Atta's conveniently late luggage

[albie]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.

[BigAl]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw.

Even if true, so what? Here's a summary of just some of the evidence we have for Atta and 18 other Arab Islamists hijacking 4 commercial jets.

The 19 Arab Islamist Hijackers Edited 7/16/09
http://911links.webs.com/19Hijackers.htm
Table of Contents
[1] Reading list for all the evidence we have about the hijackers.
[2] The martyrdom videos made by 7 of the hijackers.
[3] Arabic spoken in cockpits of hijacked planes.
[4] Boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows hijacker's names
[5] The names of the hijackers
[6] BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
[7] Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
[8] Status of Hijacker DNA - (2009)
[9] Answer to "At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive"
[10] bin Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers
[11] News Report on hijackers as of Nov 2, 2001
[12] Hanjour as a pilot
[13] Photo and DNA ID match of some of the hijackers.
[14] Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers
[15] Pictures of the Hanjour and another hijacker boarding the airplanes.
[16] Details of airline tickets for some of the hijackers.
[17] 166-page 9/11 Commission document contains lots of information on hijacker visa applications, with a particular focus on Mohamed Atta.
[18] This 9/11 Commission document includes an INS analysis of Abdulaziz al-Omari's passport, presumably recovered from the Flight 11 crash scene, and reports on another Abdulaziz al-Omari who had no connection at all with terrorism or the plot, but was caught up in one of the "hijacker still alive" stories.
If you want to knowwhy each person is on the list, read any or all of these books to get an idea of just how much evidence for who hijacked the planes and how they are connected directly to bin Laden and KSM and the American Embassy bombings in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole. Some of these names were known to the FBI even before 9/11/2001 for their crimes.

[1] ----- Essential reading list ---------------------------

The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence
Perfect Soldiers: The 9/11 Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry Mcdermott
The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America, by James Bamford.
PBS Video on Bamford http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/program.html
Spying Blind by Amy Zegart
Perfect Soldiers by Terry McDermott

[2] -------Hijacker videos -------------------------------------------

This video has the martyrdom videos made by some of the hijackers.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1619489
Hijackers video wills (Scroll down to the bottom)
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Responsibility

[3] -------Arab Audio on Voice recorders --------------

We have the audio of Arabs on the recovered cockpit voice recorders.
The CVR clearly captured the words of the hijackers, including words in Arabic from the microphone in the pilot headset up to the end of the flight. The hijackers' statements, the clarity of the recording, the position of the microphone in the pilot headset, and the corresponding manipulations of flight controls provide the evidence. The quotes are taken from our listening to the CVR, aided by an Arabic speaker.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/9/11_Commission_Report/Notes/Part_1

[4] -----------Boarding Manifests ---------------------------

I have the boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows the names.
http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/Flight_11_Manifest.gif http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/Flight_11_Manifest.gif
Discussion
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=124907
Flash app shows seating, calls , hijackers,
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200018.html

[5] -----Hijacker names ------------------------------

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
1) Khalid Almihdhar - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of San Diego, California, and New York
-Alias: Sannan Al-Makki; Khalid Bin Muhammad; 'Addallah Al-Mihdhar;
Khalid Mohammad Al-Saqaf

2) Majed Moqed - Possible Saudi national
-Alias: Majed M.GH Moqed; Majed Moqed, Majed Mashaan Moqed

3) Nawaf Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey; San Diego, California
-Alias: Nawaf Al-Hazmi; Nawaf Al Hazmi; Nawaf M.S. Al Hazmi
4) Salem Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey
5) Hani Hanjour -
-Possible resident of Phoenix, Arizona, and San Diego, California
-Alias: Hani Saleh Hanjour; Hani Saleh; Hani Hanjour, Hani Saleh H. Hanjour

AMERICAN AIRLINES #11 BOEING 767
1) Satam M.A. Al Suqami- Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: June 28, 1976; Last known address: United Arab Emirates
2) Waleed M. Alshehri - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: September 13, 1974; January 1, 1976; March 3,
1976; July 8, 1977; December 20, 1978; May 11, 1979; November 5, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Orlando, Florida;
Daytona Beach, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot

3) Wail M. Alshehri
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Newton, Massachusetts
-Believed to be a pilot
4) Mohamed Atta - Possible Egyptian national
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Coral Springs, Florida;
Hamburg, Germany
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Mehan Atta; Mohammad El Amir; Muhammad Atta; Mohamed El
Sayed; Mohamed Elsayed; Muhammad Muhammad Al Amir Awag Al Sayyid
Atta; Muhammad Muhammad Al-Amir Awad Al Sayad

5) Abdulaziz Alomari - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: December 24, 1972 and May 28, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
UNITED AIRLINES #175 BOEING 767
1) Marwan Al-Shehhi
-Date of birth used: May 9, 1978
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Marwan Yusif Muhammad Rashid Al-Shehi; Marwan Yusif Muhammad
Rashid Lakrab Al-Shihhi; Abu Abdullah
2) Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Fayez Ahmad; Banihammad Fayez Abu Dhabi Banihammad; Fayez
Rashid Ahmed; Banihammad Fayez; Rasid Ahmed Hassen Alqadi; Abu
Dhabi Banihammad ; Ahmed Fayez; Faez Ahmed
3) Ahmed Alghamdi
-Alias: Ahmed Salah Alghamdi
4) Hamza Alghamdi
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Hamza Al-Ghamdi; Hamza Ghamdi; Hamzah Alghamdi; Hamza
Alghamdi Saleh
5) Mohand Alshehri
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Mohammed Alshehhi; Mohamd Alshehri; Mohald Alshehri
UNITED AIRLINES #93 BOEING 757
1) Saeed Alghamdi
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Abdul Rahman Saed Alghamdi; Ali S Alghamdi; Al- Gamdi; Saad
M.S. Al Ghamdi; Sadda Al Ghamdi; Saheed Al-Ghamdi; Seed Al Ghamdi
2) Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi - Possible Saudi national
-Date of birth used: October 11, 1980
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ahmed Alhaznawi
3) Ahmed Alnami
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ali Ahmed Alnami; Ahmed A. Al-Nami; Ahmed Al- Nawi
4) Ziad Samir Jarrah
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Zaid Jarrahi; Zaid Samr Jarrah; Ziad S. Jarrah; Ziad Jarrah
Jarrat, Ziad Samir Jarrahi

[6] -----------------------------------------

BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html

[7] ----------------------------------
Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCj8X2glIrA

[8] ------------------------------------------------

Newsweek - Remains of the Day
Nineteen hijackers died on 9/11. What should be done with what's left of them? Eve Conant
From the magazine issue dated Jan 12, 2009
...Through a combination of innovative DNA-mapping techniques, help from the FBI's crime lab and dumb luck, the scientists have now ID'd four of the 10 New York hijackers. The remains of the nine hijackers from the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites have also been confirmed; six other hijackers have yet to be identified. ...
http://www.newsweek.com/id/177724/output/print

[9] -----------------------------------------------

At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers.html
BBC Response
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html
[10] ----------------------------------------------------


bib Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers

[11] -------------------------------------------------------

News report as of Nov 2, 2001
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/11/02/attack/main316806.shtml

[12] --------------------------------------------

New York Newsday article from 9/23/01. "Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said." Most of the complaints that I've seen were that he couldn't land well. Considering what he was planning on doing, I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't exactly the top of his "skills to hone" list.
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/deceptions/nynewsday_sep23.html
Woman taught 9/11 hijacker how to fly
http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=55&fArticleId=3171841

[13] -------------------------

Photo and DNA ID match of some of the pilots.
This 9/11 Commission document explains how the FBI attempted to verify the hijackers identities (includes an apparent DNA match with Jarrah).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13950034/T5-B62-T-Eldridge-Files-Aliases-and-IDs-Fdr-Doc-Req-54-and-43-FBI-ID-of-Hijackers-by-Family-Members-PENTTBOM
http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box62_AliasesAndIDs-FBIIDsHijackers-1.pdf

[14] ---- Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers ---------

This 9/11 Commission document includes details of a forensic examination of hijacker ID cards recovered from the Pentagon, and a list of identification documents belonging to the hijackers (passports, visas, driving licences, more).
http://911myths.com/images/b/ba/Team5_Box46_Chronology_US_Identifications.pdf

[15] --------------------------------

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x34702

[16] ---------------------------------

Details in hijacker tickets.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4722224#post4722224
[17] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box51_Hijacker-Primary-Docs_AA11-ChronologySaudiVisaApps.pdf
[18] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box51_Hijacker-Primary-Docs_AA11-AbdulAzizAlomari-Passport.pdf

[Dave Rogers]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw.

Losing one item in nineteen is about right for airline baggage handling, isn't it?

The word "conveniently", in this usage, is a classic piece of confirmation bias in action. It means "I'm going to ignore this piece of evidence for no other reason than that it supports an interpretation I choose not to believe."

Dave

[McHrozni]

Losing one item in nineteen is about right for airline baggage handling, isn't it?

The US average now is about 1 in 150 pieces. Of course, this assumes that only the 19 hijackers count, when in fact we should count the luggage of all those boarding the four ill-fated flights.

McHrozni

[TruthersLie]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.

Why? Because it is a piece of luggage which was missed?

When our family moved to china, one of our bags was left in a connecting airport (SFO) and it took 4 days to catch up to us with about half of the contents missing. I wouldn't call it "highly convenient", I'd call it airport incompetence.

It happens. Not everything that happened on 9/11 was planned and part of the "inside job."

I love it how twoof have the conspiracy sooooo intricate that it can leave behind specific pieces of luggage, fake phone calls from people about to die, and paint super duper nanothermite on steel columns which has higher energy output than possible, yet at the same scooby and the gang of pizza delivery boys, college drop outs, discredited physics professors, and army deserters can figure it out.

So it is the rube goldberg conspiracy machine (proof that the jooooooz did it), with a group who is the mixture of the A team and Rain Man.

[Horatius]

The US average now is about 1 in 150 pieces. Of course, this assumes that only the 19 hijackers count, when in fact we should count the luggage of all those boarding the four ill-fated flights.

McHrozni


That may be the average now, what was it in 2001? With all the security theatre created since then, it should be much harder to lose a bag these days.


That being said, I've flown a lot fewer than 150 times, and have lost my bags at least twice. So I suspect those numbers have been massaged a bit. How do they define a "lost bag"?

[twinstead]

How do they define a "lost bag"?

Well, once I couldn't find my ex wife for a couple hours. Does that count?

[Undesired Walrus]

And was Mr Bloggs from baggage handling somehow in on this conspiracy?

[paulheinze]

Except BigAl the usual incompetent answers.

[Horatius]

And was Mr Bloggs from baggage handling somehow in on this conspiracy?



No, he's just a good sheeple who didn't even think twice when the MiBs showed up, and told he he'd found the bag they were carrying in the lost luggage bin. On 9/11. While he was watching TV. And realizing that that was one of his planes.

Nope, he's never even questioned those events.

[MikeW]

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.
Really? So, what do you think would have been different if the luggage had made the flight?

[Horatius]

Except BigAl the usual incompetent answers.



It must be wonderful, living in a world where you've never met anyone incompetent at their job.

[twinstead]

The things that make some people go "hmmmmmmmmmm" are hilarious.

[Dave Rogers]

Except BigAl the usual incompetent answers.

To an utterly stupid question. I mean, really, how can you take this sort of thing seriously? An airline leaving an item of baggage behind is not so outlandish an occurrence that a conspiracy theory is needed to explain it; it's an everyday, commonplace occurrence that is familiar at second hand to virtually everyone. The OP isn't even making a serious attempt to point out any reason to disbelieve the evidence other than that it favours a hypothesis he chooses not to believe.

So what's your position on this, paulheinze? Is it your belief that airlines never lose baggage, and that this piece of evidence can only possibly be explained as a blatant attempt to plant a piece of evidence that wasn't even needed to prove the involvement of Atta in the plan in the first place? Or are you prepared to admit that airlines quite frequently lose baggage, as is such common knowledge that it's a standard cultural reference in Western comedy, and that there's some other reason why this particular piece of evidence should be considered suspect?

When you have nothing to offer, it's a bit difficult to come up with a better answer than "You have nothing to offer".

Dave

[A W Smith]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.

Atta arrived late at the gate "sweating bullets (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24596)" according to the agent who handled his boarding pass. Apparently the flight from Portland Maine (http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/news/local/3114385.shtml) he arrived on docked at a terminal at the opposite end of the airport. He was one of the last to board so it is understandable that his bag missed the cut off.

[McHrozni]

That may be the average now, what was it in 2001? With all the security theatre created since then, it should be much harder to lose a bag these days.

That being said, I've flown a lot fewer than 150 times, and have lost my bags at least twice. So I suspect those numbers have been massaged a bit. How do they define a "lost bag"?

Luggage that doesn't arrive at destination with the passanger who checked it in?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_luggage
It also has a link to a relevant report from 2009 as a source.

I found the report relevant for the time:
http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2002/0210atcr.doc
In August 2001, the ratio was slightly more 4 complaints per 1000 passangers, or 1 per 250, comparable with average of april 2008 and 2009.

Wiki article probably counted this differently in some way, and arrived at a somewhat higher number. With the chance of 1 in 250, the chance of loosing a random bag among 19 is ~7,5% - in other words, plausible.
The chance of loosing at least 1 bag among 246 that would be on the four planes is ~63%.

It doesn't take a genius to understand that with a chance of about 1 in 250 of an event happening, it is supposed to happen about once in 250 samplings, does it. It's probably too much for an average twoofer, though.

McHrozni

[Drudgewire]

This is only a coincidence to anyone who doesn't fly regularly. http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/fist4su.gif

[Brattus]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.

What are you suggesting?
Twoofers never seem to ever come out and say what they think about anything.
They throw some meaningless fact or fiction out there and add a word to it like conveniently and expect someone else to come along and explain it.
If this bag was the only misplaced piece of luggage ever in the history of air travel then maybe it might mean something.
Misplaced/lost luggage is a common and rather inconvenient fact of air travel.
So what are you suggesting this misplaced bag means?

[johnny karate]

What specific piece (or pieces) of evidence was obtained from Atta's luggage that yielded information both crucial to the "official narrative" and that couldn't have been ascertained by some other means?

[NoZed Avenger]

Well, once I couldn't find my ex wife for a couple hours. Does that count?

I am interested in signing up for your service.












[disclaimer: total joke. My in-the-process-of-becoming-ex-wife is a good person and I wouldn't want her to have her feelings hurt if she reads this.]

[16.5]

Because no airline has EVAR delayed getting a bag on to a plane.

whoops, i just rolled my eyes so hard I pulled my eyeball muscles.

[atavisms]

the thing about "Atta's luggage"
I don;t believe it for a second it was his, if he was even on the plane?? Who KNows

But we are told he was leading the executing of this suicide attack, yet the bag contained a copy of his will with instructions on how to treat his body after death.
If we are going to be reasonable we might ask, Why would he take any luggage on such a trip? But certainly he would not take a document that is addressed to his next of kin!

Just silliness..
Who needs these things to know the obvious fact that 9/11 could only have been an inside job bc those results (the ones that are so firmly documented and established in fact) could only have been achieved through the use of pre-positioned explosives.

[Dave Rogers]

the thing about "Atta's luggage"
I don;t believe it for a second it was his, if he was even on the plane?? Who KNows

Since it's a matter of your personal and uninformed beliefs, who cares?

But we are told he was leading the executing of this suicide attack, yet the bag contained a copy of his will with instructions on how to treat his body after death.
If we are going to be reasonable we might ask, Why would he take any luggage on such a trip? But certainly he would not take a document that is addressed to his next of kin!

Do you think he expected anyone to find enough of his body to do anything with, once he'd used it to crash an airliner into a skyscraper? Seems a bit of a redundant document to me.

Just silliness..
Who needs these things to know the obvious fact that 9/11 could only have been an inside job bc those results (the ones that are so firmly documented and established in fact) could only have been achieved through the use of pre-positioned explosives.

That didn't go "BANG" when they went off, but went "BANG" several times up to an hour beforehand, and carried on burning for three months after they exploded. Yes, it must have been those special explosives.

Dave

[ElMondoHummus]

Do truthers not comprehend the concept of convergence of evidence? It's not only the existence of the luggage that demonstrates that Atta was on the jet!

[roger]

But we are told he was leading the executing of this suicide attack, yet the bag contained a copy of his will with instructions on how to treat his body after death.
If we are going to be reasonable we might ask, Why would he take any luggage on such a trip? But certainly he would not take a document that is addressed to his next of kin!
It wasn't a given that they would succeed in taking over the plane. He and his cohorts could have died in the attempt. Why not be prepared for that possibility?

[atavisms]

Because no airline has EVAR delayed getting a bag on to a plane.
.

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?

The man's suitcase, left behind and after these attacks found to contain all manner of incriminating evidence. Yes, u'r most certainly right, not a chance that was not Atta's own bag! That is why most people would carry along on such a mission. (Videos of planes, koran, notes to people, instructions for how to wash his body, etc)

I don;t think this evidence matters one way or another, (there is a mountain of other more compelling evidence) I just think it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.

[lapman]

One of the newly released 9/11 Commission documents states that his luggage was not "left behind." I did miss his flight, but was in the process of being routed to another flight to the same destination when the planes were grounded. I've already had 2 bags not make it on the same flight as mine to understand that it is only a coincidence.

[Pardalis]

I don;t believe it for a second

Sums up you're entire view on 9/11, doesn't it?

Next.

[BigAl]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?



The Twoofer picks one factoid that in fact shows that Atta flew to Ny and tries to use it to dismiss the entire body of evidence we have for what Atta and his 18 friends did on 9/11.

Here's just some of it.

The 19 Arab Islamist Hijackers Edited 7/16/09

http://911links.webs.com/19Hijackers.htm

Table of Contents
[1] Reading list for all the evidence we have about the hijackers.
[2] The martyrdom videos made by 7 of the hijackers.
[3] Arabic spoken in cockpits of hijacked planes.
[4] Boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows hijacker's names
[5] The names of the hijackers
[6] BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
[7] Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
[8] Status of Hijacker DNA - (2009)
[9] Answer to "At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive"
[10] bin Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers
[11] News Report on hijackers as of Nov 2, 2001
[12] Hanjour as a pilot
[13] Photo and DNA ID match of some of the hijackers.
[14] Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers
[15] Pictures of the Hanjour and another hijacker boarding the airplanes.
[16] Details of airline tickets for some of the hijackers.
[17] 166-page 9/11 Commission document contains lots of information on hijacker visa applications, with a particular focus on Mohamed Atta.
[18] This 9/11 Commission document includes an INS analysis of Abdulaziz al-Omari's passport, presumably recovered from the Flight 11 crash scene, and reports on another Abdulaziz al-Omari who had no connection at all with terrorism or the plot, but was caught up in one of the "hijacker still alive" stories.
If you want to knowwhy each person is on the list, read any or all of these books to get an idea of just how much evidence for who hijacked the planes and how they are connected directly to bin Laden and KSM and the American Embassy bombings in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole. Some of these names were known to the FBI even before 9/11/2001 for their crimes.

[1] ----- Essential reading list ---------------------------

The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence
Perfect Soldiers: The 9/11 Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry Mcdermott
The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America, by James Bamford.
PBS Video on Bamford http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/program.html
Spying Blind by Amy Zegart
Perfect Soldiers by Terry McDermott

[2] -------Hijacker videos -------------------------------------------

This video has the martyrdom videos made by some of the hijackers.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1619489
Hijackers video wills (Scroll down to the bottom)
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Responsibility

[3] -------Arab Audio on Voice recorders --------------

We have the audio of Arabs on the recovered cockpit voice recorders.
The CVR clearly captured the words of the hijackers, including words in Arabic from the microphone in the pilot headset up to the end of the flight. The hijackers' statements, the clarity of the recording, the position of the microphone in the pilot headset, and the corresponding manipulations of flight controls provide the evidence. The quotes are taken from our listening to the CVR, aided by an Arabic speaker.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/9/11_Commission_Report/Notes/Part_1

[4] -----------Boarding Manifests ---------------------------

I have the boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows the names.
http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/Flight_11_Manifest.gif http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/Flight_11_Manifest.gif
Discussion
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=124907
Flash app shows seating, calls , hijackers,
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200018.html

[5] -----Hijacker names ------------------------------

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
1) Khalid Almihdhar - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of San Diego, California, and New York
-Alias: Sannan Al-Makki; Khalid Bin Muhammad; 'Addallah Al-Mihdhar;
Khalid Mohammad Al-Saqaf

2) Majed Moqed - Possible Saudi national
-Alias: Majed M.GH Moqed; Majed Moqed, Majed Mashaan Moqed

3) Nawaf Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey; San Diego, California
-Alias: Nawaf Al-Hazmi; Nawaf Al Hazmi; Nawaf M.S. Al Hazmi
4) Salem Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey
5) Hani Hanjour -
-Possible resident of Phoenix, Arizona, and San Diego, California
-Alias: Hani Saleh Hanjour; Hani Saleh; Hani Hanjour, Hani Saleh H. Hanjour

AMERICAN AIRLINES #11 BOEING 767
1) Satam M.A. Al Suqami- Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: June 28, 1976; Last known address: United Arab Emirates
2) Waleed M. Alshehri - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: September 13, 1974; January 1, 1976; March 3,
1976; July 8, 1977; December 20, 1978; May 11, 1979; November 5, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Orlando, Florida;
Daytona Beach, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot

3) Wail M. Alshehri
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Newton, Massachusetts
-Believed to be a pilot
4) Mohamed Atta - Possible Egyptian national
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Coral Springs, Florida;
Hamburg, Germany
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Mehan Atta; Mohammad El Amir; Muhammad Atta; Mohamed El
Sayed; Mohamed Elsayed; Muhammad Muhammad Al Amir Awag Al Sayyid
Atta; Muhammad Muhammad Al-Amir Awad Al Sayad

5) Abdulaziz Alomari - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: December 24, 1972 and May 28, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
UNITED AIRLINES #175 BOEING 767
1) Marwan Al-Shehhi
-Date of birth used: May 9, 1978
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Marwan Yusif Muhammad Rashid Al-Shehi; Marwan Yusif Muhammad
Rashid Lakrab Al-Shihhi; Abu Abdullah
2) Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Fayez Ahmad; Banihammad Fayez Abu Dhabi Banihammad; Fayez
Rashid Ahmed; Banihammad Fayez; Rasid Ahmed Hassen Alqadi; Abu
Dhabi Banihammad ; Ahmed Fayez; Faez Ahmed
3) Ahmed Alghamdi
-Alias: Ahmed Salah Alghamdi
4) Hamza Alghamdi
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Hamza Al-Ghamdi; Hamza Ghamdi; Hamzah Alghamdi; Hamza
Alghamdi Saleh
5) Mohand Alshehri
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Mohammed Alshehhi; Mohamd Alshehri; Mohald Alshehri
UNITED AIRLINES #93 BOEING 757
1) Saeed Alghamdi
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Abdul Rahman Saed Alghamdi; Ali S Alghamdi; Al- Gamdi; Saad
M.S. Al Ghamdi; Sadda Al Ghamdi; Saheed Al-Ghamdi; Seed Al Ghamdi
2) Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi - Possible Saudi national
-Date of birth used: October 11, 1980
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ahmed Alhaznawi
3) Ahmed Alnami
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ali Ahmed Alnami; Ahmed A. Al-Nami; Ahmed Al- Nawi
4) Ziad Samir Jarrah
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Zaid Jarrahi; Zaid Samr Jarrah; Ziad S. Jarrah; Ziad Jarrah
Jarrat, Ziad Samir Jarrahi

[6] -----------------------------------------

BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html

[7] ----------------------------------
Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCj8X2glIrA

[8] ------------------------------------------------

Newsweek - Remains of the Day
Nineteen hijackers died on 9/11. What should be done with what's left of them? Eve Conant
From the magazine issue dated Jan 12, 2009
...Through a combination of innovative DNA-mapping techniques, help from the FBI's crime lab and dumb luck, the scientists have now ID'd four of the 10 New York hijackers. The remains of the nine hijackers from the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites have also been confirmed; six other hijackers have yet to be identified. ...
http://www.newsweek.com/id/177724/output/print

[9] -----------------------------------------------

At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers.html
BBC Response
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html
[10] ----------------------------------------------------


bib Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers

[11] -------------------------------------------------------

News report as of Nov 2, 2001
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/11/02/attack/main316806.shtml

[12] --------------------------------------------

New York Newsday article from 9/23/01. "Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said." Most of the complaints that I've seen were that he couldn't land well. Considering what he was planning on doing, I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't exactly the top of his "skills to hone" list.
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/deceptions/nynewsday_sep23.html
Woman taught 9/11 hijacker how to fly
http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=55&fArticleId=3171841

[13] -------------------------

Photo and DNA ID match of some of the pilots.
This 9/11 Commission document explains how the FBI attempted to verify the hijackers identities (includes an apparent DNA match with Jarrah).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13950034/T5-B62-T-Eldridge-Files-Aliases-and-IDs-Fdr-Doc-Req-54-and-43-FBI-ID-of-Hijackers-by-Family-Members-PENTTBOM
http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box62_AliasesAndIDs-FBIIDsHijackers-1.pdf

[14] ---- Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers ---------

This 9/11 Commission document includes details of a forensic examination of hijacker ID cards recovered from the Pentagon, and a list of identification documents belonging to the hijackers (passports, visas, driving licences, more).
http://911myths.com/images/b/ba/Team5_Box46_Chronology_US_Identifications.pdf

[15] --------------------------------

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x34702

[16] ---------------------------------

Details in hijacker tickets.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4722224#post4722224
[17] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box51_Hijacker-Primary-Docs_AA11-ChronologySaudiVisaApps.pdf
[18] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box51_Hijacker-Primary-Docs_AA11-AbdulAzizAlomari-Passport.pdf

[twinstead]

Just silliness..
Who needs these things to know the obvious fact that 9/11 could only have been an inside job bc those results (the ones that are so firmly documented and established in fact) could only have been achieved through the use of pre-positioned explosives.

What's silliness is that you expect us to take your incredulous arguments seriously. I mean get real; who CARES what you believe? You obviously don't know what you're talking about. To rational people, you know, the ones who actually require EVIDENCE of explosives, you're just the internet equivalent of the old man on the street corner telling us we're all going to hell and the world is about to end.

We step over him and continue with our business. You, well, we just turn off our computers and POOF, you disappear just like the rest of your delightful little movement.

[MikeW]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?
He had a will with him that he'd had printed years before, so it was just some of his personal papers. The instructions wouldn't apply because there would be no significant body left to wash, no funeral with friends attending. So he had with him things that he'd carried around for years and expected to be destroyed. What exactly is the problem with that?

The man's suitcase, left behind and after these attacks found to contain all manner of incriminating evidence.
What difference would it have made if the suitcase hadn't been left behind?

I just think it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.
In my experience truthers are a very poor judge of what's likely.

I prefer to look at what the people responsible for handling luggage at that airport had to say:

Two bags from an incoming U.S. AIR flight from Portland, Maine came over too late to make AA Flight 11. The bags from U.S. Air are always late, and this is a common occurrence.
http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team7_Box18_Attas_Luggage.pdf

[Sunray Breaker]

Even if true, so what? Here's a summary of just some of the evidence we have for Atta and 18 other Arab Islamists hijacking 4 commercial jets.

The 19 Arab Islamist Hijackers Edited 7/16/09
http://911links.webs.com/19Hijackers.htm
Table of Contents
[1] Reading list for all the evidence we have about the hijackers.
[2] The martyrdom videos made by 7 of the hijackers.
[3] Arabic spoken in cockpits of hijacked planes.
[4] Boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows hijacker's names
[5] The names of the hijackers
[6] BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
[7] Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
[8] Status of Hijacker DNA - (2009)
[9] Answer to "At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive"
[10] bin Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers
[11] News Report on hijackers as of Nov 2, 2001
[12] Hanjour as a pilot
[13] Photo and DNA ID match of some of the hijackers.
[14] Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers
[15] Pictures of the Hanjour and another hijacker boarding the airplanes.
[16] Details of airline tickets for some of the hijackers.
[17] 166-page 9/11 Commission document contains lots of information on hijacker visa applications, with a particular focus on Mohamed Atta.
[18] This 9/11 Commission document includes an INS analysis of Abdulaziz al-Omari's passport, presumably recovered from the Flight 11 crash scene, and reports on another Abdulaziz al-Omari who had no connection at all with terrorism or the plot, but was caught up in one of the "hijacker still alive" stories.
If you want to knowwhy each person is on the list, read any or all of these books to get an idea of just how much evidence for who hijacked the planes and how they are connected directly to bin Laden and KSM and the American Embassy bombings in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole. Some of these names were known to the FBI even before 9/11/2001 for their crimes.

[1] ----- Essential reading list ---------------------------

The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence
Perfect Soldiers: The 9/11 Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry Mcdermott
The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America, by James Bamford.
PBS Video on Bamford http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/program.html
Spying Blind by Amy Zegart
Perfect Soldiers by Terry McDermott

[2] -------Hijacker videos -------------------------------------------

This video has the martyrdom videos made by some of the hijackers.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fu...ideoid=1619489
Hijackers video wills (Scroll down to the bottom)
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Responsibility

[3] -------Arab Audio on Voice recorders --------------

We have the audio of Arabs on the recovered cockpit voice recorders.
The CVR clearly captured the words of the hijackers, including words in Arabic from the microphone in the pilot headset up to the end of the flight. The hijackers' statements, the clarity of the recording, the position of the microphone in the pilot headset, and the corresponding manipulations of flight controls provide the evidence. The quotes are taken from our listening to the CVR, aided by an Arabic speaker.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/9/11_C...t/Notes/Part_1

[4] -----------Boarding Manifests ---------------------------

I have the boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows the names.
http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/...1_Manifest.gif http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/...1_Manifest.gif
Discussion
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=124907
Flash app shows seating, calls , hijackers,
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...s/P200018.html

[5] -----Hijacker names ------------------------------

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
1) Khalid Almihdhar - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of San Diego, California, and New York
-Alias: Sannan Al-Makki; Khalid Bin Muhammad; 'Addallah Al-Mihdhar;
Khalid Mohammad Al-Saqaf

2) Majed Moqed - Possible Saudi national
-Alias: Majed M.GH Moqed; Majed Moqed, Majed Mashaan Moqed

3) Nawaf Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey; San Diego, California
-Alias: Nawaf Al-Hazmi; Nawaf Al Hazmi; Nawaf M.S. Al Hazmi
4) Salem Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey
5) Hani Hanjour -
-Possible resident of Phoenix, Arizona, and San Diego, California
-Alias: Hani Saleh Hanjour; Hani Saleh; Hani Hanjour, Hani Saleh H. Hanjour

AMERICAN AIRLINES #11 BOEING 767
1) Satam M.A. Al Suqami- Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: June 28, 1976; Last known address: United Arab Emirates
2) Waleed M. Alshehri - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: September 13, 1974; January 1, 1976; March 3,
1976; July 8, 1977; December 20, 1978; May 11, 1979; November 5, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Orlando, Florida;
Daytona Beach, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot

3) Wail M. Alshehri
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Newton, Massachusetts
-Believed to be a pilot
4) Mohamed Atta - Possible Egyptian national
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Coral Springs, Florida;
Hamburg, Germany
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Mehan Atta; Mohammad El Amir; Muhammad Atta; Mohamed El
Sayed; Mohamed Elsayed; Muhammad Muhammad Al Amir Awag Al Sayyid
Atta; Muhammad Muhammad Al-Amir Awad Al Sayad

5) Abdulaziz Alomari - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: December 24, 1972 and May 28, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
UNITED AIRLINES #175 BOEING 767
1) Marwan Al-Shehhi
-Date of birth used: May 9, 1978
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Marwan Yusif Muhammad Rashid Al-Shehi; Marwan Yusif Muhammad
Rashid Lakrab Al-Shihhi; Abu Abdullah
2) Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Fayez Ahmad; Banihammad Fayez Abu Dhabi Banihammad; Fayez
Rashid Ahmed; Banihammad Fayez; Rasid Ahmed Hassen Alqadi; Abu
Dhabi Banihammad ; Ahmed Fayez; Faez Ahmed
3) Ahmed Alghamdi
-Alias: Ahmed Salah Alghamdi
4) Hamza Alghamdi
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Hamza Al-Ghamdi; Hamza Ghamdi; Hamzah Alghamdi; Hamza
Alghamdi Saleh
5) Mohand Alshehri
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Mohammed Alshehhi; Mohamd Alshehri; Mohald Alshehri
UNITED AIRLINES #93 BOEING 757
1) Saeed Alghamdi
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Abdul Rahman Saed Alghamdi; Ali S Alghamdi; Al- Gamdi; Saad
M.S. Al Ghamdi; Sadda Al Ghamdi; Saheed Al-Ghamdi; Seed Al Ghamdi
2) Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi - Possible Saudi national
-Date of birth used: October 11, 1980
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ahmed Alhaznawi
3) Ahmed Alnami
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ali Ahmed Alnami; Ahmed A. Al-Nami; Ahmed Al- Nawi
4) Ziad Samir Jarrah
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Zaid Jarrahi; Zaid Samr Jarrah; Ziad S. Jarrah; Ziad Jarrah
Jarrat, Ziad Samir Jarrahi

[6] -----------------------------------------

BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditor..._theory_1.html

[7] ----------------------------------
Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCj8X2glIrA

[8] ------------------------------------------------

Newsweek - Remains of the Day
Nineteen hijackers died on 9/11. What should be done with what's left of them? Eve Conant
From the magazine issue dated Jan 12, 2009
...Through a combination of innovative DNA-mapping techniques, help from the FBI's crime lab and dumb luck, the scientists have now ID'd four of the 10 New York hijackers. The remains of the nine hijackers from the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites have also been confirmed; six other hijackers have yet to be identified. ...
http://www.newsweek.com/id/177724/output/print

[9] -----------------------------------------------

At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...hijackers.html
BBC Response
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditor..._theory_1.html
[10] ----------------------------------------------------


bib Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers

[11] -------------------------------------------------------

News report as of Nov 2, 2001
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/...in316806.shtml

[12] --------------------------------------------

New York Newsday article from 9/23/01. "Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said." Most of the complaints that I've seen were that he couldn't land well. Considering what he was planning on doing, I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't exactly the top of his "skills to hone" list.
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/di...day_sep23.html
Woman taught 9/11 hijacker how to fly
http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php...icleId=3171841

[13] -------------------------

Photo and DNA ID match of some of the pilots.
This 9/11 Commission document explains how the FBI attempted to verify the hijackers identities (includes an apparent DNA match with Jarrah).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13950034/T...mbers-PENTTBOM
http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:...ijackers-1.pdf

[14] ---- Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers ---------

This 9/11 Commission document includes details of a forensic examination of hijacker ID cards recovered from the Pentagon, and a list of identification documents belonging to the hijackers (passports, visas, driving licences, more).
http://911myths.com/images/b/ba/Team...ifications.pdf

[15] --------------------------------

http://www.democraticunderground.com...ress=125x34702

[16] ---------------------------------

Details in hijacker tickets.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...24#post4722224
[17] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:...diVisaApps.pdf
[18] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:...i-Passport.pdf

Just one more reason I love JREF...You ask for an inch and they give you Texas...Nice goin' man...I'm gonna copy paste this into a seperate document and keep it around as a debating reference

[twinstead]

atavisms do you have ANY comment on the the list of some of the evidence we have that contradicts you posted by BigAl? I know. It's all faked. Right?

[Regnad Kcin]

Just silliness..
Who needs these things to know the obvious fact that 9/11 could only have been an inside job...Now, considering it in no way, shape, or form was an "inside job" (it being literally 100% impossible), may I ask why you bother?

No one on the planet has any serious issue with the evident events of that day. No one, save for those either: new to the topic (and thus not up to speed); willfully ignorant of the demonstrable facts; or pushing an agenda.

Which category do you fall under?

[BigAl]

Just one more reason I love JREF...You ask for an inch and they give you Texas...Nice goin' man...I'm gonna copy paste this into a seperate document and keep it around as a debating reference

Just bookmark the URL. It gets updated from time to time.

Much credit for the content goes to a couple years of reading the posts of JREF denizens current and past.

[lapman]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?Really? How many hijackings have you carried out that involved flying a jet into a building at 500 mph?

The man's suitcase, left behind and after these attacks found to contain all manner of incriminating evidence. Yes, u'r most certainly right, not a chance that was not Atta's own bag! That is why most people would carry along on such a mission. (Videos of planes, koran, notes to people, instructions for how to wash his body, etc)Since it wasn't left behind, your whole contention is baseless.

I don;t think this evidence matters one way or another, (there is a mountain of other more compelling evidence) I just think it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.Please provide us with this mountain of evidence. You know, like the audio recording of the explosive sequence that would have occured just prior to the collapse of all 3 buildings. That would be something that we couldn't refute. You know, like this:
79sJ1bMR6VQ

[TruthersLie]

the thing about "Atta's luggage"
I don;t believe it for a second it was his, if he was even on the plane?? Who KNows

I love twoofs. so he checks in in Portland with a suitcase. It was checked in with him. It didn't make the connecting flight, so now it is not his? Amazing intellect there twoof.


But we are told he was leading the executing of this suicide attack, yet the bag contained a copy of his will with instructions on how to treat his body after death.
If we are going to be reasonable we might ask, Why would he take any luggage on such a trip? But certainly he would not take a document that is addressed to his next of kin!


Ah.. the monday morning quarterback fallacy. Who knows why... but he did.


Just silliness..


Yes it is, so why do you bring it up?

Who needs these things to know the obvious fact that 9/11 could only have been an inside job bc those results (the ones that are so firmly documented and established in fact) could only have been achieved through the use of pre-positioned explosives.

GREAT. PROVIDE proof of pre positioned explosives. You know, witnesses who saw any, people who admit to placing any, heck any video which has the sound of CD explosives going off right before the collapse.

we will wait.

[16.5]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?

snip it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.

That folks is what we call an argument frrom incredulity!

But maybe he has a point, Can you imagine a suicidal hijacker intent on destroying himself and the plane, writing a note on the plane, a sort of suicide note, and even more unbelievably, that in all the destruction, thinking that the note would survive! UNBELIEVABLE!!!

Oh wait, that actually happened, atavisms, but when you posted your sterling example of the fallacy of argument from incredulity, you knew that, didn't you? I mean otherwise, you'd be wasting our time here, champ.

You make a good faith effort to find what I am talkng about, and if you still can't find it, someone here will give you the link.

[TruthersLie]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?


WRONG sparky. How about the hijacker who crashed ps 1771? He wrote a suicide note right BEFORE he hijacked the jet and it was found.

QrT6joi4gco
aMkWFIoVBXQ

Try again. I love this version of the "first time in history" ruse though. Other folks who have suicide hijacked jets and buses have had their wills ON THEM. Oops. 5 minutes of REAL research sparky.


The man's suitcase, left behind and after these attacks found to contain all manner of incriminating evidence. Yes, u'r most certainly right, not a chance that was not Atta's own bag! That is why most people would carry along on such a mission. (Videos of planes, koran, notes to people, instructions for how to wash his body, etc)


Since he was studying what to do up until the minute they went on the jets, it is rather important that he NOT leave that stuff behind in his hotel room... I mean after all, what if 1. housekeeping find the stuff and calls the FBI? Or 2. What if they decided to ABORT the mission. He'd need all of his materials for later.


I don;t think this evidence matters one way or another, (there is a mountain of other more compelling evidence) I just think it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.

If it is not important then why did you bring it up? oh... truther tactic #4... when getting schooled on the BS you pass off, handwave it away (it isn't that important) and then ignore it.

try again sparky.

[Corsair 115]

And was Mr Bloggs from baggage handling somehow in on this conspiracy?


Wait, I thought gorillas did airline baggage handling. Or am I just remember an old suitcase commerical?

[lapman]

Wait, I thought gorillas did airline baggage handling. Or am I just remember an old suitcase commerical?
You mean:
B2ZeIoLz8FE

[Pardalis]

That's a chimp.

[A W Smith]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?
I have no doubt that the last will was intended in case he was caught or killed before the flight. at that point it was no longer needed except in the event the mission failed.

The man's suitcase, left behind and after these attacks found to contain all manner of incriminating evidence. Yes, u'r most certainly right, not a chance that was not Atta's own bag! That is why most people would carry along on such a mission. (Videos of planes, koran, notes to people, instructions for how to wash his body, etc)
a convenient was to destroy that evidence would be to crash it into a building
I don;t think this evidence matters one way or another, (there is a mountain of other more compelling evidence) I just think it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.
You will presenting this evidence soon? I mean not all the pre-debunked stuff you posted in that other thread. You will need to hop some sort of transport out of 2006 to the current date though.

[DGM]

But we are told he was leading the executing of this suicide attack, yet the bag contained a copy of his will with instructions on how to treat his body after death.
If we are going to be reasonable we might ask, Why would he take any luggage on such a trip? But certainly he would not take a document that is addressed to his next of kin!
.

What makes you think we were dealing with a reasonable thinking man? He's about to crash a plane into a building. It wouldn't surprise me if he brought along his swim fins and snorkel.

[Quad4_72]

Except BigAl the usual incompetent answers.

Direct me to one single post you have made on this forum that has been competent.

[MarkyX]

What makes you think we were dealing with a reasonable thinking man? He's about to crash a plane into a building. It wouldn't surprise me if he brought along his swim fins and snorkel.

You forgot he crashed a plane into a building because he thinks an invisible man would appreciate his efforts.

[johnny karate]

The man's suitcase, left behind and after these attacks found to contain all manner of incriminating evidence.

Ahem...
What specific piece (or pieces) of evidence was obtained from Atta's luggage that yielded information both crucial to the "official narrative" and that couldn't have been ascertained by some other means?

[beachnut]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.
You don't fly much do you.

Totally ridiculous. I have flown over the years and my luggage has shown up at my door hours or days later; I wish they would drive me home. Late luggage is late luggage, Atta was an idiot anyway, if you had to let someones luggage miss a flight I would vote for Atta he was not nice to anyone; oops, he turned out to be a murderer! I bet the guy who checked him in did it on purpose; if you knew Atta like some people knew the arrogant bugger you would have torched his luggage. So much for being nice. BUT, Atta was late, so when you are just in time to get on a flight your luggage is stuck! But don't worry, you baggage is tagged to your final destination. Atta would not need his luggage anymore ...

The evidence in the bag? HELLO! We would never have known what was in Atta's bag if he had not committed murder! They deliver you luggage to you if it is late! Atta was a verified passenger of Flight 11, he was a suspect in a crime. How long do you think it took the FBI to get a warrant to open his late luggage?

911 truth is the biggest bunch of failed ideas ever assembled to fool the gullible.


...
I don;t think this evidence matters one way or another, (there is a mountain of other more compelling evidence) I just think it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.

You have a nano-sized amount of evidence that vaporized before you could post it? You have nothing but hearsay, lies and fantasy. Why do you think your failed opinions are a mountain of compelling evidence.

I can list your mountain of compelling evidence.

1.

Finished. Why do you never post your compelling evidence?

This is a skeptic forum and you lost your mountain of compelling evidence where? Your dog ate it? Aliens took it?

[T.A.M.]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?

The man's suitcase, left behind and after these attacks found to contain all manner of incriminating evidence. Yes, u'r most certainly right, not a chance that was not Atta's own bag! That is why most people would carry along on such a mission. (Videos of planes, koran, notes to people, instructions for how to wash his body, etc)

I don;t think this evidence matters one way or another, (there is a mountain of other more compelling evidence) I just think it's astonishing that you guys think of yourselves as skeptics and believe such an unlikely story without even blinking.

SO prior or since 9/11, how many OTHER hijackers were there that planned to ram a jet into a building at 500 mph? please provide me the names of these other hijackers who planned to do such before 9/11 (or after) but decided NOT to bring along such things?

silliness

TAM:)

[SpitfireIX]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident. His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.


First, both Atta's and al-Omari's checked bags didn't make the flight (they were both checked in Atta's name).

Second, the AA baggage expediter stated in an interview with the Massachusetts State Police, in the interviewer's paraphrase,

When luggage is not put on their (sic) correct flight, they (sic) are given to the Expediter to route to their (sic) proper destination. The Expediter finds an alternate route, using various flights, to get the bags to their destination in a speedy fashion. . . . Two bags from an incoming U.S. AIR flight from Portland, Maine, came over too late to make AA Flight 11. The bags from U.S. AIR are always late, and this is a common occurrence. [bolding mine]


Third, Atta having been flagged as a potentially suspicious passenger at Portland, the two suitcases had special tags indicating that they should not be loaded aboard the aircraft until their owner was confirmed to be on board. This could have resulted in their being separated from the other luggage from the US Air flight.

See here (http://www.scribd.com/doc/19414281/Mfr-Nara-t1a-Na-Atta-Suitcases-FBI-21004-00038) and here (http://www.scribd.com/doc/16313323/T7-B18-Atta-Luggage-Fdr-Entire-Contents-FBI-302).

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.


Please cite an "official" claim for this. Or was this just a mistaken initial media report?

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.


:tinfoil :tinfoil :tinfoil

[twinstead]

I suppose albie assumes anybody who was supposed to be in the WTC that morning but called off sick was suspicious, too.

[njslim]

[QUOTE][Well, once I couldn't find my ex wife for a couple hours. Does that count?/QUOTE]

Yes - but did you really go looking for her.....?

[NutCracker]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.

OMG!!!, by Non Sequitur it follows that 9/11 was an inside jobby-job! OMG! Call the FBI, the perps must be rounded up instantly!

[dudalb]

the thing about "Atta's luggage"
I don;t believe it for a second it was his, if he was even on the plane?? Who KNows

But we are told he was leading the executing of this suicide attack, yet the bag contained a copy of his will with instructions on how to treat his body after death.
If we are going to be reasonable we might ask, Why would he take any luggage on such a trip? But certainly he would not take a document that is addressed to his next of kin!

Just silliness..
Who needs these things to know the obvious fact that 9/11 could only have been an inside job bc those results (the ones that are so firmly documented and established in fact) could only have been achieved through the use of pre-positioned explosives.

The most annoyning thing about Twoofers is they almost NEVER come up with anything new, they keep recycling the Same Old S---t.

[ElMondoHummus]

I can list your mountain of compelling evidence.

1.

Finished. Why do you never post your compelling evidence?


:dl:

Beechnut rocks!! http://forums.randi.org/picture.php?albumid=157&pictureid=1601

[The Platypus]

How are we dealing with this one? Coincidence that Mohammed Atta's incriminating luggage was left behind at the airport and contained incriminating evidence to show he and the other terrorists were to blame for the whole incident.

His was the ONLY luggage left behind btw, AND was tagged as official luggage and NOT simply left behind to be found by whomever.

The official side of it is that the plane was behind time so the luggage could not be taken aboard, but this excuse was dropped later as it was shown the plane was on time.

HIGHLY convenient whichever way you look at it.



In the words of Barney Frank - "On what planet do you spend most of your time?"

[HeyLeroy]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?

WRONG sparky. How about the hijacker who crashed ps 1771? He wrote a suicide note right BEFORE he hijacked the jet and it was found.

QrT6joi4gco
aMkWFIoVBXQ

SO YOU ADMIT that no suicide hijacker has ever taken notes on paper written for his next-of-kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 500 mph!!!

!NS!DE JorB!!!11!!!!!
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/61974547713022614.gif

Oh, and here's a link to that event for those who can't Youtube: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1771

[Mr.Herbert]

No, because no suicide hijacker ever took notes on paper written for his next of kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 5oo mph. What would be the sense of that?

Due to posts like these, I have made some slight adjustments to the Wong-Baker Face Pain scale. This can now be used when describing how much the stupid hurts from Truther's postings like the one above.

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o233/CameronFox/wong_baker_faces.jpg

Here is how I scored the above post:

http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o233/CameronFox/wong_baker_facesred.jpg

[Dumb All Over]

Hi albie! How ya doin'?

Today was your first post in over a year. How come? What took you so long to post again?

This has been such an incredible week in the forums. First, p'doh and Lucus get banned (again). And now our beloved albie has returned. Yay!

WB, albie.

Yours,
DAO

[T.A.M.]

Hi albie! How ya doin'?

Today was your first post in over a year. How come? What took you so long to post again?

This has been such an incredible week in the forums. First, p'doh and Lucus get banned (again). And now our beloved albie has returned. Yay!

WB, albie.

Yours,
DAO

yah I know. PDoh thinks he is smart cause he signed up a bunch of dummy accounts. I am sure the boy is obsessed (understatement) with the forum to the point where he is likely right now signing up yet another "mole" account.

TAM:)

[TruthersLie]

SO YOU ADMIT that no suicide hijacker has ever taken notes on paper written for his next-of-kin along with him when he was planning on flying a jet into a building at 500 mph!!!

!NS!DE JorB!!!11!!!!!
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/61974547713022614.gif

Oh, and here's a link to that event for those who can't Youtube: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1771

Leroy. I have to use youtube because it is the only medium that most twoofs seem capable of understanding. I mean we just have to look at Bill S, Heiwa, and Red Ibis to see how incredibly poor their reading comprehension is. And you go and link to something they have to READ. What is wrong with you? For shame.

[HeyLeroy]

:D

That link was for people who can read!

[Bobert]

WOW what happened in Portland that they flagged Atta as suspicious?
Did they decline that FAT NWO paycheck?

[SpitfireIX]

WOW what happened in Portland that they flagged Atta as suspicious?
Did they decline that FAT NWO paycheck?


I recall reading somewhere that it was random (a certain percentage of passengers were selected for spot checks). Here (http://www.scribd.com/doc/18886550/t7-b16-Capps-Fdr-6804-Mfr-Tsa-Briefing-441) is a TSA briefing on the matter, but it is heavily redacted, as the actual algorithms for non-random selection are classified, for obvious reasons.

[Reactor drone]

It wasn't a given that they would succeed in taking over the plane. He and his cohorts could have died in the attempt. Why not be prepared for that possibility?

Seconded.

[Retrograde]

Losing one item in nineteen is about right for airline baggage handling, isn't it?

I fly fairly frequently, and my luggage gets delayed about 5% of the time, so I'm not surprised. What I'd like to do is figure out how to consistently get it delayed on the trip home so I don't have to carry it on the train and from the station to the house.

As for why he had all this stuff in his suitcase, who knows? Maybe he didn't want his carry-on bag cluttered up with non mission-critical documents. Maybe he was afraid his carry-on might be searched. Maybe he thought he could use it again if something went wrong and he couldn't pull off the hijack successfully. The only person who knows is dead.

[Algebra34]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?

[ElMondoHummus]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?

That's something I wish I knew the answer to myself. Unfortunately, it's unanswerable; the only ones who know for certain are dead. All we can do is examine the evidence and take it where it leads us. And it all quite firmly converges on the hijackers having been on board, regardless of these niggling little points that bother everybody - myself included - but do not falsify or change anything that's already known.

[Puggy]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?

Why do You think they took their luggage with them?

[Justin39640]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?

um so they would look legit
duh

[Sam.I.Am]

As has been said earlier. There was no reason to leave them behind. The plot might have been aborted for whatever reason (there was some speculation at the time that there were other flights that were supposed to be hijacked but never left the ground for example). Why leave behind evidence to be found by housekeeping? Especially if there's a chance no matter how slight that you might not complete your mission.

[Horatius]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?



I seem to recall that people traveling without checked bags are more likely to be flagged as suspicious - they probably didn't want to stand out from the crowd any more than was necessary.

[Algebra34]

Why do You think they took their luggage with them?

I don't know. If I was planning on dying by either crashing a plane or attempting to, I would just take some carry on. If I had to take any luggage I would put nothing incriminating in it that could jeopardize the plan should security examine it. I would just put items in it that looked like I was on a business trip or a vacation. It's stupid. But then again I would guess these individuals were pretty stupid. Except when you remember they all fooled everyone long enough to be succsessful with their evil plan. I guess.

[beachnut]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?
Wanted to look normal.
Leaving luggage in room is not normal.
They were not planning on dying, they were murdering.

[Justin39640]

Wanted to look normal.
Leaving luggage in room is not normal.
They were not planning on dying, they were murdering.

this is such an obvious point no one should have to type it out

[ElMondoHummus]

I don't know. If I was planning on dying by either crashing a plane or attempting to, I would just take some carry on. If I had to take any luggage I would put nothing incriminating in it that could jeopardize the plan should security examine it. I would just put items in it that looked like I was on a business trip or a vacation. It's stupid. But then again I would guess these individuals were pretty stupid. Except when you remember they all fooled everyone long enough to be succsessful with their evil plan. I guess.

That's actually quite reasonable. Like I said before, I've wondered that myself. But anomalies exist with any piece of recorded history. If it would affect what we know about the events of that day, or go so far as to indicate that a piece of evidence we already have is faulty or erroneous, then I'd pay more attention to it. But again, given the convergence of existing evidence, I have to admit, I assign this question nearly zero importance and just write it off to being one of those oddities of history I'll never get the answer to.

ETA: And as Sam.I.Am and Beechnut pointed out, the explanations could be terribly mundane: A plot abort, or simply not wanting to tip anyone off by leaving the luggage behind. There are plenty of explanations that are reasonable and fit the scenario.

[Algebra34]

That's actually quite reasonable. Like I said before, I've wondered that myself. But anomalies exist with any piece of recorded history. If it would affect what we know about the events of that day, or go so far as to indicate that a piece of evidence we already have is faulty or erroneous, then I'd pay more attention to it. But again, given the convergence of existing evidence, I have to admit, I assign this question nearly zero importance and just write it off to being one of those oddities of history I'll never get the answer to.

ETA: And as Sam.I.Am and Beechnut pointed out, the explanations could be terribly mundane: A plot abort, or simply not wanting to tip anyone off by leaving the luggage behind. There are plenty of explanations that are reasonable and fit the scenario.

I fully agree. I just thought it was stupid and that someone that stupid should have been caught long before it ever got that far. They didn't hatch this plan overnight. But, just my opinion.

[Sam.I.Am]

Luggage wasn't normally opened back then unless they had probable cause. Dog alerts for drugs or explosives, suspicious X-Rays or sounds. The only exception was on incoming international flights where they might or might not have you open it at customs.

[beachnut]

... Except when you remember they all fooled everyone long enough to be succsessful with their evil plan. I guess.
I don't call 75 percent successful. That is a low standard.

Flight 93 terrorists failed completely. Flight 93 Passengers attacked and stopped the terrorists.

Flight 93 Passengers figured out 911 in minutes; 911 Truth has no clue after 8 years.

Would the luggage give clues to the plot?
I never heard that the terrorist wrote down the complex plot:
1. Kill pilots
2. Crash plane into large buildings

They had to search for years for a crew of 19 who could memorize the complex plot. Only 19 had to know step 1. and only 4 had to know step 2.

[Algebra34]

I don't call 75 percent successful. That is a low standard.

Flight 93 terrorists failed completely. Flight 93 Passengers attacked and stopped the terrorists.

Flight 93 Passengers figured out 911 in minutes; 911 Truth has no clue after 8 years.

Well they didn't fail completely. They still killed a whole lot of people after they were successful boarding the plane and taking it over. Maybe not as much as they planned to but it wasn't a total wash. Picking a plane full of people from NJ was the stupid move. People from Jersey will kick your ass.

[A W Smith]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?

if they left it behind, they risked having their plans revealed had their flight been delayed.

[Algebra34]

Luggage wasn't normally opened back then unless they had probable cause. Dog alerts for drugs or explosives, suspicious X-Rays or sounds. The only exception was on incoming international flights where they might or might not have you open it at customs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5413462.stm

[tsig]

I don't know. If I was planning on dying by either crashing a plane or attempting to, I would just take some carry on. If I had to take any luggage I would put nothing incriminating in it that could jeopardize the plan should security examine it. I would just put items in it that looked like I was on a business trip or a vacation. It's stupid. But then again I would guess these individuals were pretty stupid. Except when you remember they all fooled everyone long enough to be succsessful with their evil plan. I guess.

1. Leave bags in room

2. housekeeper finds and notifies police

3. police find you

4. no virgins for you

ETA: I see it's been said and said.

[Algebra34]

1. Leave bags in room

2. housekeeper finds and notifies police

3. police find you

4. no virgins for you

I don't think they should have had some of that stuff with them at all. To me the hotel is better than the car or the airport. It was stupid to have it at all is my point.

[Justin39640]

Well they didn't fail completely. They still killed a whole lot of people after they were successful boarding the plane and taking it over. Maybe not as much as they planned to but it wasn't a total wash. Picking a plane full of people from NJ was the stupid move. People from Jersey will kick your ass.

sully woulda beat em all down
and landed the plane in the field

[16.5]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?

Atta's Koran was in it.

Knowing what we know about the hijackers, that fact is enough to explain why they took the luggage with them

[UNLoVedRebel]

I don't think they should have had some of that stuff with them at all. To me the hotel is better than the car or the airport. It was stupid to have it at all is my point.

Some people get sloppy and leave clues. Example:

http://i625.photobucket.com/albums/tt332/JREFImages/sock.jpg

[triforcharity]

I fly fairly frequently, and my luggage gets delayed about 5% of the time, so I'm not surprised. What I'd like to do is figure out how to consistently get it delayed on the trip home so I don't have to carry it on the train and from the station to the house.

As for why he had all this stuff in his suitcase, who knows? Maybe he didn't want his carry-on bag cluttered up with non mission-critical documents. Maybe he was afraid his carry-on might be searched. Maybe he thought he could use it again if something went wrong and he couldn't pull off the hijack successfully. The only person who knows is dead.

Take the outside tag off, and put a wind up clock, and a pile of wires. that outta do the trick!!

J/k, don't do this.

[Retrograde]

Take the outside tag off, and put a wind up clock, and a pile of wires. that outta do the trick!!

Mr. Retrograde had a pouch full of cables and connectors in his checked bag on a recent trip, which got TSA's attention. All legit: power supplies for the laptop, adapters for European plugs, chargers for phones, PDAs, etc. In the process of examining it TSA managed to tear all the id tags off. We went to Zurich; the bag ended up in Las Vegas, which is where United's lost luggage ends up. After several phone calls, they found it and got it to us in Italy. Nothing was missing.

2 or 3 wine bottles will also cause TSA to open checked bags: I've always had the wine arrive intact with a note.

Back to why they took baggage. Consider this scenario: although Tuesday morning flights were selected because they were relatively empty, suppose that morning the first flight filled up with a large tour group or something. Atta doesn't think his muscle can handle all of them, so he calls off at least his part of the attack and goes on to LA as if nothing were in the air. At least he has his Koran for solace as he goes back to the drawing board. And he doesn't have to go shopping for clean underwear :)

[MikeW]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later?
As people have said, it's the normal thing to do. Leaving it behind may raise alerts, and more serious ones than usual given who they are (several Arab-looking guys stay in the same room overnight then leave all their luggage behind and take a taxi to the airport).

Also: what if the plan went wrong? What if some unexpected problem delayed all planes from Boston for an hour? What if a few have them had been arrested? They would have to consider the possibility that some or perhaps all of the hijackings would have become impossible/ impractical, and so would need a fallback plan, to move on or regroup. If they didn't have their luggage, and it was also drawing unwanted attention to them as a group, then that would me more difficult.

ETA: Oops, sorry, I didn't notice that Retrogade said basically the same thing.:o

[TruthersLie]

Why did these guys take luggage at all? Carry on wasn't enough? Couldn't they have just left it all in their hotel room for someone to find later? They were planning on dying one way or another weren't they?

I already answered this HI.

But we can go over it again.
1. If they left it in their rooms and it was discovered BEFORE the attack happened (a possibility, because once you check out your room is cleaned very quickly) then it is possible the FBI or other would be warned. Operational security
2. What if they decided to call off the attacks? They might need the materials for a later attempt. Basic operational tactics.
3. What a GREAT way to destroy evidence. Bring it with you so it will be destroyed in the attack.

wow... that took me only about 5 minutes to come up with. Are you really that dense HI?

[TruthersLie]

I don't know. If I was planning on dying by either crashing a plane or attempting to, I would just take some carry on. If I had to take any luggage I would put nothing incriminating in it that could jeopardize the plan should security examine it. I would just put items in it that looked like I was on a business trip or a vacation. It's stupid. But then again I would guess these individuals were pretty stupid. Except when you remember they all fooled everyone long enough to be succsessful with their evil plan. I guess.

What was in the baggage that would make security "jepordize" the plan? They claimed to be muslims, so they needed the koran, and the rest of it is just documents. In fact carrying a will in your baggage is quite common. (I have a copy of mine in my bags).

They were rather smart, and they only needed to get it right ONE time.

[TruthersLie]

Mr. Retrograde had a pouch full of cables and connectors in his checked bag on a recent trip, which got TSA's attention. All legit: power supplies for the laptop, adapters for European plugs, chargers for phones, PDAs, etc. In the process of examining it TSA managed to tear all the id tags off. We went to Zurich; the bag ended up in Las Vegas, which is where United's lost luggage ends up. After several phone calls, they found it and got it to us in Italy. Nothing was missing.

2 or 3 wine bottles will also cause TSA to open checked bags: I've always had the wine arrive intact with a note.

Back to why they took baggage. Consider this scenario: although Tuesday morning flights were selected because they were relatively empty, suppose that morning the first flight filled up with a large tour group or something. Atta doesn't think his muscle can handle all of them, so he calls off at least his part of the attack and goes on to LA as if nothing were in the air. At least he has his Koran for solace as he goes back to the drawing board. And he doesn't have to go shopping for clean underwear :)

<slight derail, but sorta on this topic>
When we were first in China (6 years back) we were in central china where they didn't have cheese (they hyper pasturize milk so it lasts like 6 months, and they think cheese is disgusting). My wife went back to the states for a conference. On the way back she bought a 4 kilo cheese wheel, and since it was a pretty direct flight back she picked up a thing of sour cream (which they also don't have in central china, it translates as BAD MILK, and thehy don't eat it). She wrapped the sour cream in frozen blocks (the blue ice stuff). So when she got to china, she found that her bags had definately been opened. The cheese had 6 different "core" samples missing and TSA stickers all over it.

We wondered about it for a few minutes and then put it together. What does a wheel of cheese look like in an xray machine? and then you have a tube surrounded by 6 rectangular blocks. i'm surprised it actually made it through customs.

She then told me she was wondering why there was an hour delay at each airport... doh...
<derail off>

[albie]

Sorry guys but after all you've said, it's still TOO convenient. It smacks of planted evidence. IF they had so much more to incriminate Atta why plant evidence?

I'm not saying he wasn't guilty, but suppose the FBI knew about him far in advance and wanted to confirm QUICKLY who was to blame? They might not have trusted the terrorists to prove their guilt at all.

The most important thing here is QUICK INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE. That luggage provided that in a very CONVENIENT way.

And I'm not a truther, I was a firm debunker until a few days ago when this little gem came up in discussion. I just want you to explain this highly convenient evidence.

And if you think that evidence wasn't incriminating then why do you see debunkers using the contents of the luggage themselves to prove Atta's guilt?

[Undesired Walrus]

the thing about "Atta's luggage"
I don;t believe it for a second it was his, if he was even on the plane?? Who KNows

But we are told he was leading the executing of this suicide attack, yet the bag contained a copy of his will with instructions on how to treat his body after death.
If we are going to be reasonable we might ask, Why would he take any luggage on such a trip? But certainly he would not take a document that is addressed to his next of kin!


It was an old will written in the mid 90's. His will (possibly new) was recited in a video recorded in 2000.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article656683.ece

Despite the deadly tasks the men had been assigned, they appear in high spirits, laughing and smiling in front of the camera. Only when Atta, with an AK-47 propped on a wall beside him, reads a document marked in Arabic “the will”, does he become solemn. Both are well groomed, without the haggard appearance of the identity mugshots issued after September 11.

[tsig]

It smacks of planted evidence. IF they had so much more to incriminate Atta why plant evidence?

You go from suggesting evidence was planted to asking why it was planted in two sentences.

First you have to prove it was planted then you can ask the question why. Otherwise you can toss any old speculation or guess up in the air.

[MikeW]

The most important thing here is QUICK INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE. That luggage provided that in a very CONVENIENT way.
Atta was flagged up by phone calls from Flight 11 before it had even reached the WTC. And most of the others were identified at suspects while flight 93 was still in the air. This is really just the same as the "indestructible passport" argument: truthers pretend it's somehow significant and must have been planted, but the reality is it's not necessary to the overall case, and had the passport and luggage not been found, everyone would still have been identified very quickly & events would proceed in much the same way.

[Stellafane]

I suppose albie assumes anybody who was supposed to be in the WTC that morning but called off sick was suspicious, too.

In that case, I wonder what one would make of Seth MacFarlane (creator of Family Guy and spinoffs) who was supposed to be on Flight 11, but missed it because (get this for a feeble excuse) his agent told him the flight left at "quarter past eight" when in fact it left at "quarter of eight." Hmmm...and then Family Guy goes and provokes the entire Muslim world by sacreligiosly showing an image of Mohammed, no doubt in an effort to make them look like a bunch of extremists to get so upset over a mere "joke," and maybe get them to do something like throw a rock an an embassy so we could retaliate with nukes. Remember, nothing is coincidental as far as 9/11 is concerned. Quarter past eight my ass...

[Regnad Kcin]

Sorry guys but after all you've said, it's still TOO convenient...I just want you to explain this highly convenient evidence."Never mind that what you've said more than measures up to any reasonable standard of explanation, I need more!"

[TruthersLie]

Sorry guys but after all you've said, it's still TOO convenient. It smacks of planted evidence. IF they had so much more to incriminate Atta why plant evidence?

monday morning quarterback fallacy. They didn't plant evidence.


I'm not saying he wasn't guilty, but suppose the FBI knew about him far in advance and wanted to confirm QUICKLY who was to blame? They might not have trusted the terrorists to prove their guilt at all.

Ah... so it is LIHOP with planted evidence. Of course.


The most important thing here is QUICK INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE. That luggage provided that in a very CONVENIENT way.


Other than the quick incriminating evidence gathered about who the hijackers were based on the phone calls, the reports of who hijacked the jets, the backtracking and finding the cars and motel rooms?


And I'm not a truther, I was a firm debunker until a few days ago when this little gem came up in discussion. I just want you to explain this highly convenient evidence.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_pRkZ3D_rsZo/Snct4mIFOyI/AAAAAAAABT0/8EEJm3-82T8/s200/steaming-poo.thumbnail.jpg


And if you think that evidence wasn't incriminating then why do you see debunkers using the contents of the luggage themselves to prove Atta's guilt?

Attas guilt was proven by his actions. The suitcase is part of the totality of the evidence. It isn't the "smoking" gun that shows his guilt.

[SpitfireIX]

Sorry guys but after all you've said, it's still TOO convenient.


Argument from personal incredulity. Fail.

It smacks of planted evidence.


What part of "The bags from U.S. AIR are always late, and this is a common occurrence" did you not understand? Fail.

IF they had so much more to incriminate Atta why plant evidence?


Begging the question of whether the evidence was planted. Fail.

I'm not saying he wasn't guilty, but suppose the FBI knew about him far in advance and wanted to confirm QUICKLY who was to blame? They might not have trusted the terrorists to prove their guilt at all.


Baseless speculation. Fail.

The most important thing here is QUICK INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE.


The most important thing here is reasoning based on the facts, rather than your aforementioned baseless speculation. Fail.

That luggage provided that in a very CONVENIENT way.


And it was also very CONVENIENT that Timothy McVeigh was pulled over for driving without a license plate, that the officer noticed him carrying a concealed weapon and arrested him, and that he had a copy of The Turner Diaries in his car. Do you believe that law enforcement never gets lucky breaks?

And I'm not a truther, I was a firm debunker until a few days ago when this little gem came up in discussion.


I think not. You're focusing on a single piece of evidence that you claim is anomalous, and acting as though this one purported anomaly somehow calls the entire generally accepted version of events into question. This is the typical MO of a conspiracist or Holocaust denier, rather than that of a critical thinker.

I just want you to explain this highly convenient evidence.


It has been explained to you several times. But, quite frankly, you seem to be unwilling or unable to accept the perfectly reasonable explanations offered.

And if you think that evidence wasn't incriminating then why do you see debunkers using the contents of the luggage themselves to prove Atta's guilt?


To quote Charles Babbage, "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." The short answer is, it's only incriminating in hindsight.

[BigAl]

Sorry guys but after all you've said, it's still TOO convenient. It smacks of planted evidence. IF they had so much more to incriminate Atta why plant evidence?

I'm not saying he wasn't guilty, but suppose the FBI knew about him far in advance and wanted to confirm QUICKLY who was to blame? They might not have trusted the terrorists to prove their guilt at all.

The FBI knew the names of many of the hijackers as of the summer of 2001. That knowledge was in the individual branch offices and the FBI failed to consolidate the information. This prevented FBI HQ from seeing the extent of the plot. On 9/11 it was easy to put all these names together and this was the start of the investigation.

Read Spying Blind by Amy Zegart.

[Furcifer]

In that case, I wonder what one would make of Seth MacFarlane (creator of Family Guy and spinoffs) who was supposed to be on Flight 11, but missed it because (get this for a feeble excuse) his agent told him the flight left at "quarter past eight" when in fact it left at "quarter of eight." Hmmm...and then Family Guy goes and provokes the entire Muslim world by sacreligiosly showing an image of Mohammed, no doubt in an effort to make them look like a bunch of extremists to get so upset over a mere "joke," and maybe get them to do something like throw a rock an an embassy so we could retaliate with nukes. Remember, nothing is coincidental as far as 9/11 is concerned. Quarter past eight my ass...

That was an episode of South Park, not Family Guy.

[T.A.M.]

Yah it was an episode of "South Park". The plot was that the show "Family Guy" was threatening to show a picture of Mohamed, and IIRC something to do with Manatee being the true writers for the "Family Guy" show.

TAM:)

[johnny karate]

What specific piece (or pieces) of evidence was obtained from Atta's luggage that yielded information both crucial to the "official narrative" and that couldn't have been ascertained by some other means?

Bump for albie.

[twinstead]

Yea, I suppose the next step in your "investigation", albie, is to show that the evidence in the suitcase was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back that broke the case wide open, because I don't see it.

You have NOTHING to base your opinion that this was somehow an anomaly other than your baseless incredulity. What kind of investigator are you?

[HeyLeroy]

(snip)

I'm not saying he wasn't guilty, but suppose the FBI knew about him far in advance and wanted to confirm QUICKLY who was to blame? They might not have trusted the terrorists to prove their guilt at all.

(snip)

Exactly whom, amongst the almost 31,000 people that the FBI employs, are "in on" your supposed conspiracy?

And I'm not a truther,

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/6197454770d2500d5.gif

[ElMondoHummus]

Sorry guys but after all you've said, it's still TOO convenient. It smacks of planted evidence. IF they had so much more to incriminate Atta why plant evidence?

But they did have so much more to incriminate Atta with. Even if you eliminate the luggage, the convergence of all the other pieces still place him on the jet. The video of him at the Portland airport, combined with the unbroken ticket and manifest trail to the Boston flight alone does this, let alone his accidental broadcast over the radio instead of the in-cabin public announcement system.

Even if you accept that the luggage is "too convenient" a piece of evidence and discard it, you still have a very solid case.

[Brattus]

Sorry guys but after all you've said, it's still TOO convenient. It smacks of planted evidence. IF they had so much more to incriminate Atta why plant evidence?

I'm not saying he wasn't guilty, but suppose the FBI knew about him far in advance and wanted to confirm QUICKLY who was to blame? They might not have trusted the terrorists to prove their guilt at all.

The most important thing here is QUICK INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE. That luggage provided that in a very CONVENIENT way.

And I'm not a truther, I was a firm debunker until a few days ago when this little gem came up in discussion. I just want you to explain this highly convenient evidence.

And if you think that evidence wasn't incriminating then why do you see debunkers using the contents of the luggage themselves to prove Atta's guilt?

Lets say for the sake of argument that what you are suggesting is correct.
The FBI, CIA and the entire evil guberment planted that bag.
Atta was not the terrorist pilot but a passenger/victim.
So what?
Somebody on that plane flew it into the tower.
The only thing your pointing out is that the government as a whole could not identify who the terrorist pilot was.
Which of course they did and rather quickly.
My question is what does any of that have to do with the evil guberment murdering 1000s of it's citizens for no reason at all?

Also the terrorist keeping their luggage with them makes perfect sense to me.
The terrorist knew what they were going to do and had no way of knowing the FBI wasn't one step behind them and closing fast.
They in fact would have to act under the presumption that the FBI was on their tracks.

A morbid but good example of that way of thinking is if I were planing on going on a mass kill spree at the local McDonald's and suicide by cop.
First off I obviously would not be in a rational mind set.
My main and only goal would be to complete my mission.
So I would not sell off all my stuff or burn down my house because that might draw attention of others to try to stop me from my mission.
My point being right up to the second I opened the door and walked into the McDonald's everything I did would have to look as normal as I could make it.

I find it rather sad I or others here would even have to explain this to you.

[SpitfireIX]

Even if you accept that the luggage is "too convenient" a piece of evidence and discard it, you still have a very solid case.


I think albie is trying to set up a LIHOP scenario where "they" planted evidence that would make the perpetrators' identities immediately obvious. What "they" could possibly have hoped to gain by this that would have even come close to justifying the added risk of the plot's being exposed isn't clear to me, however.

[T.A.M.]

Can someone clarify this for me.

In the Wiki Entry about this, there is the following comment,


Atta's luggage

The passport of hijacker Abdulaziz Alomari was found in Mohamed Atta’s left-behind luggage.[8]

When examining Mohamed Atta's left-behind luggage, the FBI found important clues about the hijackers and their plans. His luggage contained papers that revealed the identity of all 19 hijackers, and provided information about their plans, motives, and backgrounds.[9] The FBI was able to determine details such as dates of birth, known and/or possible residences, visa status, and specific identity of the suspected pilots. However, none of these documents have been scrutinized by independent legal experts.[10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBOM#cite_note-9


Now if you go down to the bottom of the link, where we look up the references, for reference [10], we have the following,


10. Reaves, Jessica (January 2, 2002). "The Case Against Zacarias Moussaoui". Time. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,190413,00.html.

So I go to the link and read the article, and the article does not even mention the Atta luggage...it is entirely about the Moussaoui Trial.

Is this simply an error in the reference #, an intentional misrepresentation of information, or what?

Regardless, it once again proves that you need to take Wiki with a grain of salt.

TAM:)

[Arus808]

i would fix that citation.

[T.A.M.]

to what? Link for citation [9] is no longer available. Man Wiki sucks.

TAM:)

[deep]

to what? Link for citation [9] is no longer available. Man Wiki sucks.


The first page is stored in Google's cache - just search on the article name.

Here's the entire article: http://www.securityinfowatch.com/Homeland+Security/1282349?pageNum=1

[TruthersLie]

Can someone clarify this for me.

In the Wiki Entry about this, there is the following comment,



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PENTTBOM#cite_note-9


Now if you go down to the bottom of the link, where we look up the references, for reference [10], we have the following,



So I go to the link and read the article, and the article does not even mention the Atta luggage...it is entirely about the Moussaoui Trial.

Is this simply an error in the reference #, an intentional misrepresentation of information, or what?

Regardless, it once again proves that you need to take Wiki with a grain of salt.

TAM:)

TAM. This is one of the great weaknesses of Wikipedia as a source. Obviously it was cited by a truther who was ignorant of the facts. (normal piss poor reading comprehension) but it has apparently been fixed.

That is why I always tell my students to CHECK the citations offered from the original citation because wikipedia is filled with those types of intentional (and for the most part unintentional) errors.

[Lupie]

Wow, the airlines can actually lose your checked luggage...

Who would have known? I'm shocked! Where would the world be without troofers to educate us about such terrible things? I'll sleep better tonight, because of you, Sir Troofer. Carry on, Albie sir...

[Arus808]

ssems that the OP never has traveled at all, or had connecting flights so close together, that they couldn't transfer the luggage from one plane to another.

Case in point. I was on my way to Florida from Hawaii. The plane left on time from Hawaii, but 40 minutes into the flight the capt made an announcement that we would have to turn around because the landing gear light wouldn't go off. So we circled for 30 minutes (to dump fuel) and turned around and headed back to HNL. That put my flight now, 2 hours behind schedule till they brought in another plane, or fixed the current one. 30 minutes later, they fixed hte problem loaded us all back on the plane.

My connecting flight in Houston however was 3 1/2 hours after I was supposed to have landed there (my layover time). Since we were delayed 3 hours, I had to run from one end of the terminal to the other side, to make it for my flight, since now I had no buffer time. I reached the gate at 15 minutes till the flight was supposed to leave, but the attendant informed me that they couldn't get my checked in luggage to the connecting plane. Suffice to say, I made the flight but my luggage would have to go out on the next flight (3 hours later) and I would have to pick it up at the airport 3 hours after I landed.

Yes, luggage can get separated from the person traveling especially when flights get delayed and you are literally running to catch your connecting flight.

Not as bad as my friend. On one flight, he had to go back to the airport 8 hours later to pick up his luggage that missed his connecting flight.

[KreeL]

We all know that black ops wouldn't plant any evidence to incriminate the patsies. That would be too unbelievable and require way too much planning. :p

[TruthersLie]

We all know that black ops wouldn't plant any evidence to incriminate the patsies. That would be too unbelievable and require way too much planning. :p

Welcome back twoofie... which sock were you using that got banned?

We all know that black ops wouldn't be found out by mental giants like twoofs.

again twoofie, any support for the blanket generalization? of course not.

[AJM8125]

Welcome back twoofie... which sock were you using that got banned?

We all know that black ops wouldn't be found out by mental giants like twoofs.

again twoofie, any support for the blanket generalization? of course not.


Please don't feed the troll. Thanks. (http://www.muzzlefree.com/politics-religion-f1/lol-i-got-suspended-at-jref-for-pwning-a-bunch-of-guvtardz-t1789.htm)

[dropzone]

When our family moved to china, one of our bags was left in a connecting airport (SFO) and it took 4 days to catch up to us with about half of the contents missing. I wouldn't call it "highly convenient", I'd call it airport incompetence.Speaking as a former baggage agent, had your luggage been properly packed and agents from a connecting airport had not labeled it, "Contains marijuana," we wouldn't have stolen your wife's undies and your Old Spice deodorant out of spite. :D

[ElMondoHummus]

Please don't feed the troll. Thanks. (http://www.muzzlefree.com/politics-religion-f1/lol-i-got-suspended-at-jref-for-pwning-a-bunch-of-guvtardz-t1789.htm)

Seconded. Kreel simply posts truther clichés in the hopes of getting a rise out of people, clichés which have been shown time and time again to lack evidence. Put him on ignore. You won't miss anything.

[albie]

What part of "The bags from U.S. AIR are always late, and this is a common occurrence" did you not understand? Fail.


[/I].

What part of "His was the only item that didn't make it on the plane." is NOT suspicous?

The one item, and of the leader of the attack on the towers, and contains items that would push the investigation towards certain people on those planes.

If you cannot admit that reads as suspicous then I would have to wonder if you weren''t a little over eager to not concede one point on this subject. You know, like the truthers act.

It IS a religion, after all, this debunking/conspiracy field.

Not ONE thing has been said that takes away the convenientness of that bag. Sorry. Mass Fail.

[albie]

Wow, the airlines can actually lose your checked luggage...

Who would have known? I'm shocked! Where would the world be without troofers to educate us about such terrible things? I'll sleep better tonight, because of you, Sir Troofer. Carry on, Albie sir...

I'm not a truther.

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient. Funny that. But continue to make snide angry comments for your pals on here. Maybe that will work. HAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!!!

[McHrozni]

What part of "His was the only item that didn't make it on the plane." is NOT suspicous?

This part:
"His was the only item that didn't make it on the plane."

The one item, and of the leader of the attack on the towers, and contains items that would push the investigation towards certain people on those planes.

He arrived late at the airport, and his luggage was on the watch list, which means it was more likely not to get on the plane, especially if he was late. It stands to reason that if any luggage was to be late, it was to be most likely his.

Not ONE thing has been said that takes away the convenientness of that bag. Sorry. Mass Fail.

See above.

McHrozni

[MikeW]

The one item, and of the leader of the attack on the towers, and contains items that would push the investigation towards certain people on those planes.
Ah, it actually sounds like you're getting close to making a real claim. Please, continue. If the baggage hadn't been found, then how would the investigation have been different?

[TruthersLie]

What part of "His was the only item that didn't make it on the plane." is NOT suspicous?

The one item, and of the leader of the attack on the towers, and contains items that would push the investigation towards certain people on those planes.

If you cannot admit that reads as suspicous then I would have to wonder if you weren''t a little over eager to not concede one point on this subject. You know, like the truthers act.

It IS a religion, after all, this debunking/conspiracy field.

Not ONE thing has been said that takes away the convenientness of that bag. Sorry. Mass Fail.

Yes you are right. You are a massive fail.

1. The bag missed the connection.... and that is important because? Oh you find it suspicious... ok. Isn't that special.

Have you never lost a bag when flying? I have. It wasn't suspicious to me... inconvenient since it was the only bag that missed the flight.

There is no point to concede... a bag missed the flight, so what?

Nothing directly in his bag was not corroborated by multiple other sources, so it is a rather small blip and not an issue.

Now if you had video showing FBI agents planting the suitcase, that would be a FACT.
Or if you could show that it wasn't his bag (ie the handwriting doesn't match, he never attended a flight school, or anything else) that might be interesting. But you don't.

You are making a bad fallacy of trying to connect the dots AFTER the event, and using poor logic.

[TruthersLie]

I'm not a truther.

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient. Funny that. But continue to make snide angry comments for your pals on here. Maybe that will work. HAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!!!

YOu are most definately a twoof. You have been provided answers to your "questions" which are accurate, logical and honest. Instead of reevaluating your ideas and making them fit the evidence, you snidely say "it is too convenient." Your twoof is showing...

Here is a great example. When I left home this morning I had my passport with me and a bag full of clothes. Now had there been an accident and I had been killed, someone could look through my stuff (a bag full of clothes, including shoes) and a passport and said "he was leaving his wife and kids and leaving the country." Yet, today I took a bag full of clothes and shoes to a local charity, and I hand to use my passport for my travel tickets. It is amazing that with no knowledge of the events, you can recreate a scenerio and then say, "see, I'm right."

That poor logic is also very easy to use on other examples. That means any one who didn't go into to work on 9/11 in the towers is just "too convenient." I mean they lived instead of dying. Very bad logic ther twoofie. You should try again.

[16.5]

I'm not a truther.

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient. Funny that. But continue to make snide angry comments for your pals on here. Maybe that will work. HAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!!!

"too convienient."

Absolutely wonderful example of the fallacy of incredulity, which is of course a subset of argumentum ad ignorantiam

"The argument from personal incredulity, also known as argument from personal belief or argument from personal conviction, refers to an assertion that because one personally finds a premise unlikely or unbelievable, the premise can be assumed to be false, or alternatively that another preferred but unproven premise is true instead."

Come back to us when you have a real argument.

[NoZed Avenger]

Have you never lost a bag when flying? I have. It wasn't suspicious to me... inconvenient since it was the only bag that missed the flight.


So . . . by using the same logic as the OP . . . you're an ADMITTED TERRORIST!!!1!!!

[TruthersLie]

ssshhhhh.

I could tell you, but then gwb, and dick chaney would have to kill you.

of course running around in beijing with NO freaking underwear for 2 days waiting for the bag to arrive was just peachy...

[Furcifer]

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient.

The smoking gun is late ariving luggage?

If you guys are going to make this conspiracy work you really need to come up something more anomalous than a piece of luggage.

You're not even trying anymore.

[twinstead]

I'm still trying to figure out how we are expected to "counter the fact that the bag is too convenient". What the hell does that even mean?

[NoZed Avenger]

of course running around in beijing with NO freaking underwear for 2 days waiting for the bag to arrive was just peachy...

Ah, I remember college.

[R.Mackey]

I'm still trying to figure out how we are expected to "counter the fact that the bag is too convenient". What the hell does that even mean?

Apparently, we're expected to make it "less convenient."

I agree, this constitutes an unreasonable burden of proof. Ignore would seem to be the correct response.

[beachnut]

I'm not a truther.

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient. Funny that. But continue to make snide angry comments for your pals on here. Maybe that will work. HAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!!!

When will you support your luggage conspiracy with facts?

It was Atta's luggage, if Atta had called off the operation on 911, Atta would have his luggage that day or the next. The airlines deliver luggage to you when it is late, misplaced, or does not make the flight. Your lack of experience and knowledge does not make an event a conspiracy due to your ignorance on the subject.

What is next? Who is...

[Macgyver1968]

Ah, I remember college.
Ah...me too. But I think we're both talking about a different kind of bag. :)

[stateofgrace]

I'm not a truther.

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient. Funny that. But continue to make snide angry comments for your pals on here. Maybe that will work. HAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!!!

Wow, what a mystery.

In the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States), an average of 1 of 150 people have their checked baggage misdirected or left behind each year.
If a passenger arrives late for a flight, their luggage will sometimes not have enough time to be loaded on the plane. If tags are accidentally torn off airport workers may not know where to send the luggage. Human error is also common as tags are misread or luggage is placed in the wrong location. Sometimes there is no room in the plane or weight problems. Security delays can also cause bags to arrive on a later flight than their owner.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_luggage

But things are getting better as time passes. :rolleyes:

AUC chairman Tina Tietjen said: “According to the latest industry data, airlines mishandled 42 million bags worldwide in 2007 compared to 30 million in 2005.” The Council predicts that as airline passenger travel is expected to double in the next decade, the problem is only going to get worse. By 2019, the forecast is that nearly 70 million pieces of luggage will be mishandled each year.
http://ecanadatravel.suite101.com/article.cfm/airlines_misplace_42_million_bags_in_2007#ixzz0TBj A7tZG

[Furcifer]

I'm still trying to figure out how we are expected to "counter the fact that the bag is too convenient". What the hell does that even mean?

Of the multitude, the most easily attained?

[dudalb]

The smoking gun is late ariving luggage?

If you guys are going to make this conspiracy work you really need to come up something more anomalous than a piece of luggage.

You're not even trying anymore.

Really. Anybody who flies with any regualrity will have a few horror stories about misplaced luggage to tell.

[beachnut]

I'm not a truther. ...
Just like Nixon?
Well, I'm NOT a crook. or was he was? Richard Nixon after the conspiracy, not a theory, was exposed (Watergate) and a Pulitzer Prize earned for exposing it. When is your Pulitzer Prize coming for exposing the Atta luggage conspiracy?

[Sam.I.Am]

Not counting military flights I've taken 6 commercial round trip flights across the country. I've had my luggage lost once. I went to San Francisco, my luggage went to Denver. Lost luggage is an unfortunate expected inconvenience every once in awhile.

[ktesibios]

If the mean rate of left-behind luggage is 1 in 150, then the likelihood of at least one person from a group of 19 having his luggage left behind comes out to about 0.119, or 11.9%.

albie seems to be laboring under the belief that Atta's lost luggage was a one-in-a-million occurence, i.e., "too convenient".

In fact, it wasn't even a one-in-ten chance- it was slightly more likely than that.

[dudalb]

If the mean rate of left-behind luggage is 1 in 150, then the likelihood of at least one person from a group of 19 having his luggage left behind comes out to about 0.119, or 11.9%.

albie seems to be laboring under the belief that Atta's lost luggage was a one-in-a-million occurence, i.e., "too convenient".

In fact, it wasn't even a one-in-ten chance- it was slightly more likely than that.

Asa anybody who flies a lot can tell you through personal experience.

[A W Smith]

I'm not a truther.

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient. Funny that. But continue to make snide angry comments for your pals on here. Maybe that will work. HAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!!!


Texas lost luggage fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy)

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Do truthers not comprehend the concept of convergence of evidence? It's not only the existence of the luggage that demonstrates that Atta was on the jet!


http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/jref/the-evidence_1.gif

http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/jref/the-evidence_2.gif

http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/jref/the-evidence_3.gif

[Furcifer]

Like i said, the standards for incredulity in the truth movement are dropping as fast as the their membership numbers.

:woo

[apathoid]

Let me see if I have this right...Atta has a tight connection in Boston, along with a switch in airlines, and a certain truther thinks its strange that his luggage didn't make it? There is no suitable facepalm.

Working in the industry, and knowing what I know about the process of baggage handling, I'm freaking amazed when I see my bags coming out of the chute. Oh and shame on you albie for accusing the airlines of complicity in a mass murder. :nope:

[akama1]

Atta arrived late at the gate "sweating bullets (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24596)" according to the agent who handled his boarding pass. Apparently the flight from Portland Maine (http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/news/local/3114385.shtml) he arrived on docked at a terminal at the opposite end of the airport. He was one of the last to board so it is understandable that his bag missed the cut off.

I can agree with this from experience. The only time I have had luggage misplaced, I took advantage of changing to an early flight on my flexible ticket. Even though I had a 30 minute window before the flight, my luggage did not travel with me. It ended up at my destination a few flights later.

Just because the flight was not delayed, does not mean that that he (as we can see above) was not late. It is a lot easier to board a late passenger that it is to board late luggage

[LashL]

http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/jref/the-evidence_1.gif

http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/jref/the-evidence_2.gif

http://images.cl1mh4224rd.com/jref/the-evidence_3.gif




If visual depictions were TLA-eligible, this post would have both my nom and my vote. Kudos, Cl1mh4224rd. :)

[Travis]

I love the idea that Atta's bag being held for another flight is "too convenient."

No, the idea that, at a time when 1/250 people had this happen to them, one person out of four different flights with 265 people had their luggage delayed is anything but "too convenient" it is, in fact, statistically expected.

No, "too convenient" would have been all 19 hijackers having their luggage delayed with the luggage containing loads of plans outlining everything they were doing along with a video taped message explaining why they were doing it. Oh, and they absolutely insist, in a separate document, that "no way does the Bush Administration have anything to do with this plot. Go Rangers!" Yeah, that would have been "too convenient."

So, unless someone can name one good reason that Atta's luggage could not have been delayed via the normal circumstances that delays 1/250 people's luggage I move we discard this entire idea of "too convenient" to the rubbish bin.

[MikeW]

In January 2002 the FBI produced a "case summary for 9/11", itemising what they knew so far. If the luggage was so important then you'd expect it to make an appearance here, right? And sure enough, it does:

Later in the day on September 11, 2001, two pieces of luggage in the name of MOHAMED ATTA, which had not been loaded onto Flight 11, were recovered at Boston's Logan Airport. A subsequent search of this baggage revealed items to include a three page letter handwritten in Arabic which, upon translation, was found to contain instructions for the hijackers. Copies of this letter were also recovered at the crash site of Flight 93 and in the car registered to NAWAF AL-HAMZI that was found at Dulles International Airport.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13120344/FBI-Case-Summary-for-911-from-the-911-Commission-Files

And that, apparently, is it. The only thing they thought worthy of mention is the letter, which is only interesting in retrospect (it's not explicit about what they're going to do), and was found elsewhere anyway. Seems like the luggage really wasn't necessary at all.

[albie]

If I wanted to point towards a certain type of person(A muslim) commiting this crime I would plant a Koran, a knife and a letter that contained suggestive quotes from the Koran.

Nothing you guys have said is fair or honest or rational.

You have not countered the fact that the luggage is a convenient coincidence. Too convenient. It stinks. So Atta was late. Says who? They guys who planted the case?

Admit this looks suspicious, and move on.

[albie]

I love the idea that Atta's bag being held for another flight is "too convenient."

No, the idea that, at a time when 1/250 people had this happen to them, one person out of four different flights with 265 people had their luggage delayed is anything but "too convenient" it is, in fact, statistically expected.

No, "too convenient" would have been all 19 hijackers having their luggage delayed with the luggage containing loads of plans outlining everything they were doing along with a video taped message explaining why they were doing it. Oh, and they absolutely insist, in a separate document, that "no way does the Bush Administration have anything to do with this plot. Go Rangers!" Yeah, that would have been "too convenient."

So, unless someone can name one good reason that Atta's luggage could not have been delayed via the normal circumstances that delays 1/250 people's luggage I move we discard this entire idea of "too convenient" to the rubbish bin.

Ever heard of overkill?

It is convenient because HE WAS THE HEAD OF THE TERRORISTS WHO FLEW THE PLANES INTO BUILDINGS.

The ONE item left behind just HAPPENS to be his and doesn't just contain his underwear and chocolate but contains a KORAN a knife and suggestive quotes from the Koran. To point towards him, the owner of the knife, being a muslim.

head out of sand.

[NutCracker]

If I wanted to point towards a certain type of person(A muslim) commiting this crime I would plant a Koran, a knife and a letter that contained suggestive quotes from the Koran.

Nothing you guys have said is fair or honest or rational.

You have not countered the fact that the luggage is a convenient coincidence. Too convenient. It stinks. So Atta was late. Says who? They guys who planted the case?

Admit this looks suspicious, and move on.

Can you spot the circular logic in the above? And it is WE that are not rational?

[TruthersLie]

Ever heard of overkill?


Ever heard that 1 in 150 peoples bags misses their flights? How many people were on thos 4 jets? over 250... so that would suggest that 2 peoples bags missed their flights.

Ever hear that Atta arrived LATE tot he gate, and was sweating?
Ever hear that bags don't always make the flights?


It is convenient because HE WAS THE HEAD OF THE TERRORISTS WHO FLEW THE PLANES INTO BUILDINGS.


Argument from incredulity noted. And that makes it suspicious because? It is a bag that missed the flight. so what?


The ONE item left behind just HAPPENS to be his and doesn't just contain his underwear and chocolate but contains a KORAN a knife and suggestive quotes from the Koran. To point towards him, the owner of the knife, being a muslim.

Why would it hold the koran? Oh he claims to be a muslim, so having his holy book would be good.

What information that is part of the investigation comes from that bag? What key piece of information which would make the investigation fall apart comes from that bag? Oh nothing. try again.


head out of sand.

we can hope... we can only hope. But you won't... this is your "smoking gun?"

Really?

[TruthersLie]

If I wanted to point towards a certain type of person(A muslim) commiting this crime I would plant a Koran, a knife and a letter that contained suggestive quotes from the Koran.

Really? I'd plant images of him with UBL (oh wait we have that from his video, and the Al Q. videos). I'd plant the full plans with everyones names and flights (oh wait that didn't happen).


Nothing you guys have said is fair or honest or rational.

You should really look up those words in dictionary.com They don't mean what yo think they mean.


You have not countered the fact that the luggage is a convenient coincidence. Too convenient. It stinks. So Atta was late. Says who? They guys who planted the case?

Ah finally you post the key word. Coincidence. Yes it is a coincidence. Just like finding their parked cars at the airports, and then backtracking them to their hotels to gather their DNA.

Atta was late because his connecting flight was late... oh wait.. was the pilot of the connecting flight in on it? Were the ATC's making that jet late?
Basic research twoof... go back to homeroom and try again.

Admit this looks suspicious, and move on.

Not really. It makes me go, hmmmm... Damn *********** airlines, can't keep someones bag with them.

[albie]

>>Argument from incredulity noted. And that makes it suspicious because? It is a bag that missed the flight. so what?

Sweet lord. Just ignore what I'm saying why doncha. I am a debunker and I know the techniques you use. I've been banned from several conspiracy sites for being too vehment in my attack of truther nuts. I was debunking a site called conspiracycentral when the notion of the late luggage came up. Check it out. I'm no truther. You'll probably still find posts by me on abovetopsecret and the david icke forum. Not a truther at all.

I brought the luggage problem here and have received nothing but weak responses and diversionary tacticts. SUch as:>>Argument from incredulity noted. And that makes it suspicious because? It is a bag that missed the flight. so what?

It isn't to do with luggage being late it is THAT specific luggage being late. The only items left behind and not smashed to bits in a plane crash just happen to be from the main man behind the crash. They happen to contain a knife and a koran and suggestive quotes from the koran that look like they were picked out to look suspicious. It looks like a plant to me. I'm not saying this is the most vital of all the evidence top support that they were the culprits. I'm saying it could have been planted to back up the investigation. It may not have even been necessary. You wouldn't know that for certain if you were planting evidence. Take it out of the investigation and it would not make a difference. That doesn't matter to the suspiciousness of the luggage itself.

Now, stop saying "What's odd about late luggage?" and face what I am actually saying. If you can. IT must be painful to concede even one point. :)))

[albie]

Seriously, if the luggage doesn't spark even a bit of suspicion from you then it is no wonder you are debunkers.

You've come across as avoiding the issue.

Just like truther nuts. It's the same mentality.

[NutCracker]

Seriously, if the luggage doesn't spark even a bit of suspicion from you then it is no wonder you are debunkers.

You've come across as avoiding the issue.

Just like truther nuts. It's the same mentality.

You have not yet explained WHY it is an issue in the first place. And no, circular arguments don't count. Until you have done so, I'm afraid, you are the nut here.

[Dave Rogers]

And you still haven't countered the FACT that the bag is too convenient.

That's because it's not a fact, it's an opinion. Your opinions aren't evidence of anything other than your state of mind at the time you express them, which none of us particularly want to dispute.

Dave

[albie]

You have not yet explained WHY it is an issue in the first place. And no, circular arguments don't count. Until you have done so, I'm afraid, you are the nut here.

OMG. It's a bit obvious. What do you think I mean? I've set it out for you time enough.

It is obvious plant material. Koran knife etc. You are feigning ignorance. Another technique I've seen and used dozens of times with conspiracy nuts.

What circular argument? The one that you guys keep foisting onto what I'm saying making it easier for you to argue against? It's called strawmanning. All the old tricks.

[albie]

That's because it's not a fact, it's an opinion. Your opinions aren't evidence of anything other than your state of mind at the time you express them, which none of us particularly want to dispute.

Dave

Koran, knife and suggestive quotes is NOT convenient? OMG.

[twinstead]

Seriously, if the luggage doesn't spark even a bit of suspicion from you then it is no wonder you are debunkers.

You've come across as avoiding the issue.

Just like truther nuts. It's the same mentality.

double post

[twinstead]

Seriously, if the luggage doesn't spark even a bit of suspicion from you then it is no wonder you are debunkers.

You've come across as avoiding the issue.

Just like truther nuts. It's the same mentality.

BS. If you were really a skeptic you would at first say "hummm" about the suitcase, then you WOULD DO RESEARCH and find out just how common it is, find out that the evidence in the suitcase in NO way, shape or form changed the outcome of the investigation, find out just how HUGE the amount of other evidence is that points to 19 hijackers, and come to the rational conclusion that it was just a simple coincidence. Unless you believe the contents of that suitcase is what sealed the case for the government. Then you really would be nuts.

Not a whole lot more of a coincidence than a worker in the WTC calling in sick on 9/11, or a passenger on one of the doomed planes missing their flight. Don't pull this incredulity thing on us. It is NOT suspicious even upon the most cursory investigation.

[twinstead]

Koran, knife and suggestive quotes is NOT convenient? OMG.

So do you think the rest of the HUGE amount of evidence collected that connects him and the other hijackers to the crime is also too convenient? Don't be shy.

[BigAl]

OMG. It's a bit obvious. What do you think I mean? I've set it out for you time enough.

It is obvious plant material. Koran knife etc. You are feigning ignorance. Another technique I've seen and used dozens of times with conspiracy nuts.

What circular argument? The one that you guys keep foisting onto what I'm saying making it easier for you to argue against? It's called strawmanning. All the old tricks.

The suitcase, when considered in the context of all the evidence we have for the 19 hijackers, is just more evidence consistant with the standard story; 19 Islamic hijackers caputred 4 planes and this caused all the death and destruction on 9/11.

Here is just some of the evidence.

The 19 Arab Islamist Hijackers Edited 7/16/09

http://911links.webs.com/19Hijackers.htm

Table of Contents
[1] Reading list for all the evidence we have about the hijackers.
[2] The martyrdom videos made by 7 of the hijackers.
[3] Arabic spoken in cockpits of hijacked planes.
[4] Boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows hijacker's names
[5] The names of the hijackers
[6] BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
[7] Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
[8] Status of Hijacker DNA - (2009)
[9] Answer to "At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive"
[10] bin Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers
[11] News Report on hijackers as of Nov 2, 2001
[12] Hanjour as a pilot
[13] Photo and DNA ID match of some of the hijackers.
[14] Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers
[15] Pictures of the Hanjour and another hijacker boarding the airplanes.
[16] Details of airline tickets for some of the hijackers.
[17] 166-page 9/11 Commission document contains lots of information on hijacker visa applications, with a particular focus on Mohamed Atta.
[18] This 9/11 Commission document includes an INS analysis of Abdulaziz al-Omari's passport, presumably recovered from the Flight 11 crash scene, and reports on another Abdulaziz al-Omari who had no connection at all with terrorism or the plot, but was caught up in one of the "hijacker still alive" stories.
If you want to knowwhy each person is on the list, read any or all of these books to get an idea of just how much evidence for who hijacked the planes and how they are connected directly to bin Laden and KSM and the American Embassy bombings in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole. Some of these names were known to the FBI even before 9/11/2001 for their crimes.

[1] ----- Essential reading list ---------------------------

The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence
Perfect Soldiers: The 9/11 Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry Mcdermott
The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America, by James Bamford.
PBS Video on Bamford http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/program.html
Spying Blind by Amy Zegart
Perfect Soldiers by Terry McDermott

[2] -------Hijacker videos -------------------------------------------

This video has the martyrdom videos made by some of the hijackers.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1619489
Hijackers video wills (Scroll down to the bottom)
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Responsibility

[3] -------Arab Audio on Voice recorders --------------

We have the audio of Arabs on the recovered cockpit voice recorders.
The CVR clearly captured the words of the hijackers, including words in Arabic from the microphone in the pilot headset up to the end of the flight. The hijackers' statements, the clarity of the recording, the position of the microphone in the pilot headset, and the corresponding manipulations of flight controls provide the evidence. The quotes are taken from our listening to the CVR, aided by an Arabic speaker.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/9/11_Commission_Report/Notes/Part_1

[4] -----------Boarding Manifests ---------------------------

I have the boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows the names.
http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/Flight_11_Manifest.gif http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/Flight_11_Manifest.gif
Discussion
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=124907
Flash app shows seating, calls , hijackers,
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200018.html

[5] -----Hijacker names ------------------------------

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
1) Khalid Almihdhar - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of San Diego, California, and New York
-Alias: Sannan Al-Makki; Khalid Bin Muhammad; 'Addallah Al-Mihdhar;
Khalid Mohammad Al-Saqaf

2) Majed Moqed - Possible Saudi national
-Alias: Majed M.GH Moqed; Majed Moqed, Majed Mashaan Moqed

3) Nawaf Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey; San Diego, California
-Alias: Nawaf Al-Hazmi; Nawaf Al Hazmi; Nawaf M.S. Al Hazmi
4) Salem Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey
5) Hani Hanjour -
-Possible resident of Phoenix, Arizona, and San Diego, California
-Alias: Hani Saleh Hanjour; Hani Saleh; Hani Hanjour, Hani Saleh H. Hanjour

AMERICAN AIRLINES #11 BOEING 767
1) Satam M.A. Al Suqami- Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: June 28, 1976; Last known address: United Arab Emirates
2) Waleed M. Alshehri - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: September 13, 1974; January 1, 1976; March 3,
1976; July 8, 1977; December 20, 1978; May 11, 1979; November 5, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Orlando, Florida;
Daytona Beach, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot

3) Wail M. Alshehri
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Newton, Massachusetts
-Believed to be a pilot
4) Mohamed Atta - Possible Egyptian national
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Coral Springs, Florida;
Hamburg, Germany
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Mehan Atta; Mohammad El Amir; Muhammad Atta; Mohamed El
Sayed; Mohamed Elsayed; Muhammad Muhammad Al Amir Awag Al Sayyid
Atta; Muhammad Muhammad Al-Amir Awad Al Sayad

5) Abdulaziz Alomari - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: December 24, 1972 and May 28, 1979
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
UNITED AIRLINES #175 BOEING 767
1) Marwan Al-Shehhi
-Date of birth used: May 9, 1978
-Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Marwan Yusif Muhammad Rashid Al-Shehi; Marwan Yusif Muhammad
Rashid Lakrab Al-Shihhi; Abu Abdullah
2) Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Fayez Ahmad; Banihammad Fayez Abu Dhabi Banihammad; Fayez
Rashid Ahmed; Banihammad Fayez; Rasid Ahmed Hassen Alqadi; Abu
Dhabi Banihammad ; Ahmed Fayez; Faez Ahmed
3) Ahmed Alghamdi
-Alias: Ahmed Salah Alghamdi
4) Hamza Alghamdi
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Hamza Al-Ghamdi; Hamza Ghamdi; Hamzah Alghamdi; Hamza
Alghamdi Saleh
5) Mohand Alshehri
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Mohammed Alshehhi; Mohamd Alshehri; Mohald Alshehri
UNITED AIRLINES #93 BOEING 757
1) Saeed Alghamdi
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Abdul Rahman Saed Alghamdi; Ali S Alghamdi; Al- Gamdi; Saad
M.S. Al Ghamdi; Sadda Al Ghamdi; Saheed Al-Ghamdi; Seed Al Ghamdi
2) Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi - Possible Saudi national
-Date of birth used: October 11, 1980
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ahmed Alhaznawi
3) Ahmed Alnami
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida
-Alias: Ali Ahmed Alnami; Ahmed A. Al-Nami; Ahmed Al- Nawi
4) Ziad Samir Jarrah
-Believed to be a pilot
-Alias: Zaid Jarrahi; Zaid Samr Jarrah; Ziad S. Jarrah; Ziad Jarrah
Jarrat, Ziad Samir Jarrahi

[6] -----------------------------------------

BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html

[7] ----------------------------------
Answers to Zeitgeist The Movie: - Flight Manifests
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCj8X2glIrA

[8] ------------------------------------------------

Newsweek - Remains of the Day
Nineteen hijackers died on 9/11. What should be done with what's left of them? Eve Conant
From the magazine issue dated Jan 12, 2009
...Through a combination of innovative DNA-mapping techniques, help from the FBI's crime lab and dumb luck, the scientists have now ID'd four of the 10 New York hijackers. The remains of the nine hijackers from the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites have also been confirmed; six other hijackers have yet to be identified. ...
http://www.newsweek.com/id/177724/output/print

[9] -----------------------------------------------

At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers.html
BBC Response
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html
[10] ----------------------------------------------------


bib Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers

[11] -------------------------------------------------------

News report as of Nov 2, 2001
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/11/02/attack/main316806.shtml

[12] --------------------------------------------

New York Newsday article from 9/23/01. "Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said." Most of the complaints that I've seen were that he couldn't land well. Considering what he was planning on doing, I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't exactly the top of his "skills to hone" list.
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/deceptions/nynewsday_sep23.html
Woman taught 9/11 hijacker how to fly
http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=55&fArticleId=3171841

[13] -------------------------

Photo and DNA ID match of some of the pilots.
This 9/11 Commission document explains how the FBI attempted to verify the hijackers identities (includes an apparent DNA match with Jarrah).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13950034/T5-B62-T-Eldridge-Files-Aliases-and-IDs-Fdr-Doc-Req-54-and-43-FBI-ID-of-Hijackers-by-Family-Members-PENTTBOM
http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box62_AliasesAndIDs-FBIIDsHijackers-1.pdf

[14] ---- Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers ---------

This 9/11 Commission document includes details of a forensic examination of hijacker ID cards recovered from the Pentagon, and a list of identification documents belonging to the hijackers (passports, visas, driving licences, more).
http://911myths.com/images/b/ba/Team5_Box46_Chronology_US_Identifications.pdf

[15] --------------------------------

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x34702

[16] ---------------------------------

Details in hijacker tickets.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4722224#post4722224
[17] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box51_Hijacker-Primary-Docs_AA11-ChronologySaudiVisaApps.pdf
[18] ------------------------------



http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:Team5_Box51_Hijacker-Primary-Docs_AA11-AbdulAzizAlomari-Passport.pdf
[Get your free website today!]

[MikeW]

I'm saying it could have been planted to back up the investigation
You want someone to agree with that? Fine, I'll agree with that. It could have been. There is a probability of this that's greater than zero.

Now, in order to identify whether it's a high enough probability to be interesting, we have to look at other evidence.

Like the baggage handling people saying this wasn't an unusual occurrence, bags from that airline were late all the time.

Like the fact that the FBI's own summary of the 9/11 case mentioned it only in conjunction with the letter in Arabic, I assume the one you refer to here as "suggestive quotes from the koran that look like they were picked out to look suspicious", and notes that the same information was found elsewhere.

Like the fact that hijacker documentation in general was found in other places (crash scenes, cars) - this wasn't the sole source.

Like the fact that it wasn't necessary for quick identification of the hijackers - the "official story" says the authorities had a very good idea who they were before Atta's luggage was even discovered.

Like the fact that it's not necessary for anything else, either - there were other ways to identify the hijackers. Had the luggage been lost forever it would have made no difference.

So, could the luggage have been planted? Yes. Is there any evidence for that? No. Was there any benefit from planting it? No. In fact quite the opposite - like the WTC passport, it's done nothing more than raise suspicions.

And does anyone have any solid explanation of why it was planted? No. You've nothing more than arguments from incredulity and bald assertions, "this is supicious because I say it's suspicious". Get as angry as you like about that being pointed out, it wouldn't make any difference: people aren't impressed because what you're offering really isn't very impressive.

[Travis]

Ever heard of overkill?

Of course. Overkill is the essential heart of what "too convenient" means. A distinction you seem to have missed.

It is convenient because HE WAS THE HEAD OF THE TERRORISTS WHO FLEW THE PLANES INTO BUILDINGS.

That was convenient. How was it "too" convenient?

The ONE item left behind just HAPPENS to be his and doesn't just contain his underwear and chocolate but contains a KORAN a knife and suggestive quotes from the Koran. To point towards him, the owner of the knife, being a muslim.

Why would it necessarily contain underwear or chocolate? Because you expect it too? Why should it not contain a Qur'an or knife? Because you think he wouldn't? Why, since he was into taking inspiration to murder from the Qur'an, would he have not have suggestive notes from it? Oh yeah, because you don't think it should.

Not all people are going to do things the way you think they should. Not all events are going to happen the way you think they should.

It's not all about you.

head out of sand.

:rolleyes:

Seriously, if the luggage doesn't spark even a bit of suspicion from you then it is no wonder you are debunkers.

Nothing suspicious has been presented. A perfectly normal event (delayed luggage) happened in a way that is perfectly expected (delay during a transfer for an airline notorious for delayed luggage) that just happened to be fortuitous for investigators. So one thing in their investigation actually turned out to be easier. On the other hand none of the data recorders from Flight 11 or 175 were ever recovered. So that was a unfortunate event for the investigators. Those are the ways these things happen. Some things will be easier than others.

You've come across as avoiding the issue.

Hardly. In fact we investigated this matter after you brought it up and looked up statistics and quotes about it. That you want to dismiss what we found is your problem.

Just like truther nuts. It's the same mentality.

Seriously, what did you want us to do? What actions on our part would have made you think we are top of this in a fashion more so than we already were?

[Dave Rogers]

Koran, knife and suggestive quotes is NOT convenient? OMG.

Albie, it appears that you have acquired what Ryan Mackey refers to as an Irreducible Delusion. See http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=118389 for a complete explanation of the term.

Your starting premise here, as best I can express it, is that it is a suspicious circumstance that Mohammed Atta's luggage was delayed, failed to make it on to the plane, and contained incriminating material, and that this casts doubt on the generally accepted fact that Mohammed Atta was the leader of the attackers on 9/11. This, is appears, is your own personal Irreducible Delusion.

You've had it explained to you that Atta's luggage may well have been delayed because he was on a terrorist watch list, and that therefore it was not a fortunate coincidence that his luggage was left off the plane, but rather a causal consequence of his being the leader of the hijackers. It also seems to me trivially obvious that the presence of incriminating material in his luggage is no less a causal consequence of his being the leader of the hijackers. Finally, it's been pointed out that the impact of the evidence on the progress and conclusions of criminal investigations into 9/11 was negligible. Your response to these arguments has been simply to repeat your statement of opinion, accompanied by a demand that your opinion be refuted. It appears, then, that this is a position which you are not prepared to reassess in the light of evidence; in other words, a classic example of the Irreducible Delusion.

I have nothing more to add, therefore, than Ryan Mackey's final words on the matter:

For our part, the debate should be simplified, and if indeed as it appears Irreducible Delusion lies at the heart of it all, then nothing more remains to be said.

Dave

[NutCracker]

OMG. It's a bit obvious. What do you think I mean? I've set it out for you time enough.

It is obvious plant material. Koran knife etc. You are feigning ignorance. Another technique I've seen and used dozens of times with conspiracy nuts.


Errr.. as I said, circular arguments do not count.


What circular argument? The one that you guys keep foisting onto what I'm saying making it easier for you to argue against? It's called strawmanning. All the old tricks.

What circular argument, you ask? Errr.. You assume government agents where busy that day doing all kind of nasty things like planting phony evidence. You then put forward one of this nasty things in favour of the position that government agents where busy that day doing all kind of nasty things. How about that circular argument?

[stateofgrace]

Must be great to be a truther and just make stuff up to suit your needs. A suitcase turns up therefore it was planted. On the other hand had no suitcase turned up that would also bolster their arguments because there is no evidence.

An around win situation.

Evidence = fake = Inside job.

No evidence = Inside job.

[TruthersLie]

Sweet lord. Just ignore what I'm saying why doncha. I am a debunker and I know the techniques you use. I've been banned from several conspiracy sites for being too vehment in my attack of truther nuts.

I call bs. Cuz it is twoofie.

I was debunking a site called conspiracycentral when the notion of the late luggage came up. Check it out. I'm no truther. You'll probably still find posts by me on abovetopsecret and the david icke forum. Not a truther at all.


You most definately are a twoofie. There is no issue with the bag. it is a coincidence (which when you examine the 1 in 150 peoples bags are late or miss the flights in normal operations, and you have nearly 300 passengers on the 4 jets, you end up with 2 people who will have their bags miss the flights)


I brought the luggage problem here and have received nothing but weak responses and diversionary tacticts.


There is no "luggage problem." His bags missed the connecting flight. Which is rather common considering he had only 30 minutes to connect, was connecting with a DIFFERENT carrier. You have received information which shows that it is a coincidence and you wish to dance around like you just scored the game winning touchdown.

All you have done is use the argument from incredulity in a circular reasoning problem.

so again I ask

SUch as:>>Argument from incredulity noted. And that makes it suspicious because? It is a bag that missed the flight. so what?



It isn't to do with luggage being late it is THAT specific luggage being late. The only items left behind and not smashed to bits in a plane crash just happen to be from the main man behind the crash.

That is such a great logical leap it requires help. I mean if you figure that anytime there is a crime, but something is left behind it shows "overkill." It isn't, and it doesn't.

What KEY piece of evidence came from his luggage? Huh twoof? Please point to it.


They happen to contain a knife and a koran and suggestive quotes from the koran that look like they were picked out to look suspicious. It looks like a plant to me.

Thank you for FINALLY putting in the key words. Isn't that nice. It looks like airport incompetence to me.

It is amazing... I mean if I were taking my bible (I'm not christian) heaven help me. Mine is filled wtih highlighted text, quotes, and notes in the margins. I have to remember not to bring my bible with me and leave it in my luggage next time I go and kill myself.

He claimed to be a muslim. He was following his faith, and to NOT have his Quor'an with him would be even MORE out of character. And a knife... wow.. it is amazing.


I'm not saying this is the most vital of all the evidence top support that they were the culprits.


For what purpose? Huh? Oh to make the consipracy larger... yes. We need to plant MORE people in on the inside job of the LIHOP to make it an even larger Rube Goldberg (them damn jooooooz) conspiracy machine.


I'm saying it could have been planted to back up the investigation.

It makes no sense. They had their names from the manifests. They had a rough approximation of where the hijackers came from based on the ATC and airphone calls, so they KNEW who did it within a day or two. They then backtracked them. The FBI had over 4,000 agents on the case. There was NO REASON to "plant" anything.


It may not have even been necessary. You wouldn't know that for certain if you were planting evidence. Take it out of the investigation and it would not make a difference. That doesn't matter to the suspiciousness of the luggage itself.

The luggage was suspicious? What crime did it commit? Was it fleeing justice? How can you say it was suspicious...
or do you mean the luggage KNEW it was an inside jobby job and just trying to gather enough evidence?


Now, stop saying "What's odd about late luggage?" and face what I am actually saying. If you can. IT must be painful to concede even one point. :)))

There is NO point to concede. Late luggage happens. The fact that atta's luggage missed the is nothing more than what happens.

Under your logic, take a look at psa 1771. I mean the suicidal mans suicide note survived the plane crash... that is very suspicious isn't it?
Or we can go to the "undamaged" passport being recovered... ohhhh inside jobby job...

you are falling for the texas sharpshooter fallacy...

[TruthersLie]

OMG. It's a bit obvious. What do you think I mean? I've set it out for you time enough.

It is obvious plant material. Koran knife etc. You are feigning ignorance. Another technique I've seen and used dozens of times with conspiracy nuts.

What circular argument? The one that you guys keep foisting onto what I'm saying making it easier for you to argue against? It's called strawmanning. All the old tricks.

OMG. dude u r m8king me PMSLMAO.
See you want it to be the "smoking gun" of lihop. It is not a FACT. It is your opinion. I'm find with your opinion.

Now if it really was "over kill" there would have been detailed plans with the hijackers name and flight numbers. there would have been a picture of UBL and KSM, and a suidice note.

that would be overkill...

oh wait... it has to be discrete overkill... how silly of me.

The circular argument that you think it is too convenient. why is it too convenient? because it is attas bag. Why is that too convenient? Because he lead the attacks. Why is that too convenienent? because it is attas bags. Why is that too convenienent? because atta lead the attacks... round and round you go.

[RedIbis]

Is there an explanation for why Atta drove to Portland from Boston, only to board a plane for Boston?

[Dave Rogers]

Is there an explanation for why Atta drove to Portland from Boston, only to board a plane for Boston?

Is there a reason why that supports a conspiracy theory more than the actual events, or are you just anomaly hunting as usual?

Dave

[twinstead]

Is there an explanation for why Atta drove to Portland from Boston, only to board a plane for Boston?

What, no comment on the thread topic Red?

[BigAl]

Is there an explanation for why Atta drove to Portland from Boston, only to board a plane for Boston?

Do you have a point you are trying to make or defend or are you just asking pointless questions.

[RedIbis]

What, no comment on the thread topic Red?

Granted, the question wasn't about the luggage, although a skeptic might have questions about that. Atta's activity before 9/11 is very important to piecing together the narrative of events.

But if you would rather I ask about the luggage, I'll first point out that the luggage wasn't lost, it didn't make the flight. How that happened is valid inquiry, especially since there was an hour between the Portland flight and the Boston flight.

[twinstead]

Granted, the question wasn't about the luggage, although a skeptic might have questions about that. Atta's activity before 9/11 is very important to piecing together the narrative of events.

But if you would rather I ask about the luggage, I'll first point out that the luggage wasn't lost, it didn't make the flight. How that happened is valid inquiry, especially since there was an hour between the Portland flight and the Boston flight.

If you question the narrative of events, perhaps you should address the HUGE amount evidence collected during the investigation, because to any rational person that pretty much gives in fairly good detail the narrative of the events. I'm not sure exactly what you're doing, but it is pretty irrelevant as far as I can see.

[RedIbis]

If you question the narrative of events, perhaps you should address the HUGE amount evidence collected during the investigation, because to any rational person that pretty much gives in fairly good detail the narrative of the events. I'm not sure exactly what you're doing, but it is pretty irrelevant as far as I can see.

It's wholly unsurprising that you feel that way, but whether you like it or not, piecing together the strange case of Atta is an important part of the story.

I can understand why the residents here don't want to look too far into this one.

[BigAl]

It's wholly unsurprising that you feel that way, but whether you like it or not, piecing together the strange case of Atta is an important part of the story.

Unless you can convince us that the answer to your query somehow adds to or discredits some of the massive amount of evidence for Atta's role in 9/11, nobody cares.

[twinstead]

It's wholly unsurprising that you feel that way, but whether you like it or not, piecing together the strange case of Atta is an important part of the story.

I can understand why the residents here don't want to look too far into this one.

It's not just "the residents here" Red. It's the whole friggin' world minus a small cult of truthers. Frankly, It's wholly unsurprising that you feel the way you do in light of the evidence that supports how I feel, and I can understand why you don't want to look at the evidence right under your nose and desire to anomaly hunt.

[stateofgrace]

Granted, the question wasn't about the luggage, although a skeptic might have questions about that. Atta's activity before 9/11 is very important to piecing together the narrative of events.

But if you would rather I ask about the luggage, I'll first point out that the luggage wasn't lost, it didn't make the flight. How that happened is valid inquiry, especially since there was an hour between the Portland flight and the Boston flight.

Red, luggage that doesn't make a flight is normally classed as "lost luggage". At airports there is normally a " lost luggage" counter not a " luggage that did not make the flight" counter.

Just thought you should know.

[funk de fino]

Granted, the question wasn't about the luggage, although a skeptic might have questions about that. Atta's activity before 9/11 is very important to piecing together the narrative of events.

But if you would rather I ask about the luggage, I'll first point out that the luggage wasn't lost, it didn't make the flight. How that happened is valid inquiry, especially since there was an hour between the Portland flight and the Boston flight.

That inquiry has been answered in the thread.

Figures you would not read it.

[DGM]

Is there an explanation for why Atta drove to Portland from Boston, only to board a plane for Boston?
I've heard speculation that they thought security would be looser at a regional airport as apposed to Logan. Does this help?

[Dave Rogers]

It's wholly unsurprising that you feel that way, but whether you like it or not, piecing together the strange case of Atta is an important part of the story.

Then let me suggest that you, who feel this to be important, do some research into the subject, then come back and let us know what you found out.

I can understand why the residents here don't want to look too far into this one.

And I could understand why you wouldn't want to. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Anyone up for a forum bet that RedIbis either (a) runs away from the thread, (b) changes the subject or (c) comes up with some excuse as to why he's not going to bother researching this important part of the story?

Dave

[triforcharity]

I recently few to NYC. I boarded a plane in Orlando, and had a layover in Atlanta. This was to be a 2 1/2 hr layover. Guess what?? They didn't get me my bags untill I landed at Newark and waited for 3 hours for my bags. Someone put them on the wrong plane, realized it, pulled them off, then by that time, I had already left.

Does it mean that there was some big conspiracy?? Nope, not at all. It means that airlines are notorious for loosing peoples baggage. I can't blame them. How many flight X each person having ~2 bags= A S***TON of bagage.

[RedIbis]

It's not just "the residents here" Red. It's the whole friggin' world minus a small cult of truthers. Frankly, It's wholly unsurprising that you feel the way you do in light of the evidence that supports how I feel, and I can understand why you don't want to look at the evidence right under your nose and desire to anomaly hunt.

I don't know if this is a formally named fallacy, but perhaps informally, we might call it the "the whole world" fallacy, in which you attempt to suggest that since only a small number question something, those who don't question it automatically support the prevailing position.

The flaw in this thinking is exposed by asking the rather obvious question, have you actually polled the whole world?

[twinstead]

I don't know if this is a formally named fallacy, but perhaps informally, we might call it the "the whole world" fallacy, in which you attempt to suggest that since only a small number question something, those who don't question it automatically support the prevailing position.

The flaw in this thinking is exposed by asking the rather obvious question, have you actually polled the whole world?

Oh. Nice. I suppose this is what the others mean when they say you dance around issues. Whatever. The evidence that supports the Generally Accepted Narrative Of The Hijackers is out there for the whole world to see, including you. You of course can't deny it exists.

So, what is your comment on it? Why are there so few people who question it? What problem exactly do you have with the evidence posted in this very thread (post 167)? Do you have a position on this evidence? Tell you what, it sure is good enough for me.

ETA: I'm still working on polling the whole world if they believe the Earth is flat, because until I do, I can't prove it isn't.

[Furcifer]

A waitress interviewed afterwards commented that Atta ordered two eggs and toast, sunny side up. Friends and family told reporters that Atta always had his eggs scrambled.

Thus 9/11 was an inside job.

[twinstead]

A waitress interviewed afterwards commented that Atta ordered two eggs and toast, sunny side up. Friends and family told reporters that Atta always had his eggs scrambled.

Thus 9/11 was an inside job.

A waitress interviewed afterwards

commented that Atta ordered two eggs and toast

sunny side up

Friends and family told reporters

that Atta always had his eggs scrambled

Thus 9/11 was an inside job

Burmashave

**(apologies for the obscure cultural reference only Americans of a certain age group would get)

[funk de fino]

I don't know if this is a formally named fallacy, but perhaps informally, we might call it the "the whole world" fallacy, in which you attempt to suggest that since only a small number question something, those who don't question it automatically support the prevailing position.

The flaw in this thinking is exposed by asking the rather obvious question, have you actually polled the whole world?

Have you actually read the whole thread?

[TruthersLie]

Is there an explanation for why Atta drove to Portland from Boston, only to board a plane for Boston?

The easiest answer that I can think of is the security measures at portland would be easier to get through than those in Boston.

Once you are inside the terminal, you don't have to go through other security measures.

OR (and I could easily be wrong here, I'm not sure) maybe they wanted to come from different areas to board the plane in boston. 5 arab men boarding the plane in boston at the same time might just be noticed. But if they were coming in from different routes (again, I do not know this, I'm weak on this area and this is just conjecture) it would be possible to have a smaller team if one group got caught.

again it is what I would call operational security. So you break down into 2 groups and come in from different areas, arrive at different times, and sit in different areas.

[Sledge]

OMG. It's a bit obvious. What do you think I mean? I've set it out for you time enough.

It is obvious plant material. Koran knife etc. You are feigning ignorance. Another technique I've seen and used dozens of times with conspiracy nuts.

What circular argument? The one that you guys keep foisting onto what I'm saying making it easier for you to argue against? It's called strawmanning. All the old tricks.So you're saying that Atta wasn't a Muslim and/or one of the hijackers?

[16.5]

>>Sweet lord. Just ignore what I'm saying why doncha. I am a debunker and I know the techniques you use. I've been banned from several conspiracy sites for being too vehment in my attack of truther nuts. I was debunking a site called conspiracycentral when the notion of the late luggage came up. Check it out. I'm no truther. You'll probably still find posts by me on abovetopsecret and the david icke forum. Not a truther at all.

And that makes it suspicious because? It is a bag that missed the flight. so what?

Now, stop saying "What's odd about late luggage?" and face what I am actually saying. If you can. IT must be painful to concede even one point. :)))

Holy CRAP! Fallacious arguments are fallacious! Well done. May I respond?

Sweet lord. Just ignore what I'm saying why doncha. I am a Truther and I know the techniques you use. I've been banned from several conspiracy sites for being too vehment in my attack of debunker nuts. I was contributing to a site called conspiracycentral when the notion of the late luggage came up. Check it out. I'm no debunker. You'll probably still find posts by me on abovetopsecret and the david icke forum. I’m a truther.

Even so, the fact that the bag missed the flight makes it suspicious because? It is a bag that missed the flight. so what?

Now, stop saying "What's odd about late luggage?" and face what I am actually saying. If you can. IT must be painful to concede even one point

[RedIbis]

The easiest answer that I can think of is the security measures at portland would be easier to get through than those in Boston.

Once you are inside the terminal, you don't have to go through other security measures.

OR (and I could easily be wrong here, I'm not sure) maybe they wanted to come from different areas to board the plane in boston. 5 arab men boarding the plane in boston at the same time might just be noticed. But if they were coming in from different routes (again, I do not know this, I'm weak on this area and this is just conjecture) it would be possible to have a smaller team if one group got caught.

again it is what I would call operational security. So you break down into 2 groups and come in from different areas, arrive at different times, and sit in different areas.

I appreciate that you simply addressed this without any vitriol and gave a reasonable response. The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.

[JamesB]

Is there an explanation for why Atta drove to Portland from Boston, only to board a plane for Boston?

Is there a reason why your supposed conspirators went to great risk and expense to blow up an unoccupied building, or why they faked a plane crash in an empty field, or why they used airplanes in NYC but then used a missile against the Pentagon? Conspiracy theorists are hardly the ones to question peoples' reasoning simply because they don't have all the answers.

[Macgyver1968]

I appreciate that you simply addressed this without any vitriol and gave a reasonable response. The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.

Why would it be a greater risk? Once you board in Portland, you exit the plane into a secured area. You don't have to go through security again before you board your connecting flight. It's all just speculation, though. No one can know the logic behind what they were thinking.

[johnny karate]

Red, in what specific way do you feel further investigating Atta's actions prior to boarding AA11 will impact our understanding of the events that followed?

[Dave Rogers]

Red, in what specific way do you feel further investigating Atta's actions prior to boarding AA11 will impact our understanding of the events that followed?

He's hoping it will reduce our understanding, the holy grail of the no-claimer.

Dave

[funk de fino]

I appreciate that you simply addressed this without any vitriol and gave a reasonable response. The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.

How many words do you actually read in somones replies to you?

These master terrorists certainly were successful with their plan so who are you to criticize the logic of what Atta did? What relevance is it to anything anyway?

Do you agree it would make sense to split up?

[A W Smith]

I appreciate that you simply addressed this without any vitriol and gave a reasonable response. The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.

Was he able to change planes at Boston or not?

QED,, it worked

[BigAl]

I appreciate that you simply addressed this without any vitriol and gave a reasonable response. The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.

Hindsight unconstrained by facts is endless. That's all you've got.

The evidence that 19 Arabs executed 9/11 is massive. Until you become familiar with all of it and start showing how any of it is wrong or come up with another theory that fits that evidence, you are just ankle-biting.

PS. I don't think I fly that much and I've had my luggage temporarily lost several times. Every regular flyer I know has.

[lapman]

I appreciate that you simply addressed this without any vitriol and gave a reasonable response. The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.
You haven't been flying much, have you? You do understand that once you pass security at one airport, you're not checked again unless the flight originated outside the US. Logic would state that you originate your flight at the airport with the lax security.

[TruthersLie]

I appreciate that you simply addressed this without any vitriol and gave a reasonable response. The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.

Again you are making ASSUMPTIONS that don't track.

You have 5 man teams who are supposed to hijack jets to fly them into buildings.

I can think of several reasons to drive to logan to catch a flight in a pair, and having the other 3 come in at boston.

what if one group was stopped? If all 5 come in at the same time in the same way, it is possible that they could be held up, caught or detained.

By having multiple groups taking multiple routes it allows higher operational security and better chances of success.

again to me, 5 arabic men getting on at the same place (many of them sitting next to each other) might just tingle some warning bells.

All of it is pure conjecture as they didn't leave behind detailed notes (maybe in that suspicious luggage) which lays out why they seperated that way.

Maybe he had some personal business in Logan. Maybe that is where the boxcutters and pepper spray got through the security checkpoints. (as both were not permitted prior to 9/11, which is funny because 4 inch folding blades were allowed). That would be a reason to go there and fly into boston. Maybe they scoped out the security at boston and realized they wouldn't be able to get box cutters through.

Yet, I can think of a half of a dozen reasons... all of them valid, all of them possible. And not one is sinister, or shows an inside job.

[Retrograde]

The problem I have with this logic is that it would be easier to evade security measures in two airports instead of just one? Not to mention that Atta had to be at Logan anyway, so adding an airport would not reduce chances that he got caught, but would increase them. FOr these master terrorists that seems a very big risk to take, adding to that the possibility of something unexpected happening on the way from Boston to Portland and back to Logan.

I've only had to go through security multiple times once, on a trip from Rome to Frankfurt to San Francisco. I went through both Italian and German checks then (and my luggage spent a few extra days in Frankfurt.) For purely within the US flights once you get past the checkpoint no one stops you again (unless you start yelling loudly about how the delays are Bush's fault, then the nice airport police will come and tell you to shut up).

Suppose something does go wrong between Portland and Boston: then what? On Sept. 11 the hijackers made several phone calls among themselves to confirm that the operation was on: if one or more get delayed, or if something else doesn't fit your plan you cancel. Then when you get to LA and your bag isn't there you complain to the airline and they make sympathetic noises and get it to your hotel or where-ever, eventually. Just another routine screw-up.

BTW, on my last trip I put both my knife and my scissors in my checked bag, as is my wont. For a change it made an earlier connecting flight and actually got to the home airport before me.

[Luntoc]

I think we all know about pilots, professors, architects and engineers, and others for 911 truth. But I just came across this site a few minutes ago.
http://lawyersfor911truth.blogspot.com/
What do you think?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

If visual depictions were TLA-eligible, this post would have both my nom and my vote. Kudos, Cl1mh4224rd. :)


*bow* That's good enough for me. :)

What circular argument?


Your argument that, since the "alleged" hijackers were claimed to be Muslim, any evidence supporting that claim is somehow automatically suspect.

Why would it necessarily contain underwear or chocolate? Because you expect it too? Why should it not contain a Qur'an or knife? Because you think he wouldn't? Why, since he was into taking inspiration to murder from the Qur'an, would he have not have suggestive notes from it? Oh yeah, because you don't think it should.


People also keep Bible quotes for inspiration and cite them as motivation for others. That Atta had quotes from his religion's Holy book is not at all surprising. I'm not sure why albie finds it suspicious.

I think we all know about pilots, professors, architects and engineers, and others for 911 truth. But I just came across this site a few minutes ago.
http://lawyersfor911truth.blogspot.com/
What do you think?


I think this is in the wrong thread. :p

[Regnad Kcin]

If I wanted to point towards a certain type of person(A muslim) commiting this crime I would plant a Koran, a knife and a letter that contained suggestive quotes from the Koran.

Nothing you guys have said is fair or honest or rational.

You have not countered the fact that the luggage is a convenient coincidence. Too convenient. It stinks. So Atta was late. Says who? They guys who planted the case?

Admit this looks suspicious, and move on.Former Vice-President (and future President) Richard Nixon was in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963. "Too convenient," you might whisper.

The brain (human and otherwise) is pattern-centric. Whether through imagery, language, or other sensory stimulous, we make sense of a random world by determining associations with past learned information. This can help to predict future outcomes; a good thing for a being wishing to continue surviving. Thing is, some patterns can also be random while appearing otherwise. That's why it's important to look at things in various contexts.

So...did Mr. Nixon have anything to do with the murder of JFK? Be honest.

[Hokulele]

If visual depictions were TLA-eligible, this post would have both my nom and my vote. Kudos, Cl1mh4224rd. :)




Just to clarify, if an image or series of images is original to the poster and to the thread, they do qualify for the Language Award and Pith Poll.

[RedIbis]

Again you are making ASSUMPTIONS that don't track.

You have 5 man teams who are supposed to hijack jets to fly them into buildings.

I can think of several reasons to drive to logan to catch a flight in a pair, and having the other 3 come in at boston.

what if one group was stopped? If all 5 come in at the same time in the same way, it is possible that they could be held up, caught or detained.

By having multiple groups taking multiple routes it allows higher operational security and better chances of success.

again to me, 5 arabic men getting on at the same place (many of them sitting next to each other) might just tingle some warning bells.

All of it is pure conjecture as they didn't leave behind detailed notes (maybe in that suspicious luggage) which lays out why they seperated that way.

Maybe he had some personal business in Logan. Maybe that is where the boxcutters and pepper spray got through the security checkpoints. (as both were not permitted prior to 9/11, which is funny because 4 inch folding blades were allowed). That would be a reason to go there and fly into boston. Maybe they scoped out the security at boston and realized they wouldn't be able to get box cutters through.

Yet, I can think of a half of a dozen reasons... all of them valid, all of them possible. And not one is sinister, or shows an inside job.

Where was Atta on Sept. 10?

[Sam.I.Am]

Where was Atta on Sept. 10?

In New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine assuming he drove up I95. What's your point?

[triforcharity]

Where was Atta on Sept. 10?


Page 468 of the PDF file, 9/11 comission report, found here.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

"Atta drove from Boston to Portland ME on 9/10/09. His reasoning is unknown"
(Paraphrased)

"However, Atta reacted negatively when informed he would have to check in again in Boston."

This tells me that MacGuyver et al were possibly correct. He was agitated that he would have to check in again. Maybe he was counting on making it through security just once in Protland.

Hummm....Imagine what people could do with an HOURS worth of research. Daamn, that took 5 minutes, 4 of those waiting for the download to finish.

[TruthersLie]

Where was Atta on Sept. 10?

Shift noted.

9/11 commission report discusses attas movements and whereabouts on 9/10. Of course Looming Tower also discusses it. And so does Perfect Warriors.

And the point of the question? Come now, fully state you premise.

Can YOU think of a half dozen reasons why he would drive up to portland? I can.

Can you think of even a few reasons? I can.

[RedIbis]

Sam's saying Atta started in NY. Tri is saying he was in Boston. So which one is it?

[RedIbis]

Shift noted.

9/11 commission report discusses attas movements and whereabouts on 9/10. Of course Looming Tower also discusses it. And so does Perfect Warriors.

And the point of the question? Come now, fully state you premise.

Can YOU think of a half dozen reasons why he would drive up to portland? I can.

Can you think of even a few reasons? I can.

Increase his chances of getting stopped by a cop, or car trouble maybe? Or maybe he just wanted to add an airport to the itinerary.

[TruthersLie]

now I see why they call you a no-claimer.

really?

I see you don't have an understanding of what research is. Got it.

again red, if you want on line lessons for reading for comprehension just pm me and I'll see if my wife can sign you up for her class.

If you want to follow my research methods course, let me know and I'll see if the school where I teach it will allow me to sign you up as an observer... it might help you.

[JamesB]

Increase his chances of getting stopped by a cop, or car trouble maybe? Or maybe he just wanted to add an airport to the itinerary.

Once again, given the ridiculously complicated reasoning that truthers use for their plots, why is simplicity now suddently a requirement for a conspiracy?

[TruthersLie]

Increase his chances of getting stopped by a cop, or car trouble maybe? Or maybe he just wanted to add an airport to the itinerary.

sure...

nice dodge.

How about
1. to be able to have seperate groups enter the airport at the same time so as to not attract attention? Yes or no?
2. to have seperate groups in case one group was stopped/detained/caught. yes or no?
3. to bypass the harder security at Boston for easier security at Logan. Yes or no?
4. Maybe he had personal business he wanted to take care of in Logan on 9/10. Yes or no?
5. To go through security EARLIER than anyone else to see if he would get flagged? Yes or no?

are any of those possible? yes or no.

could there be other reasons? I don't know... maybe he liked that drive from boston to logan and wanted to do it a last time before he died. possible? yes or no?

or it was all part of some vast conspiracy, and he was just a patsy who was set up?

boy oh boy.. I know which one I'd choose....

Now if you really want to be intersting, go to someone who has any idea of military tactics and strategy and ask them why would terrorists seperate into two groups when approaching an airport they going to hijack... and then LISTEN to them.

[RedIbis]

I guess when terrorist masterminds plan their attacks they figure going through two airports instead of one will decrease their chances of getting caught.

Is that what you guys are going with or does someone have a better explanation?

[dtugg]

Nobody here is psychic and your terrorist buddy Atta is dead, so who knows why he did what he did.

[JamesB]

I guess when terrorist masterminds plan their attacks they figure going through two airports instead of one will decrease their chances of getting caught.

Is that what you guys are going with or does someone have a better explanation?

Why not? Apparently you guys think that criminal masterminds think wiring and blowing up 3 buildings for no apparent reason decreases their chances of getting caught.

[16.5]

I guess when terrorist masterminds plan their attacks they figure going through two airports instead of one will decrease their chances of getting caught.

Is that what you guys are going with or does someone have a better explanation?

I dunno, Red, y'all looked through the voluminous Commission notes and other documents that were recently made available?

[dtugg]

I wonder why the NWO didn't fabricate more "believable" movements for Atta if 9/11 were an inside jobby job like RedIbis believes.

[triforcharity]

Hey Red, did you READ what I posted?? He was ANGRY that he had to check in AGAIN in Boston. Now, use those elusive critical thinking skill you have (I am assuming) and think for a minute. WHY would he be mad???

[Sam.I.Am]

Sam's saying Atta started in NY. Tri is saying he was in Boston. So which one is it?

He had a motel room in New Jersey just before the attacks and I don't recall any mention of him having a motel room in Boston. I gave you the shortest and fastest route by car between Jersey and Maine. If they did get a room in Boston then I would be wrong but IIRC he picked up the guy he went to Portland with on Sept 10th, if he was in Boston I'd think that he would've stayed in the same hotel, they did so in Portland.

You still didn't tell us what your point is.

[triforcharity]

Take also into consideration that this is just a snippet. I was unable to download the rest of the document, as for some reason it gets stuck at like 2 MBs during the DL.

[funk de fino]

I guess when terrorist masterminds plan their attacks they figure going through two airports instead of one will decrease their chances of getting caught.

Is that what you guys are going with or does someone have a better explanation?


Do you agree it was a good plan to split up?

I have even used a similar plan on nights out. Different reasons though.

[Dave Rogers]

Sam's saying Atta started in NY. Tri is saying he was in Boston. So which one is it?

Of course, it would be far too difficult just to look it up yourself.

Dave

[TruthersLie]

I guess when terrorist masterminds plan their attacks they figure going through two airports instead of one will decrease their chances of getting caught.


argument from ignorance noted.

Now since you have such great research skills, why don't you tell us why going in two airports, on different methods to reach the goal/target is a bad idea?

I can think of several reasons to seperate. I have already given you a list. Are any of those reasons unreasonable?

You don't put all of your eggs in one basket, you take multiple routes into your target with differnet groups. It makes sense tactically.

If you add in the idea that logan had easier security, then it makes sense to go throug them if they were carrying the banned items (boxcutters and pepper spray) than to try to get it through boston.

of course it is conjecture.
In general Red, with all military plans you follow the KISS rule. Keep It Simple Stupid.
They had a reason for atta to fly in from logan... I have no idea what it is, but neither do you. I have several good educated guesses which you have shown that you can't show are not unreasonable.


but hey, I guess wiring up 3 buildings, planting hundreds of tons of evidence and the body parts/dna of passengers on jets in a hole in the ground or in the wreckage of the pentagon is much easier...

[RedIbis]

Of course, it would be far too difficult just to look it up yourself.

Dave

You should know me well enough by now. I usually know the answers to the questions I ask. I'm just curious how you guys answer them.

So was Atta in NY or Boston the night before? Or did he stay in a hotel in Jersey as Sam is now suggesting?

[Dave Rogers]

You should know me well enough by now. I usually know the answers to the questions I ask.

I'll concede that you've usually decided what answer you want to hear.

Dave

[triforcharity]

I don't know Red, what is the answer, and please, cite your source.

Thanks.

BTW, TL, Logan IS Boston. I think you are thinking of Portland then to Boston.

[TruthersLie]

sorry tri.

you are correct.

I mean from portland to boston.

[Scott Sommers]

I think we all know about pilots, professors, architects and engineers, and others for 911 truth. But I just came across this site a few minutes ago.
http://lawyersfor911truth.blogspot.com/
What do you think?

I think it means nothing. There are only 36 names on it. 7 of them are not Americans. It includes Connie Fogel from the Canadian Action Party. It is part of their official platform that 911 needs to be investigated. The patry itself was founded by Paul Hellyer who speaks openly about the security theart of UFOs. There's another Canadian on there, Hal Sisson from Victoria. It is probable he is also a member of the CAP, as Victoria is one of their strongholds - if such a term can be used for a party that got 1% of the popular vote.

Who cares if some guys who graduated from university believe crazy things. Afterall, Timothy Leary was a professor at Harvard.

[RedIbis]

I don't know Red, what is the answer, and please, cite your source.

Thanks.

BTW, TL, Logan IS Boston. I think you are thinking of Portland then to Boston.

In post #214 you were berating me for not researching, now you're asking me to find the answer to this important question.

[triforcharity]

Ok, I just did a little more investigation, it appears that he was sitting in the OVal Office with Bush, having tea and crumpets. Jesus H Crist you are dense.
I just gave you the answer, he was driving from Somewhere, to Portland ME.


What is your point??? Do you have anything to add??

BTW, I also pointed out that I couldn't download the entire 9/11 Comission report, as for some reason, it stops downloading at 2 MB.

[triforcharity]

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/100401.htm

Portland ME is where he was.


Whats your point?!?!?!?!?!

[sleahead]

In post #214 you were berating me for not researching, now you're asking me to find the answer to this important question.


He was in Portland, Red. Now explain why this is such an important question.

[DavidJames]

Whats your point?!?!?!?!?!He's been here over 2 years and almost 4500 posts. His point is simple. To provoke responses. His posts in this thread provide textbook examples of a troll.

[triforcharity]

I think my evidence caused him to fly away. He is VERY afraid of EVIDENCE and FACTS.

Its like a fart in an elevator.

[johnny karate]

Red, in what specific way do you feel further investigating Atta's actions prior to boarding AA11 will impact our understanding of the events that followed?

Bump for RedIbis.

[RedIbis]

sure...

nice dodge.

How about
1. to be able to have seperate groups enter the airport at the same time so as to not attract attention? Yes or no?
2. to have seperate groups in case one group was stopped/detained/caught. yes or no?
3. to bypass the harder security at Boston for easier security at Logan. Yes or no?
4. Maybe he had personal business he wanted to take care of in Logan on 9/10. Yes or no?
5. To go through security EARLIER than anyone else to see if he would get flagged? Yes or no?

are any of those possible? yes or no.

could there be other reasons? I don't know... maybe he liked that drive from boston to logan and wanted to do it a last time before he died. possible? yes or no?

or it was all part of some vast conspiracy, and he was just a patsy who was set up?

boy oh boy.. I know which one I'd choose....

Now if you really want to be intersting, go to someone who has any idea of military tactics and strategy and ask them why would terrorists seperate into two groups when approaching an airport they going to hijack... and then LISTEN to them.

Besides the fact, as Tri has pointed out, that you don't seem to know what state Logan is in, you also appear to be completely unaware of the fact that Atta nearly blew the entire operation several times, including when he was stopped by the CAPPS system, while trying to check in, only to have his bags held off the plane.

The master terrorist apparently thought factoring in another airport would strengthen chances that the operation was successful, when it could have (but unfortunately did not) blow the entire operation.

This might be why some people look at the conveniently discovered luggage with a bit of skepticism.

Study the Atta timeline and you will discover how often the story changed and the many contradictions that evidentually lead to the smoking gun evidence of the AQ hijackers.

[BigAl]

Study the Atta timeline and you will discover how often the story changed and the many contradictions that evidentually lead to the smoking gun evidence of the AQ hijackers.

Until you lay out the assertions for your case and we compare the details to all the evidence for Atta as one of the hijackers, you've proved nothing.

[Travis]

Let us assume Atta isn't a terrorist at all. Now then, why does Atta, the non-terrorist, drive to Portland just to fly to Logan?

[sleahead]

The master terrorist apparently thought factoring in another airport would strengthen chances that the operation was successful, when it could have (but unfortunately did not) blow the entire operation.


If I was talking to someone who once, in an unguarded moment, let slip that he thought the hijackers may have been patsies, I would have to ask that person why he thinks his alleged conspirators put their patsy to the risk described above.

Oh, what luck! I am talking to such a person. What about it, Red?

[lapman]

I guess when terrorist masterminds plan their attacks they figure going through two airports instead of one will decrease their chances of getting caught.

Is that what you guys are going with or does someone have a better explanation?
Why don't you ask KSM since he is the terrorist mastermind behind the plot.

[Dave Rogers]

In post #214 you were berating me for not researching, now you're asking me to find the answer to this important question.

Since in both cases it's being presented as a desirable circumstance that you do your own research, I'm having trouble seeing the inconsistency here.

Dave

[Dave Rogers]

The master terrorist apparently thought factoring in another airport would strengthen chances that the operation was successful, when it could have (but unfortunately did not) blow the entire operation.

Sorry, but are we arguing that Atta got too many things wrong to have been the real attacker, or too many things right? I do so easily lose track.

Dave