Proof The Terrorists Are Alive? (Loose Change Forum)

I've seen this claim being made again and again. I'd love to believe it, but what real tangible evidence do we have there really are still some alive?

QUOTE

According to the Saudi Arabian Embassy, the following "hijackers" are living quiet lives in Saudi Arabia:

Said Al-Ghamdi, Mohand Al-Shehri, Abdulaziz Al-Omari, Salem Al-hamzi, Khalid Al-Midhar.

Wail M. Al-Shehri, accused of hijacking AA flight 11, is also not dead. He is a pilot, his father a Saudi diplomat in Bombay. According to the LA times, 9/21/01, Gaafar Allagany, head of the Saudi Embassy’s information center talked to them both.
Waleed M. Al-Shehri, also on the flight 11 list, is a Saudi national who took flight training classes in Daytona Beach, Florida. He now lives in Casablanca and works for Royal Air Morocco. On Sept. 22nd according to the Associated Press he showed up at the U.S. embassy in Morocco. In their article they reported, “His photograph was released by the FBI and has been shown in newspapers and on television around the world. That same Mr. Al-Shehri has turned up in Morocco, proving clearly that he was not a member of the suicide attack.”

Satam Al-Suqami, who’s passport was found in the rubble of the World Trade Center, is also alive. He lives in the United Arab Emirates.

There are two men who claim to be Abdulaziz Al-Omari, both of them are alive in Saudi Arabia. One is a pilot with Saudi Airlines, the other an engineer with Saudi Telecoms who says he had his passport stolen in Denver Colorado in 1995. He reported the theft at the time to the Denver Police. The date of birth attributed to the Al-Omari on the FBI’s terrorist list matches that of this second Abdulaziz Al-Omari living in Saudi Arabia.

Marwan Al-Shehhi, said to be on UA flight 175, was born in the United Arab Emirates and has been dead since 1999.

Saeed Al-Ghamdi, an alleged hijacker on UA flight 93, who, along with Abdulaziz Al-Omari appears on the list of alleged terrorists still alive provided by the Saudi Embassy was in Tunis at the time of the attacks with 22 other pilots learning to fly an Airbus 320 and was interviewed by the London based Asharq Al Awsat newspaper.

Ahmed Al-Nami is an administrative supervisor with Saudi Arabian Airlines in Riyadh. He said he had “never even heard of Pennsylvania where the plane I was supposed to have hijacked” crashed, he had never lost his passport and found it “very worrying” that his identity was stolen and published by the FBI.

Taking all of these reports into account, Satam Al-Suqami, Waleed M. Al-Shehri, Wail M. Al-Shehri and Abdulaziz Al-Omari (AA flight 11); Mohand Al-Shehri (UA flight 175); Khalid Al-Midhar and Salem Al-Hamzi (AA flight 77) and finally Said Al-Ghamdi and Ahmed Al-Nami (UA flight 93) are all alive, Marwan Al-Shehhi was dead at the time of the attacks. None of these men were in the United States when the attacks occurred. This accounts for 10 of the alleged hijackers.

Is there any significance to the fact that three of the 10 are pilots and one an administrator for an airline company? Are these cases of mistaken identity or were these men’s identities stolen by the terrorists? Al-Mihdar, wanted in connection with other terrorist acts may have allowed his identity to be used so that he would be presumed dead. All we know is that the Saudi Embassy claims he is alive. Out of the three photos released of Kahlid al-Mihdar by the FBI one looks completely different than the other two.

Waleed M. Al-Shehri says he is indeed the same man who’s name, personal data and photo were published by the FBI and that he attended the flight school in Daytona Beach just as the FBI claims, but that he left the U.S. a year before 9/11 and had nothing to to with the attacks.

The personal data on Saeed al-Ghamdi that the FBI published matches that of the real Mr. al-Ghamdi, though the photos are different. Hamza Al-Ghamdi is not one of the hijackers who claim to still be alive, but his family claims the FBI’s photo of him bears “no resemblance to him at all”.

QUOTE (payt @ May 11 2006, 02:47 PM)

I've seen this claim being made again and again. I'd love to believe it, but what real tangible evidence do we have there really are still some alive?

True news reports of this are not 100% tangible evidence.

But lets start with this question; where is the tangible evidence they are dead?

Zero proof of death

QUOTE (jenabell @ May 11 2006, 10:12 PM)

True news reports of this are not 100% tangible evidence.

But lets start with this question; where is the tangible evidence they are dead?

Zero proof of death

Exactly.

Well without a DNA sample to compare DNA/body parts to, therre is no way of making a comparison.

QUOTE (contra @ May 11 2006, 03:21 PM)

Well without a DNA sample to compare DNA/body parts to, therre is no way of making a comparison.

and yet they had pictures and names within days..lol

i've never seen any solid evidence on this other than a few quotes which i dont know the sources of.. seems its a big piece of truth that would help if discovered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

To be honest, I would LOVE to see an interview with one of these alive hijackers. I don't doubt the news stories, just would be a huge smoking gun for us to videotape them alive. Dylan? Tickets to Saudi Arabia this time of year?

[hmm]

If I remember correctly Killtown has info on this but I forget. I think there is a new hijackers section on these forums.

QUOTE (theywantitall @ Jun 6 2006, 04:31 AM)

i've never seen any solid evidence on this other than a few quotes which i dont know the sources of.. seems its a big piece of truth that would help if discovered.

What about the FBI director admiting:

"no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers."

Here's the whole story:

FBI Denies Mix-Up Of 9/11 Terrorists

QUOTE (chucksheen @ Jun 6 2006, 04:48 AM)

If I remember correctly Killtown has info on this but I forget. I think there is a new hijackers section.

I don't have a hijacker section per se. Just various stuff all over.

This forum has a new section:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...hp?showforum=30

http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0...,555146,00.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../23/widen23.xml
http://usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/20/hijack-id.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?p...59320-2001Sep19

Guys think about it -

Lost and stolen passports
People not looking like the alleged hijackers
The people still alive and well

Does it not sound like Alchaeda could of just pinched some passports, got people that looked like them and used their identities? Not really sure why, but they could of had a criminal record ect

Good point. Marty's on holy missions would never want recognition for their Holy Acts so they would just plant evidence leaving innocent living people to take the fall......... [thumbsup]

Allah couldn't be prouder, being ashamed of doing his deeds..............

QUOTE (theywantitall @ Jun 6 2006, 04:31 AM)

i've never seen any solid evidence on this other than a few quotes which i dont know the sources of.. seems its a big piece of truth that would help if discovered.

I don't think the story is true at all, in that any hijackers involved probably are not alive...I dont doubt the BBC story insofar as people's names originally named

Shit, i'd happily contribute like $20 if it meant Dylan could fly to SArabia and interview one of them.

I usually stay away from this argument cuz even if you prooved a couple were still alive, skeptics and the gov. (just like mueller said) would just go "oh well Al-Queda probably just used a few false identities" it doesn't necessarily proove inside job.

you people obviously have no experience with islamic/arab names. there are literally 70+ ways to spell the name Saddam hussein. believe me, i spent a year in the sandbox working on a database that included the names of detainees and members of terrorist networks. also, there are a relatively few names that are extremely common in islamic/arab families. they also don't conform to western naming standards, i.e., a first name, a middle name, and a last name. take old AMZ for instance...the supposed first name "Abu" merely means "son of". Musab is his father's name (son of Musab) and the al-Zarqawi is the tribe he came from (i.e., Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti) . thus, "son of Musab, from the Zarqawi tribe". my point here is, the names of the hijackers are all very common. it is very likely (in fact, almost definite) that the people who are supposedly the "still-alive-hijackers" are merely cases of people having the same names. Mohammed Attef? Mohammed is by far and away the most popular name in Islam. how many Brian Smiths are there in the U.S.? and then take into consideration the rest of the English speaking countries. your claims sound a little rediculous now, don't they? Mohammed Attef's father supposedly recieved a phone call from his son on Sept. 12th. however, this claim did not surface until long after the attacks, and after previous statements by the father which made no mention of the attacks. the father then in later comments praised martyrs like his son, and said there would be many more. so we go from "my son is still alive" to "oh wait, i DID get a phone call from him the day after 9/11", and then to "well, i guess he was a martyr, but he was a good martyr, and there'll be more".
as for new waffle order's fun little picture on his post, let me address an issue that really gets me angry. the last little item on the bottom banner. "Israeli aggression". lets take a look at the facts of that situation. Hezbollah fires rockets into northern Israel daily, and yet it's Israel that's the "aggressor" when they retaliate. sure, you might say that Israel's response is heavy-handed or over the top. think of it this way. Lebanon has refused to disarm Hezbollah for various BS reasons. Lebanese citizens dance in the street every time a Hezbollah rocket kills an Israeli. that makes them accomplices to terrorism in my book. the same with Gaza. if Al-qaeda were firing Katyushas into the U.S. from Canada or Mexico, you very same people would be demanding their blood, especially if you happened to live where the rockets were falling. and if the governments of Canada or Mexico were allowing the launches without even pretending to stop them you wouldn't think twice about attacks on their respective military installations. also, you may recall in the first week of the conflict, an Israeli missle patrol boat was hit by a Katyusha off the coat of Lebanon. did you also see that a Lebanese radar tower was used to guide the rocket to the ship? that is unequivocably an act of war on the Lebanese side. not just some wacky Islamic fundamentalist terror group (oh wait...let me be more PC and refer to them as guerrillas or resistance groups) but the armed forces of Lebanon participated in an attack against an Israeli warship. why don't you just call it for what it is, and admit you're all anti-semites? Israel has been attacked almost constantly since it's creation in 1948. and legal self defense is labeled as "aggression". the ignorance and bias is staggering. the palestinians apparently have some legal right to strap suicide vests on under their shirts and blow themselves up amongst the civilian populace. you might have a long shot of convincing me if they only ever targeted the Israeli military, which could be considered a legitimate target for "freedom fighters". however, they generally target only civilians, which makes their actions terrorism, and illegal. so quit decrying Israel for taking actions you'd demand of our government.
regardless, you're all idiots if you believe the government plotted 9/11 for an excuse to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. you might get away with saying that they did nothing to stop it, much like FDR supposedly let Pearl Harbor happen to justify entering the war. but to say the government deliberately killed almost 3000 of it's own citizens to justify invading Afghanistan and Iraq is sheer lunacy. because if you're all right about this whole conspiracy, then you'd all be dead, and this website wouldn't still be up. if the government had no qualms about murdering 3000 people, then it would most certainly have no hang-ups about killing a few idiots who might accidentally reveal the details of their plot. this is not a case where you need to read between the lines. the only conspiracy that was involved in 9/11 was the 19 hijackers with their Islamo-fascist backers.

QUOTE (parsecboy @ Jul 28 2006, 08:07 PM)

you people obviously have no experience with islamic/arab names. there are literally 70+ ways to spell the name Saddam hussein. believe me, i spent a year in the sandbox working on a database that included the names of detainees and members of terrorist networks. also, there are a relatively few names that are extremely common in islamic/arab families. they also don't conform to western naming standards, i.e., a first name, a middle name, and a last name. take old AMZ for instance...the supposed first name "Abu" merely means "son of". Musab is his father's name (son of Musab) and the al-Zarqawi is the tribe he came from (i.e., Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti) . thus, "son of Musab, from the Zarqawi tribe". my point here is, the names of the hijackers are all very common. it is very likely (in fact, almost definite) that the people who are supposedly the "still-alive-hijackers" are merely cases of people having the same names. Mohammed Attef? Mohammed is by far and away the most popular name in Islam. how many Brian Smiths are there in the U.S.? and then take into consideration the rest of the English speaking countries. your claims sound a little rediculous now, don't they? Mohammed Attef's father supposedly recieved a phone call from his son on Sept. 12th. however, this claim did not surface until long after the attacks, and after previous statements by the father which made no mention of the attacks. the father then in later comments praised martyrs like his son, and said there would be many more. so we go from "my son is still alive" to "oh wait, i DID get a phone call from him the day after 9/11", and then to "well, i guess he was a martyr, but he was a good martyr, and there'll be more".
as for new waffle order's fun little picture on his post, let me address an issue that really gets me angry. the last little item on the bottom banner. "Israeli aggression". lets take a look at the facts of that situation. Hezbollah fires rockets into northern Israel daily, and yet it's Israel that's the "aggressor" when they retaliate. sure, you might say that Israel's response is heavy-handed or over the top. think of it this way. Lebanon has refused to disarm Hezbollah for various BS reasons. Lebanese citizens dance in the street every time a Hezbollah rocket kills an Israeli. that makes them accomplices to terrorism in my book. the same with Gaza. if Al-qaeda were firing Katyushas into the U.S. from Canada or Mexico, you very same people would be demanding their blood, especially if you happened to live where the rockets were falling. and if the governments of Canada or Mexico were allowing the launches without even pretending to stop them you wouldn't think twice about attacks on their respective military installations. also, you may recall in the first week of the conflict, an Israeli missle patrol boat was hit by a Katyusha off the coat of Lebanon. did you also see that a Lebanese radar tower was used to guide the rocket to the ship? that is unequivocably an act of war on the Lebanese side. not just some wacky Islamic fundamentalist terror group (oh wait...let me be more PC and refer to them as guerrillas or resistance groups) but the armed forces of Lebanon participated in an attack against an Israeli warship. why don't you just call it for what it is, and admit you're all anti-semites? Israel has been attacked almost constantly since it's creation in 1948. and legal self defense is labeled as "aggression". the ignorance and bias is staggering. the palestinians apparently have some legal right to strap suicide vests on under their shirts and blow themselves up amongst the civilian populace. you might have a long shot of convincing me if they only ever targeted the Israeli military, which could be considered a legitimate target for "freedom fighters". however, they generally target only civilians, which makes their actions terrorism, and illegal. so quit decrying Israel for taking actions you'd demand of our government.
regardless, you're all idiots if you believe the government plotted 9/11 for an excuse to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. you might get away with saying that they did nothing to stop it, much like FDR supposedly let Pearl Harbor happen to justify entering the war. but to say the government deliberately killed almost 3000 of it's own citizens to justify invading Afghanistan and Iraq is sheer lunacy. because if you're all right about this whole conspiracy, then you'd all be dead, and this website wouldn't still be up. if the government had no qualms about murdering 3000 people, then it would most certainly have no hang-ups about killing a few idiots who might accidentally reveal the details of their plot. this is not a case where you need to read between the lines. the only conspiracy that was involved in 9/11 was the 19 hijackers with their Islamo-fascist backers.

QUOTE

you people obviously have no experience with islamic/arab names. there are literally 70+ ways to spell the name Saddam hussein. believe me, i spent a year in the sandbox working on a database that included the names of detainees and members of terrorist networks.

`Arabic nomenclature transliterated to English is dubious. That doesn't make you an expert dumbass. I am fluent in `Arabic. So what??

QUOTE

the supposed first name "Abu" merely means "son of". Musab is his father's name (son of Musab) and the al-Zarqawi is the tribe he came from (i.e., Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti) . thus, "son of Musab, from the Zarqawi tribe". my point here is, the names of the hijackers are all very common.

Now I am going to be more harsh on you, since you are badmouthing us and are a skeptic. You are like a cockroach as Scarface mentions. In other words, remember that T.V. commercial in the 80s-90s when the roaches were roaming and suddenly when the lights came on, they all SCREAMED "RAIDDDDD!!!!...." Yes, that is how it is going to be in here for you.

[crylol] How does Abu mean son of?? Abu means father in `Arabic. Ibn or bin signifies "son of". This is simple `Arabic transliteration to English that anyone should be aware of due to bin Laden's name being projected daily in the minds of everyone today. Now you are a bonafied liar. You never are the person who you presume to be. Why bother with the rest of your ordure????

QUOTE (tetchypoo @ Jun 6 2006, 04:40 AM)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

sorry, but I just cannot believe that this story is still around despite the fact that it has been proven wrong for such a long time by now.

ok, lets try to be a bit of a researcher here to figure this out. whta would you do to figure out of this story is true? right, maybe we start with the source and call BBC in London. When you speak to the guy who brought up the story, he will tell you that he got his info from several sources, mainly Arabian Newspapers. He mentions the 'Arab News' as his prime source.

Now one should call the 'Arab News' in Dschidda, Saudi-Arabia. You can speak to Managing Editor John Bradley who will die laughing if you ask him for the story. Why? Because he knows its false. The main problem was the following: the FBI released the names of the possible hijackers on September 14th. The BBC report was released on September 23rd (the 'Arab News released it a few days earlier). Therefore all the journalists had were names. And as mentioned in a couple of posts here before some of the hijackers names are like 'Smith' in Arabian countries - you would find hundreds of them. When the FBI released photos of the alleged hijackers on Septemer 27th (three days after the BBC report) it all came up: these people were not the same as the ones talked about in those articles.

And sometimes its much easier than that. In other news reports it was claimed that a certain Walid al-Schari (one of the possible hijackers) would still be alive and work as a pilot for Royal Air Maroc in Casablanca. Well, if you call the airline they will tell you that they indeed have someone whos name sounds very much like that one, but there is just one letter missing. The guy in question who works for the airline is named Walid al-Schri.

so guys, please follow the guidelines that the Loose Change producers put down themselves: do some serious and real research to find answers...

and that doesn`t mean that all other questions can be answered this easily...

wrong.

waleed al-shehri confirmed that he had indeed trained at daytona FL flight school.

he just wasnt one of the hijackers. he was alive as of Sept 21, 2001.

BBC article

this is not a case of same-name confusion. this is the FBI fingerign a flight school grad as a hijacker, and getting it totally wrong.

however, since americans don't read, they can get away with this stuff.

did you know that the FBI director admits that they have not a single piece of paper that discusses the 9/11 plot? didnt find anything in the US, in germany, in afghanistan, nowhere.

Not to be a downer, but this video from "al Qaeda" shows the "alive hijackers" to
have all been seen at Afghani training camps or making wills:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4...=usual+suspects

My theory is that the all thought they were being good little martyrs, being puppetmastered by the Pakistani ISI who was in turn being puppeted by the US. Of course, so much we don't know about the hijackers.

we know from research that many of these hijackers were easily duped, were simple minded followers, and may have been US intel assets working hand in hand with al-qada in afghanistan -- bear in mind that alqada and the CIA are working together as of 1999 in Kosovo -- -THAT's the backdrop.

how do you get them to do a video?

dunno. offer them money to read a script, while putting on a headdress. perhaps they were told that the video will was needed for them to gain 'credibility;' in accessing alqada leadership.

i think This company, intelcenter of Alexandria VA actually produced the video, which tells you something.

we know that 3 of the hijackers were living in a motel right next to the NSA.

we know that other hijackers listed Falls Church VA (CIA, cough) as residence.

others worked and trained at CIA covert stations in florida (opa locka) and Pensacola naval airstation.

so who were they ? by and large, no doubt, witting or unwitting dupes of low IQ firepower and proven ability to follow simple orders, like "join a gym" , work out a lot, "take flight classes -- i'm not tellign you why" ....

that they actually hijacked planes has not been established formally. I challenge anyone to attempt to do so.

QUOTE (jdyolam @ Aug 1 2006, 01:45 AM)

wrong.

waleed al-shehri confirmed that he had indeed trained at daytona FL flight school.

he just wasnt one of the hijackers. he was alive as of Sept 21, 2001.

BBC article

this is not a case of same-name confusion. this is the FBI fingerign a flight school grad as a hijacker, and getting it totally wrong.

however, since americans don't read, they can get away with this stuff.

did you know that the FBI director admits that they have not a single piece of paper that discusses the 9/11 plot? didnt find anything in the US, in germany, in afghanistan, nowhere.

The BBC article was found to be erroneous:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waleed_al-Shehri

QUOTE

Muhammad Ali Al-Shihri, the hijacker al-Shehri brothers' true father, was identified prior to September 17, 2001, and told Arab News that he hadn't heard from his sons in ten months prior to September 2001.[1] An ABC News story in March 2002 repeated this, and during a report entitled "A Saudi Apology" for Dateline NBC on Aug 25 2002, NBC's reporter John Hockenberry traveled to 'Asir, where he interviewed the third brother, Salah, who agreed that his two brothers were dead and claimed they had been "brainwashed".

Furthermore another article explains that the pilot who lives in Casablanca was named Walid al-Shri (not Waleed M. al-Shehri) and that much of the BBC information regarding "alive" hijackers was incorrect according to the same sources used by BBC.[8]

Another case of mistaken identity and the commonality of `Arabic nomenclature.

I believe the reports about mistaken identities (appeared as "Alive Hijackers") surfaced to weather down the effects of anti-`Arab and anti-Muslim fervor. Majority of the hijackers were from the Saudia `Arabia and those that "appeared" to be alive were from Saudia `Arabia. This tactic was pushed as I already mentioned for that purpose and could have been done by the GID intelligence agencies at the request of the Saudi embassy and Saudi royal family.

View Full Version: Proof The Terrorists Are Alive?