How Many Hijackers are Still Alive?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

7 Years Later, 9/11 Hijackers’ Remains Are in Limbo (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us/21hijackers.html)

By SEAN D. HAMILL
Published: September 20, 2008

Seven years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, the remains of 13 of the 19 men responsible have been identified and are in the custody of the F.B.I. and the New York City medical examiner’s office.

Pay close attention the next time a truther says some hijackers are still alive (I've as much as 8 or 9). If they claim anything greater than six, you've got a ready made PWNAGE to drop on them (the article doesn't mention specific names, which is unfortunate from a debunking point of view).

[Blackadder_no]

Nah, they'll just go for the "FBI is part of the NWO cover-up" hand-wave.

[gumboot]

I imagine they'll throw up the "how did they prove they're the hijackers without family samples" argument.

[Sizzler]

I imagine they'll throw up the "how did they prove they're the hijackers without family samples" argument.

Yes, and also the fact that previous claims identified hotel rooms and rental car steering wheels as the places DNA samples were found. These places are very contaminated.

However, the article in OP reveals that DNA samples were taken from cigarette butts and luggage. These things are much more personal, and plausible as DNA sources.

But, why the change in tune? Seems strange or perhaps I am reading into it more than I should;)

[Homeland Insurgency]

However, the article in OP reveals that DNA samples were taken from cigarette butts and luggage. These things are much more personal, and plausible as DNA sources.

Yeah. Now all they need to do is show which hijackers were related to the Samsonite gorilla and which ones were related to the Marlboro man.

[CHF]

Sizzler, HI....so where are the 19 hijackers in your opinion?

[Jonnyclueless]

Yes, and also the fact that previous claims identified hotel rooms and rental car steering wheels as the places DNA samples were found. These places are very contaminated.

However, the article in OP reveals that DNA samples were taken from cigarette butts and luggage. These things are much more personal, and plausible as DNA sources.

But, why the change in tune? Seems strange or perhaps I am reading into it more than I should;)

Ah so you think that maybe some of the legit passengers on the planes may have accidentally driven the hijackers cars or stayed in their hotel room? Is that what you mean by contaminated? Whoever was driving the cars, etc where the skin was found, was also on the planes that crashed.

What are you implying may have been contaminated that would change this? If the same person was in the car who's body parts were found in the plane, what exactly is the possible mis-identification here?

[PhantomWolf]

Ah so you think that maybe some of the legit passengers on the planes may have accidentally driven the hijackers cars or stayed in their hotel room? Is that what you mean by contaminated? Whoever was driving the cars, etc where the skin was found, was also on the planes that crashed.

What are you implying may have been contaminated that would change this? If the same person was in the car who's body parts were found in the plane, what exactly is the possible mis-identification here?

We have been through this with Sizzler before including the whole:

If

I find 4 samples in the Hotel Room, A, B, C and D
I find 3 samples in the car, B, C, E and F
I have samples from the Plane matching B and C

I know that Person 1 and Person 2 rented the room, that Person 1 hired the car, and that both Person 1 and Person 2's names were on the passanger manifest, then the odds are that person 1 and 2 are the B and C samples.

3 months later and he seems to have forgotten.

[SDC]

Wally Miller has a cameo in the article. Evidently he got a call from the Middle East from someone saying he was a relative of a hijacker -- the caller was encouraged by a journalist interviewing him (the caller). Strange little moment.

[Thunder]

No accused hijackers are still alive. If they were alive, they would have gone to the nearest BBC office years ago and said "Um...im still here".

[Homeland Insurgency]

Sizzler, HI....so where are the 19 hijackers in your opinion?

Maybe dead. So what? Are you that dumb?

[Sizzler]

We have been through this with Sizzler before

I find 4 samples in the Hotel Room, A, B, C and D
I find 3 samples in the car, B, C, E and F
I have samples from the Plane matching B and C


Yes you went over this with me. That doesn't mean it has any merit. What you left out is that the FBI labeled the DNA samples "Known" before they were matched to any remains from the WTC buildings.

And again, I don't think anyone would agree that a hotel and rental car steering wheel are personal enough to make a known ID of anyones DNA.

However they now claim the DNA came from cigarette butts and personal luggage items.

These items are difficult to question, but I am left wondering why the change of tune? Any comments?

[Sizzler]

Sizzler, HI....so where are the 19 hijackers in your opinion?

Most likely dead in my opinion.

[Quad4_72]

Yes you went over this with me. That doesn't mean it has any merit. What you left out is that the FBI labeled the DNA samples "Known" before they were matched to any remains from the WTC buildings.

And again, I don't think anyone would agree that a hotel and rental car steering wheel are personal enough to make a known ID of anyones DNA.

However they now claim the DNA came from cigarette butts and personal luggage items.

These items are difficult to question, but I am left wondering why the change of tune? Any comments?

Leave it to a twoofer to try and nit pick even the most tiny details to try and make it into some sort of conspiracy. Yes we get it Sizzler, you aren't claiming that they are alive or dead, "just asking questions". Yet you still suggest that there is some sort of conspiracy. Why is this? All of the facts are out there, yet you have been "Just asking questions" on this forum for months. Either accept the facts, or come out of the "twoofer closet".

[Homeland Insurgency]

Leave it to a twoofer to try and nit pick even the most tiny details to try and make it into some sort of conspiracy. Yes we get it Sizzler, you aren't claiming that they are alive or dead, "just asking questions". Yet you still suggest that there is some sort of conspiracy. Why is this? All of the facts are out there, yet you have been "Just asking questions" on this forum for months. Either accept the facts, or come out of the "twoofer closet".

Where is the positive identification of your so-called hijackers? Is it in the closet? Why don't you need to know?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Where is the positive identification of your so-called hijackers? Is it in the closet? Why don't you need to know?


Do you know what's required for a positive identification of the hijackers?

[Homeland Insurgency]

Do you know what's required for a positive identification of the hijackers?

For reality or for you?

[Quad4_72]

Where is the positive identification of your so-called hijackers? Is it in the closet? Why don't you need to know?

In New York City, medical examiners used DNA profiles furnished by the FBI to match body parts with three of the 10 hijackers who crashed there.http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-11-sept11-remains_x.htm

Also food for thought:
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/DNA_identification#cite_note-young-1
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/214781.pdf

When you are finished enlightening yourself with that reading, then come talk to me.

[Homeland Insurgency]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-11-sept11-remains_x.htm

Also food for thought:
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/DNA_identification#cite_note-young-1
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/214781.pdf

When you are finished enlightening yourself with that reading, then come talk to me.

I'm talking to you right now Mr. Faith. Tell me how you know they were positively identified. I know they weren't. What do you know?

[Quad4_72]

I'm talking to you right now Mr. Faith. Tell me how you know they were positively identified. I know they weren't. What do you know?

As I said before, when you are finished reading the required material for this discussion, then come back and pose your questions.

[Homeland Insurgency]

As I said before, when you are finished reading the required material for this discussion, then come back and pose your questions.


I can tell from your posts I've read more then you. You just hate it don't you?

Just put up or shut-up.

[Quad4_72]

I can tell from your posts I've read more then you. You just hate it don't you?

Just put up or shut-up.

Its glaringly obvious you have done little or no reading. Let me ask you this then. What do YOU think happened to the hijackers? What is your theory on the matter?

[CHF]

Maybe dead. So what? Are you that dumb?

So what? I'm asking for your opinion on what happened to the hijackers. Why so defensive?

Most likely dead in my opinion.

And how do you think they most likely died?

[Homeland Insurgency]

Its glaringly obvious you have done little or no reading. Let me ask you this then. What do YOU think happened to the hijackers? What is your theory on the matter?

What hijackers? Identify them and tell everyone how they were identified.

[Homeland Insurgency]

So what? I'm asking for your opinion on what happened to the hijackers. Why so defensive?

And how do you think they most likely died?

People die everyday. Does that mean they were a hijacker?

[Sizzler]

Either accept the facts, or come out of the "twoofer closet".

I don't have enough evidence either way.

And is it really nitpicking by questioning the FBI's method in determining a "known" sample of hijacker's DNA?

Remember, all 10 were given for the WTC crash, labeled "known", but without names attached.

And remember, we cannot "know" positively a DNA sample belongs to someone via process of elimination. So tell me how the FBI could have obtained "known" DNA samples from hotels and rental cars without a process of elimination? ....oh wait, it doesn't matter anymore. The tune has changed and they actually used personal items and cigarette butts after-all.

[JimBenArm]

Maybe dead. So what? Are you that dumb?
Why the insult? Does that further your cause?

[CHF]

People die everyday. Does that mean they were a hijacker?

It does if all the evidence points to them being hijackers.

Are you trying to argue that they could just as easily have died of cancer in Saudi Arabia or in a car accident in Afghanistan?

[Homeland Insurgency]

Why the insult? Does that further your cause?

Why no evidence? Does that further your cause?

[JimBenArm]

Why no evidence? Does that further your cause?
I don't have one. I just want to know why you're so disrespectful to people you don't know.

[Quad4_72]

What hijackers? Identify them and tell everyone how they were identified.

Go to this link:
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers

Each of the listed hijackers has a link to their history and timeline of their actions leading up to 9/11. There are also family reactions listed and other overwhelming evidence of their involvement in the attacks.

[Homeland Insurgency]

Go to this link:
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Hijackers

Each of the listed hijackers has a link to their history and timeline of their actions leading up to 9/11. There are also family reactions listed and other overwhelming evidence of their involvement in the attacks.

And?

[Quad4_72]

And?

You have obviously not read anything. Either do the reading, or do not reply.

[CHF]

And?

In other words evidence is no match for your imagination.

Truthseeking at its finest :rolleyes:

[LashL]

Happy birthday, CHF!

:hbd::wave1:bcake::wave1:hbd:

[Thunder]

Um....didn't it ever occur to you all that 9-11 Truthers..aren't REALLY interested in the truth?

=)

This is about hating Bush, bringing down the USA, a mythical revolution, and passing the time until the next X-Files movie.

[CHF]

Happy birthday, CHF!

:hbd::wave1:bcake::wave1:hbd:

Why thank you :D

29....one more year and life's over. ;)

[Jonnyclueless]

Um....didn't it ever occur to you all that 9-11 Truthers..aren't REALLY interested in the truth?

=)

This is about hating Bush, bringing down the USA, a mythical revolution, and passing the time until the next X-Files movie.


The only reason they are against Bush is because he is currently in office. I don't foresee any change once Bush is out of office. After all, NWO picks the president/shape shifters to further their agenda which has been in motion for centuries but never seems to ever pan out.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

For reality or for you?


That's not an answer to my question. Do you know what's required for a positive identification of the hijackers?

[Dave Rogers]

However, the article in OP reveals that DNA samples were taken from cigarette butts and luggage. These things are much more personal, and plausible as DNA sources.

But, why the change in tune? Seems strange or perhaps I am reading into it more than I should;)

I'm quite certain that you are reading more into it than you should. The whole substance of your concern is that one newspaper article, written by a reported with no specific training in forensic science, written to give a drastically simplified explanation that won't strain the comprehension of the average reader, and delivered to meet an immovable publishing deadline, says something very slightly and subtly different from another newspaper article, written by [etc...]. Given that the information published in any newspaper article is at best a tiny subset of the totality of information available at the time, and that the selection process has an enormous amount of uncertainty, it would be more surprising if the two articles agreed at such a level of detail.

What I suggest you do is check your sources for the original article, and see if there's anything there that in any way excludes what's been reported more recently. I'm confident you won't find anything. Quite simply, the original report gave a few examples of the kind of sample taken, and the most recent one has done the same thing but picked, alomst at random, a different set of examples.

The comment that one set of examples seems more personal than the other is simply your own impression, and one that can just as easily be argued the other way. Motel sheets are invariably laundered between customers, so samples taken just after a customer has moved out are almost certain to be from either that customer or someone who visited him. On the other hand, how often does someone forget to empty the ashtrays in a hire car, or just do a bad job of it? Only the driver handles the steering wheel, but anyone might have picked up the wrong suitcase for a moment.

Dave

[Whiplash]

I don't have one. I just want to know why you're so disrespectful to people you don't know.

And we all know the answer to this one, even the man himself.. which is why you can be sure this point will be very quickly glossed over and ignored, and the insults will continue to fly. Poor guys, I actually feel a bit sorry for them at times. Honestly.

[Sizzler]

I'm quite certain that you are reading more into it than you should. The whole substance of your concern is that one newspaper article, written by a reported with no specific training in forensic science, written to give a drastically simplified explanation that won't strain the comprehension of the average reader, and delivered to meet an immovable publishing deadline, says something very slightly and subtly different from another newspaper article, written by [etc...]. Given that the information published in any newspaper article is at best a tiny subset of the totality of information available at the time, and that the selection process has an enormous amount of uncertainty, it would be more surprising if the two articles agreed at such a level of detail.

What I suggest you do is check your sources for the original article, and see if there's anything there that in any way excludes what's been reported more recently. I'm confident you won't find anything. Quite simply, the original report gave a few examples of the kind of sample taken, and the most recent one has done the same thing but picked, alomst at random, a different set of examples.

The comment that one set of examples seems more personal than the other is simply your own impression, and one that can just as easily be argued the other way. Motel sheets are invariably laundered between customers, so samples taken just after a customer has moved out are almost certain to be from either that customer or someone who visited him. On the other hand, how often does someone forget to empty the ashtrays in a hire car, or just do a bad job of it? Only the driver handles the steering wheel, but anyone might have picked up the wrong suitcase for a moment.

Dave

I agree with most of what you've said here. I should go to the FBI and determine exactly what a "known" sample is and what the requirements are for obtaining such. I've done some secondary reading on it, mostly DNA sampling techniques and guidelines. I must admit I am a bit put off from contacting primary sources about 9-11 relatedness issues because of a few responses I have received from individuals in the past (basically, "leave me alone").