• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

the Hijackers

If any of the 19 are alive, they wouldn't be hijackers. So if anyone claims any of the hijackers are alive, either they don't know english or they are stupid - or both :)
 
So where are these hijackers who twoofers say are alive? I cant believe that there are still twoofers who claim that some of the hijackers are alive.
 
As of his speech last week Griffin repeated the "BBC said the hijackers were alive" claim. Oddly enough he forgot to mention that the BBC later retracted the story. Must have slipped his mind.
 
parky76 said:
the hijackers are dead. how do i know? none have ever come forward.
Click to expand...

Ofcourse the hijackers are still alive. These video's where made AFTER the attacks. If the hijackers were dead, how could they have pictures of the WTC attack and the damaged Pentagon in the back?

hijacker1.jpg


hijacker2.jpg


;)
 
JamesB said:
As of his speech last week Griffin repeated the "BBC said the hijackers were alive" claim. Oddly enough he forgot to mention that the BBC later retracted the story. Must have slipped his mind.
Click to expand...

How convenient. Can you give a reason for the retraction?
Im sure you can.
 
Tweeter said:
How convenient. Can you give a reason for the retraction?
Im sure you can.
Click to expand...

Look at the date of the original article:
Sunday, 23 September, 2001, 12:30 GMT 13:30 UK



5 YEARS later:

A five-year-old story 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.
In an effort to make this clearer, we have made one small change to the original story. Under the FBI picture of Waleed al Shehri we have added the words "A man called Waleed Al Shehri..." to make it as clear as possible that there was confusion over the identity. The rest of the story remains as it was in the archive as a record of the situation at the time.
We recently asked the FBI for a statement, and this is, as things stand, the closest thing we have to a definitive view: The FBI is confident that it has positively identified the nineteen hijackers responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Also, the 9/11 investigation was thoroughly reviewed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States and the House and Senate Joint Inquiry. Neither of these reviews ever raised the issue of doubt about the identity of the nineteen hijackers.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html
 
Last edited:
Tweeter said:
How convenient. Can you give a reason for the retraction?
Im sure you can.
Click to expand...

yes. we ALL know that the BBC...and all MSM outlets are ALWAYS right the first time!!

"retraction"..is just another word for "the NWO got to us!!"

:D
 
The truther's position is moving, just a little, I think. Plenty still say some of the suspects are "still alive" as though it's proven, but others have moved to the fallback argument of saying "it's not been proven that they're dead". That is, "they've not been identified by DNA so we don't know that the identifications are correct".

This appeals to them as it's a complete switch of the burden of proof. They're not putting forward any evidence or claims that any suspects are alive - it's up to others to prove that they're not.

And the other advantage is that it cannot be answered, at least not on a web forum. Therefore they can raise this forever without being directly debunked. And even if someone produces a report to say DNA identifications were made, just say "it can't be trusted", et voila - the question continues.

My guess is the move here shows us exactly what's going to happen right across 9/11 truth in future years. They'll abandon bogus "evidence" popularised by people like Griffin (without ever acknowledging its faults, of course) and fall back to "well you prove the official story, then"-type arguments. That won't win them many new converts - "we can't be sure the hijackers are dead" isn't nearly as good a talking point as "some of the hijackers are still alive" - but it'll help the hard core maintain their beliefs for many years to come.
 
They're serving drinks at the "Owl Room" in the Bohemian Grove.
 
Listen, if the NWO wanted to make up alleged hijackers, do you really think they would need to use real, live people, who could turn up "alive" and ruin it all for them? come on.

I mean with hollywood make up, wax, and what not, why not just create some wax representations of a few arab skulls, lets say a hundred years old or so, and take photos of them.

I mean if they can fake, in real time, the voices of the passengers, how hard can creating a few fake photos of fake hijackers be?

TAM;);)
 
Yes the claim pertaining to alive n well hijackers are still very much purported by truthers abound, as is the old flight-manifest chestnut, Odigo Message, 4,000 Israelis were warned not to go to work et al.
There is an apparent use for CT's in that, of course, anything can be explained away with an appeal of unfalsifiability since they can always add; "well they were in on it as well" or "they were forced to say that" or "that's a fabrication". It's the same set standards of conspiratorial inquiry found in the Moon Hoax crowd (actually, not a few truthers also happen to be supporters of the formentioned additional conspiracy theory).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom