Friday, October 27, 2006

They're Alive! Alive!

No, they're not. This won't convince the CT nutbars, but the BBC takes a look back at the story that gets cited as "evidence" that the hijackers were still alive.

We’ve carried the full report, executive summary and main findings and, as part of the recent fifth anniversary coverage, a detailed guide to what’s known about what happened on the day. But conspiracy theories have persisted. The confusion over names and identities we reported back in 2001 may have arisen because these were common Arabic and Islamic names.

In an effort to make this clearer, we have made one small change to the original story. Under the FBI picture of Waleed al Shehri we have added the words "A man called Waleed Al Shehri..." to make it as clear as possible that there was confusion over the identity. The rest of the story remains as it was in the archive as a record of the situation at the time.

We recently asked the FBI for a statement, and this is, as things stand, the closest thing we have to a definitive view: The FBI is confident that it has positively identified the nineteen hijackers responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Also, the 9/11 investigation was thoroughly reviewed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States and the House and Senate Joint Inquiry. Neither of these reviews ever raised the issue of doubt about the identity of the nineteen hijackers.


Hat Tip: Elmondohummus in the comments.

18 Comments:

At 28 October, 2006 03:53, Blogger pdoherty76 said...

So this proves that the BBC under pressure from shills is going back to CHANGE previous news stories.

What a great precedent. You dont like a news report, just go back and change it.

 
At 28 October, 2006 05:59, Blogger MarkyX said...

Or maybe they got it wrong. Remember the plane crash just two weeks ago? Loads of confusion there.

9/11 Deniers always use first hand reports to justify their position, when in reality, first hand reports are always the inaccurate ones.

 
At 28 October, 2006 07:09, Blogger JPSlovjanski said...

How many times has Alex Jones' or Stephen Jones' changed their stories?

The fact remains you CT morons were relying on a preliminary story, which did not report ANY of the actual hijackers found, coming from BEFORE 1 October 2001. It's been over FIVE YEARS since that ONE article, and not ONE of those "living hijackers" have been found.

 
At 28 October, 2006 07:54, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

THE CRACK PENTAGON CREW WILL AGAIN BE IN DC IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS!!!

THOSE DARN LIGHT POLES AT THE PENTAGON WERE PLANTED!!!!

 
At 28 October, 2006 08:25, Blogger zippychippy said...

Wow, the Bush administration controls the BBC too!

If any of those hijackers were still alive I guarantee they would have been on al jazeera every night since 9/12.

Oh wait...silly me, the Bush administration controls al jezeera too!

 
At 28 October, 2006 10:09, Blogger default.xbe said...

So this proves that the BBC under pressure from shills is going back to CHANGE previous news stories.

What a great precedent. You dont like a news report, just go back and change it.


heads you win tails i lose, eh? they dont chnage the story and its still considered accurate, they do change it or issue a retraction (or both) and you go off on that too

its not even like they changed anything major, lol

 
At 28 October, 2006 10:41, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Zionists really didn't think this thing through. You've got to kill the patsies before you frame them.

These alleged hijackers aren't that impressive, either. Why don't they just go to the press?

Sloppy all around. JFK, the moon landing - those were conspiracies. This 9/11 thing was just totally half-assed.

 
At 28 October, 2006 12:12, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

So this proves that the BBC under pressure from shills is going back to CHANGE previous news stories.

I see PD is back with the usual tin foil hatter douchebag logic.

The funny thing though is HE SHOWS NO PROOF OF ANYTHING.

This is typical.

But lets say for a even a second that this is true.....

I could imagine the headline the next day

"PERSON CLAIMING TO BE US OFFICIAL THREATENS VIOLENCE TO SILENCE BBC MEDIA"

PD assumes that people are stupid and buy into any of this bullshit.

What a great precedent. You dont like a news report, just go back and change it.

NO you total fuckin DOUCHEBAG!!
They are simply responding to NUTBARS like you and CLARIFYING.
The media does this ALL THE TIME you complete moronic piece of cow dung!

 
At 28 October, 2006 14:06, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Welcome back PD

You have fulfilled your destiny, just as we all knew you would.

Ok guys, who won the free movie tickets for predicting a CTer would come over here and simply claim "They were gotten to"...come on, who won??

TAM

 
At 28 October, 2006 14:34, Blogger Jay said...

Lol i just checked PD's site. Looks like he can only comment on things posted on debunk sites. I guess he is to stupid to actually check things for himself, so he just rants away at the debunkers.

 
At 28 October, 2006 14:36, Blogger Stevew said...

TAM Does he ever provide proof or just make hollow claims?

 
At 28 October, 2006 15:18, Blogger remdem said...

You dont like a news report, just go back and change it.

Some of the first reports from D-Day were that Omaha beach was a total diaster, and likely would be pushed back into the sea.

Of course, I'm sure the Germans were angry when the Allies decided to change those reports after, you know, we won back France. Because it is such a nasty precedent and all.

 
At 28 October, 2006 23:28, Blogger pdoherty76 said...

Correction: It was nort one bbc report. The guardian also reported it

 
At 29 October, 2006 01:26, Blogger Cassiopeia said...

pdoherty76 - And then please explain why The Guardian haven't taken on the issue as a cause celebre? It's the UK's most left-leaning newspaper, it is massively critical of Bush and Blair, it has correspondents all over the Middle East, it is privately owned - your theory kind of falls down there doesn't it?
I notice you also conveniently ignore the fact that Al Jazeera (privately owned, not subject to any governmental pressures) haven't been particularly interested in these guys considering they are apparently going about their business in the MIddle East...

Of all the weak BS you guys spout this one is one of the most pathetic. Do you really have to be so relentlessly intellectually dishonest? I guess you have to hold on to every single scrap of conspiracy nonsense dearly: cede one to logic, common sense and overwhelming evidence and then you have to apply that basic intellectual rigour to the rest of your house of cards.

 
At 29 October, 2006 05:21, Blogger JPSlovjanski said...

Everyone knows that the media never makes a single mistake, ever. That's been true for centuries, even during the wonderful administration of President Thomas Dewey.

 
At 29 October, 2006 06:52, Blogger pomeroo said...

You have to love the way pdoherty rose to the challenge and told us exactly what errors he's found in the "official" version of the 9/11 attacks.

What's that? Yes, I know. No, he never will. He's a fraud, remember?

 
At 31 October, 2006 05:28, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

"A man called Waleed Al Shehri..." to make it as clear as possible that there was confusion over the identity.

Ok, so who was Waleed Al Shehri if there was confusion over the identity?

 
At 31 October, 2006 05:33, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Oops yet another question:

Al Watan said a young man with the name Hamza Saleh Alghamdi left the country 18 months ago for Chechnya. A graduate of a religious high school, he phoned home several times from abroad but did not tell his family where he was, the Arab News said. Still, the father of Alghamdi told Al Watan that the picture provided by the FBI was not that of his son. "It has no resemblance to him at all," he said. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A19549-2001Sep24¬Found=true

So who was the hijacker posing as Al Alghamdi? Hmmm seems to me at least 2 of these dead hijackers aren't who they are suppose to be.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home