wrong. Mine are supported by existing evidence and research.
 
Gumboot will most likely want to talk some NORAD to you, so I'll focus on other issues.

A-Train said:
Sure, now they are saying there is no issue of doubt. But that's now what they were saying before:
Click to expand...

The doubt was immediately after the attacks. Since 2001 there has been no doubt.

A-Train said:
Was the BBC subjected to political pressure to revise or retract their story?
Click to expand...

Read their response and you'll know better.

A-Train said:
Therefore whether the individuals found in the original BBC story match up to the identities provided by the FBI is irrelevant; the FBI still has not shown that the people who boarded the planes were who they say they were.
Click to expand...

Have you read the commission report?

A-Train said:
The one piece of evidence that would clearly show us all who the hijackers were is the surveillance video footage of the boarding gates of all four planes. Where is that footage? That that footage has disappeared, or was never made, is almost as much of an improbable coincidence as Suqami's passport surviving the crash of AAL11.
Click to expand...

Oh, I get it. You need to actually see them boarding the plane to believe it. This is like the hunt for the Pentagon tape. We don't need it. We have enough evidence of the hijackers as it is.

A-Train said:
That's a lot of assumptions you're making. You seem to assume the rest of the world is just like the good old USA. Has the Saudi government, a very weak regime completely dependent on the support of the US and Israel, been pressured to keep a lid on this story?
Click to expand...

Show me any evidence supporting that.

A-Train said:
Have the "hijackers" themselves, and their families-- ordinary middle class people-- been subjected to any pressure or "suggestions" that they keep a low profile on this issue?
Click to expand...

Show me any evidence of that. Your biased assumptions are not evidence.

A-Train said:
Has that pressure perhaps been augmented with a little incentive, maybe a large cash payment if they keep quiet-- you know, the combined carrot and stick?
Click to expand...
Show me any evidence of that. This may sound plausible in the CT world, but there is nothing to back this claim up. Theorists think everything they cannot explain is handled with some money and threats. It sounds exciting.

A-Train said:
And who exactly is going to travel to the Middle East and track these guys down? CNN and FOX News, the two outlets who shamelessly ran the fraudulent "dancing Palestinians" footage over and over on 9/11?
Click to expand...
LC crew? David Ray Griffin who said they don't have the money to do it, but at the same time they tour Europe lecturing? Anyone from the truth movement who makes these claims without any evidence?

A-Train said:
Common sense suggests this is nonsense, and it is.
Click to expand...

Common sense suggests you don't investigate and know what you are talking about.

A-Train said:
You're correct that the stand down was not ordered. It was carried out by a small number of officers within the NORAD command structure directed not by their military and civilian superiors, but by an outside conspiracy directed by a foreign nation. These officers chose to be loyal to that nation and not the USA. The numerous loyal soldiers within the NORAD structure were helpless to defend America from the attacks as all their actions were directed by this traitorous cabal within their command structure.
Click to expand...
And here comes the compulsory NWO part, where you really start sounding ridicilous. Show ANY evidence of ANYTHING like that happening. There is none. You are speculating with your NWO mind now.

A-Train said:
Finally, it should be noted that this is not the first time Americans were slaughtered while fighter jets that could have protected them were stood down. Four F-4 Phantoms from the Sixth Fleet were scrambled to defend the USS Liberty when it was attacked while sitting in international waters in the Mediterranean in 1967. Those fighters were mysteriously ordered to return to base, and the attack continued, killing 34 sailors on board the Liberty. [Assault on the Liberty, by James M. Ennes p. 76}
Click to expand...
More the same. These claims are made by all NWO false flag artists. Evidence?

A-Train said:
We have a double problem here. We do not know if the people who boarded the planes under the names of the alleged were who we think they were.
Click to expand...
A-Train said:
We also do not know who exactly on the planes executed the hijacking. For example, it is possible that some of the hijackers were professional agents who had assumed the names of the Arabs whose identities had been stolen.
Click to expand...

Oh really? Professional agents stepped in for the hijackers to kill their own citizens and themselves in the process? Please. You make less and less sense. And still, this is in your head. You speculate with zero evidence and deny the real evidence.

A-Train said:
Other hijackers may have boarded under their real names, as indicated by Betty Ong's call from AAL11. Still others may have been real Arabs who boarded the planes under their real names, but were only patsies who were manipulated into this position, who did not participate in the hijackings, and were in fact victimized by the real hijackers. This may have been the fate of Satam Suqami, again as indicated in Ong's call.
Click to expand...

The speculation keeps mounting. Evidence keeps avoiding your story. You have nothing there.

A-Train said:
he point is that the defenders of the official story have never proven exactly who was on those planes, and even if they could, they have not proven who exactly among the passengers did the hijacking. It is therefore just as likely that the attacks were a professional job, framing the Arabs and al-Qaeda, as it is that the hijackers were the al-Qaeda Arabs themselves.
Click to expand...
Why do you have to keep denying all the monstrous amount of evidence. You prefer to speculate with stories so wild, they become fiction in an instant. You have nothing to support your tales. Why do you deny?

A-Train said:
Please explain how matching DNA from the WTC wreckage to the steering wheel of a rented car shows that somebody participated in a hijacking.
Click to expand...
It shows the same people who planned and trained for the attacks were on the planes. You need more?

A-Train said:
This has nothing to do with Jihad or purifying struggle. It only means that the agents who had assumed the identies of the Arab patsies wanted to have a little fun while completing their sheep-dipping duties. Do you understand the concept of sheep-dipping? If not, you need to learn.
Click to expand...

You are a fiction writer with all your agents. No evidence. Again. Do you understand the concept of evidence and investigation?

A-Train said:
The whole saga of the "Arabs" running around the United States in the years before 9/11 reads like something from a Laurel and Hardy routine. There is reams of evidence that these people were not who they are claimed to have been. But you have to be willing to open your eyes and look.
Click to expand...

You need to open your eyes and look for yourself. With all respect, your story is more of a fairy tale than anything else. You deny all of it. You are just not willing to see.
 
Last edited:
A-Train said:
Common sense suggests this is nonsense, and it is. Do you really think it never occurred to anyone that a plane could be commandeered within the US and flown into a sensitive target? The procedure, formal or not, went like this: When ATC notices a suspicious aircraft-- meaning NORDO, transponder off, or deviation of assigned route-- it is to immediately contact the military, who scramble a fighter jet. The fighter contacts ATC and is provided vectors to intercept the suspect aircraft. The fighter then "escorts" the aircraft, while awaiting potential orders to shoot down.
Click to expand...


We've already been over this MANY times. It's a bit sad really. you're entirely, utterly, completely wrong. And you know you are.



A-Train said:
ATC did not have to cross reference anything. A primary target screaming across a radar screen would stick out like a sore thumb, and indeed, controllers followed all four targets to their destinations. The only exception was AAL77, which disappeared for about 8.5 minutes immediately after the hijacking, to then reappear in Washington Center's airspace headed for DC.
Click to expand...


The problem is, I believe, NORAD had no way of identifying the rogue aircraft, because they had old out-of-date equipment. To quote Major Nasypany, trying to locate one of the hijacked aircraft on 9/11 was like "searching for a needle in a haystack".




A-Train said:
It should be noted that while the primary target for AAL77 was not positively identified, it was still a suspicious aircraft and should have, and probably did, trigger a call from ATC to the military.
Click to expand...



Wrong, it triggered a call to FAA HQ, who were ironically ignoring all calls because they were already dealing with a crisis - early hijacks. NEADS only found out about AA77 by accident, while trying to track AA11.



A-Train said:
You're correct that the stand down was not ordered. It was carried out by a small number of officers within the NORAD command structure directed not by their military and civilian superiors, but by an outside conspiracy directed by a foreign nation. These officers chose to be loyal to that nation and not the USA. The numerous loyal soldiers within the NORAD structure were helpless to defend America from the attacks as all their actions were directed by this traitorous cabal within their command structure.
Click to expand...


What did this stand-down consist of?




A-Train said:
Finally, it should be noted that this is not the first time Americans were slaughtered while fighter jets that could have protected them were stood down. Four F-4 Phantoms from the Sixth Fleet were scrambled to defend the USS Liberty when it was attacked while sitting in international waters in the Mediterranean in 1967. Those fighters were mysteriously ordered to return to base, and the attack continued, killing 34 sailors on board the Liberty. [Assault on the Liberty, by James M. Ennes p. 76}
Click to expand...


Actually the Phantoms were recalled because the attack was over. It was considered a wise thing to do, since they were armed with Nuclear Weapons. The launch of those aircraft is quite possibly the closest the world came to nuclear war between the USA and USSR.

-Gumboot
 
NORAD ninja to the rescue. Good job Gumboot. I have no idea of A-Trains history here, but the stories seem to be typical CT NWO stuff.
 
Nice work, Ref...

And the other thing with A-Train is that his basic thread and thrust is the same one I've heard for everything from the Russian Revolution of 1917 to the imposition of free agency in baseball: "The Jews did it."

Some of that stuff is just funny:

Let's see, Saudi Arabia depends on Israeli support? That's a good one.

The 19 hijackers on the planes were actors and dummies to keep the attention of the passengers while real Israeli hijackers took over the planes, pointed them at America's major buildings, and then parachuted out the back to anonymity and safety. And James Bond went jumping after them when they grabbed Jinx Johnson from her co-pilot's seat.

The hijackers parachuted out of these planes and disappeared into New York Harbor, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, without being seen.

A cabal of US and Canadian officers and enlisted men in league with each other and in the pay of Israel all together committed treason, dereliction of duty, and conspiracy, without leaving any kind of paper or money trail, and evaded arrest and prosecution...and are still on duty to this day.

And an Israeli-ordered attack on an American intelligence ship gathering spy material in a war zone in 1967...which led to Israel admitting its role, apologizing for the attack, and paying reparations...is somehow proof of their orchestrating attacks on the major buildings of their biggest supporter 35 years later.

And since the Israelis admitted their role in 1967, apologized, and paid reparations, what exactly do the anti-Semites want? Answer: They want Israel to vanish in a nuclear thunderclap.

I'm still waiting for A-Train to answer my questions about his anti-Semitism and love of Herr Hitler. :D
 
ref said:
Have you read the commission report?

Oh, I get it. You need to actually see them boarding the plane to believe it. This is like the hunt for the Pentagon tape. We don't need it. We have enough evidence of the hijackers as it is.
Click to expand...

The 9/11 Commission dealt with the possibility of stolen identities the same way it dealt with all uncomfortable evidence: they ignored it.

ref, your entire thesis hinges on the alleged hijackers being who you think they were when they boarded the planes. Neither you, nor the FBI, nor the 9/11 Commission has ever proven that the men who hijacked the planes were who you say they were, and you never will.

I have pointed out the obvious possibility that the hijackers had assumed the identities of others, and I backed it up with a verifiable quote from the FBI director. I have challenged you on two crucial points involving who you say committed the hijackings:

1.) How do we know that all or any of the men who boarded the planes were who their identity information indicates they were?

2.) Even if some of the Arabs on the planes were who you think they were, how do we know they participated in the hijackings, and were not simply maneuvered to be there as "patsies" consistent with the technique of false flag terrorism?

In response you have simply stated that the government is satisfied with these identities, and therefore you are as well. Then you have the nerve to declare that your conclusions "are supported by existing evidence and research." Sorry, ref, but the pronouncements of government officials is not the same thing as evidence and research.

"Oh really? Professional agents stepped in for the hijackers to kill their own citizens and themselves in the process? Please." -ref
Click to expand...
Please don't slander me. I've never suggested the hijackers were killing "their own citizens." They were representatives of a foreign people and a foreign government. They did this to us because they hate us, just as the official story suggests-- but they were not al-Qaeda.

To gumboot: When are you going to deal with the reality that all four planes were tracked by ATC all the way to their crash sites? Given this fact, when are you going to explain the failure to scramble a fighter to intercept not once, not twice, not three times, but four times on 9/11?
 
A-Train said:
The 9/11 Commission dealt with the possibility of stolen identities the same way it dealt with all uncomfortable evidence: they ignored it.

ref, your entire thesis hinges on the alleged hijackers being who you think they were when they boarded the planes. Neither you, nor the FBI, nor the 9/11 Commission has ever proven that the men who hijacked the planes were who you say they were, and you never will.

I have pointed out the obvious possibility that the hijackers had assumed the identities of others, and I backed it up with a verifiable quote from the FBI director. I have challenged you on two crucial points involving who you say committed the hijackings:

1.) How do we know that all or any of the men who boarded the planes were who their identity information indicates they were?

2.) Even if some of the Arabs on the planes were who you think they were, how do we know they participated in the hijackings, and were not simply maneuvered to be there as "patsies" consistent with the technique of false flag terrorism?

In response you have simply stated that the government is satisfied with these identities, and therefore you are as well. Then you have the nerve to declare that your conclusions "are supported by existing evidence and research." Sorry, ref, but the pronouncements of government officials is not the same thing as evidence and research.

Please don't slander me. I've never suggested the hijackers were killing "their own citizens." They were representatives of a foreign people and a foreign government. They did this to us because they hate us, just as the official story suggests-- but they were not al-Qaeda.

To gumboot: When are you going to deal with the reality that all four planes were tracked by ATC all the way to their crash sites? Given this fact, when are you going to explain the failure to scramble a fighter to intercept not once, not twice, not three times, but four times on 9/11?
Click to expand...

...and what is your proof that they were not who we believe them to be? And by all means...please show us your evidence that they were NOT al-qaeda.

You surely must have more proof than your "gut feeling"...right? Please tell me you have evidence to the contrary.
 
HyJinX said:
...and what is your proof that they were not who we believe them to be? And by all means...please show us your evidence that they were NOT al-qaeda.

You surely must have more proof than your "gut feeling"...right? Please tell me you have evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

What a joke. Why do I have to prove that they were not who you think they were? Why is the burden of proof on me, and not you? This is apparently the theme of the whole JREF forum. If others cannot "prove" their theories, you think that your theory must therefore be correct by default-- but that's not the way science works.

Two wars have been launched and untold human suffering caused around the globe because a certain people, their religion, and an entire civilization have been implicated for a crime that could just as easily have been a frame-up job. You should have to prove your case, and that is something you cannot do.
 
ref said:
A Guide for the Undecided. Brief Analysis of Common Theories Part 4: The Hijackers
Click to expand...
Excellent work once again, ref. Kudos to you!
:bigclap
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom