911 hijackers remains identified, separated from victims

In the late fall of 2001, as Shaler and his colleagues were engaged in the slow work of conducting DNA tests on the thousands of fragments from Ground Zero,

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
I'm sorry but I can't believe that anyone would fall for this. You can't believe they found bodies....

Who said they found bodies?

Since when does mangled remains means bodies?




[edit on 5-1-2009 by SLAYER69]

reply to post by dantrav


When it comes to the collapse of the buildings, its best guess. When it comes to who hijacked the planes and what they did with them, its not best guess, it is fact. Despite the seven year old BBC article Cash alluded to, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt who the hijackers were and who they were affiliated with. On three of the flights, there were flight attendants that used their respective airline maintenance nets to call in what seats the hijackers had been in and the names attached to those seats. After that, a few hours of computer work cross referenced the names from the other flight and it cascaded from there. Ninety percent of the info we needed, we already had. Unfortunately it was spread between a dozen or so different departments that, prior to 9/11, were forbidden by law to talk to one another. The only people that still talk about "the hijackers are still alive" are either people too lazy to look things up for themselves or people who just do not want to accept the truth.

reply to post by AllTiedTogether


You must have skipped over the part that says there is about twenty four pounds of remains that have been identified as belonging to the hijackers. Last I knew, Mini Me wasnt a hijacker.

Originally posted by cashlink

Because there where no remains and no highjackers, all you diehard Government believers have no proof of any highjackers but the word of your master G- BUSH and the lying Government and your sold out Press! You all have” NO PROOF”!

Many of the remains were burned and badly damaged, but identifiable. In Pennsylvania, Somerset County coroner Wallace E. Miller and his team scoured the "halo"—the field and woods surrounding the crater left when United Airlines Flight 93 plunged into the ground. The debris was everywhere.

It seems they disagree with you.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999


You must have skipped over the part that says there is about twenty four pounds of remains that have been identified as belonging to the hijackers. Last I knew, Mini Me wasnt a hijacker.

Edit to correct my statement
Good point


[edit on 5-1-2009 by SLAYER69]

reply to post by dantrav


Not for nothing D, but Iraq and Afganistan have already been punished(still being for that matter) and The Saudis will never be punished heck we just did one of the largest weapon sales ever put together to our Saudi friends.

Any kind of "questioning" of 9/11 should be for piece of mind (IMO) b/c no matter who was involved with it , at this point if there was inside participation they got away with it.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


Take me to that place and time and show me the events that occurred. Research is nothing more that looking over someone else's report and claiming it fact. Once again i don't claim to know what happened i just know it is not as it seems and that the mass media contradicts itself on a constant basis.

Our government has lied to us time and time again, there is no getting around that. We are engulfed in two wars that will never be won, are completely unjustified and that started with this attack. Our civil liberties are disappearing at an alarming rate all based on "terrorist activity." That alone is enough for me to call BS. It is the greater picture of it all. There is no way it is all some accident or coincidence from start to finish.

I know people who see it this way from only watching the basic news. No research, they just see nonsense after about 30-70 years of seeing it time and time again.

I am not saying i will never be convinced otherwise, but for the moment it just doesn't make any sense and unfortunately the truther point of view seems most logical.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

we know beyond a shadow of a doubt who the hijackers were and who they were affiliated with.

Really why don’t you prove that? and site your sources, and We do not want any lying reports well the FBI said and the CIA said because the WHOLE WORLD KNOWS THEY ARE LAIRS! It has been “PROVEN” over and over. You have done nothing but RANT!

No they didn't find bodies, they found body parts. Hands, feet, skin, bone fragments, etc.

I read somewhere that no intact bodies were found of anyone onboard the airliners.

Can second that - had to walk a crash scene of a Lear Jet 20 years ago
marking out body parts for the coroner. Only recognizable pieces were
half of torso, part of hand (minus fingers), several amputated fingers
(dont know if belonged to hand), plus lots of "human hamburger" - scraps
of flesh flung all over scene.

Read part where Wallace Miller, the coroner, spotted tooth stuck in tree....

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

On three of the flights, there were flight attendants that used their respective airline maintenance nets to call in what seats the hijackers had been in and the names attached to those seats

.

Thank you for contacting Customer Relations. I am pleased to have the opportunity to assist you.
That is correct we do not have phones on our Boeing 757. The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack.
However, the pilots are able to stay in constant contact with the Air Traffic Control tower.
Mr. XXXXXXXX, I hope this information is helpful. It is a privilege to serve you. This is an "outgoing only" email address. If you 'reply' to this message by simply selecting the reply button, we will not receive your additional comments. Please assist us in providing you with a timely response to any feedback you have for us by always sending us your email messages via AA.com at www.aa.com...
Sincerely,
Chad Kinder
Customer Relations
American Airlines

www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

Could Barbara Olson Have Made Those Calls?
An Analysis of New Evidence about Onboard Phones
06/26/07 - Did American Airlines 77---the flight that, according to the official conspiracy theory about 9/11, struck the Pentagon---have onboard phones? This question is relevant to the possible truth of the official theory, because Ted Olson, who was then the US Solicitor General, claimed that his wife, Barbara Olson, called him twice from this flight using an onboard phone.
He did, to be sure, waver on this point. CNN, which mentioned in a story posted just before midnight on 9/11 that Barbara Olson had used a cell phone to call her husband, reported in a more extensive treatment, posted at 2:06 AM (EDT) on September 12, that Ted Olson had told it that his wife “called him twice on a cell phone from American Airlines Flight 77.”1 But on September 14, Olson said on Hannity & Colmes (Fox News) that she had called collect and therefore must have been using the “airplane phone”---because, he surmised, “she somehow didn’t have access to her credit cards.”2 On CNN’s Larry King Show later that same day, however, Olson returned to his first version. After saying that the second call from her suddenly went dead, he surmised that this was perhaps “because the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well.”3 On that same day, moreover, Tony Mauro, the Supreme Court correspondent for American Lawyer Media, published an account saying that Barbara Olson “was calling on her cell phone from aboard the jet.”4 Two months later, however, Ted Olson returned to the second version of his story. In the “Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture” delivered to the Federalist Society, he said that she used “a telephone in the airplane to [make] those two telephone [calls].”5 This second version was repeated in March 2002. “[C]alling collect,” he told the London Daily Telegraph, his wife “us[ed] the phone in the passengers’ seats.” She called collect, he again surmised, because “she didn’t have her purse” and hence her credit card
Correcting an “Error”
Later, however, DRG received two items suggesting that, although AA 757s did not have onboard phones in 2004, they probably did in 2001. One item was a 1998 photograph, said to show the inside of an AA 757, revealing that it had seat-back phones. The other was a news report from February 6, 2002, which said: “American Airlines will discontinue its AT&T in-flight phone service by March 31, a spokesman for the airline said Wednesday.”17 This report, DRG realized, did not specifically mention 757s, so this notice did not necessarily imply that AA 757s had had onboard phones up until that date. However, by taking into consideration this article, the photograph, and the realization that the letters from AA in 2004 were couched entirely in the present tense, DRG concluded that the claim that AA 77 had not had onboard phones was probably an error. He published an essay, “Barbara Olson’s Alleged Call from AA 77: A Correction About Onboard Phones,”18 which contained a section entitled “My Error.”
Correcting the Correction
The publication of DRG’s retraction, however, set off a process that has led us to correct this correction, because we discovered three new pieces of evidence supporting the contention that AA 77 did not have onboard phones.

The Chad Kinder Email: One piece of evidence was brought to our attention by a member of the Pilots for 9/11 Truth forums who goes by the alias “Kesha.” Using one of these forums, “Kesha” reported that the following email exchange had been posted February 17, 2006, on a German political forum. A person using the alias “the Paradroid” had sent this email to American Airlines:

Hello, on your website . . . there is mentioned that there are no seatback satellite phones on a Boeing 757. Is that info correct? Were there any such seatback satellite phones on any Boeing 757 before or on September 11, 2001 and if so, when were these phones ripped out?

This was the reply received by “the Paradroid” (except that his real name has been crossed out):

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX:

Thank you for contacting Customer Relations. I am pleased to have the opportunity to assist you.

That is correct we do not have phones on our Boeing 757. The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack. However, the pilots are able to stay in constant contact with the Air Traffic Control tower.

Mr. XXXXXXXX, I hope this information is helpful. It is a privilege to serve you.

Sincerely,
Chad W. Kinder
Customer Relations
American Airlines

For those eight reasons alone, we would be justified in concluding, from simply this aspect of the official story, that the entire official story about 9/11 was a fabrication. This conclusion is greatly strengthened, however, by the almost definitive evidence that, besides the fact that Barbara Olson’s alleged calls could not have been made from a cell phone (which the US government now appears implicitly to have acknowledged), they also could not have been made from an onboard phone.40

pilotsfor911truth.org...

Again, there was not any on board phones built on that aircraft I guess you have proof that all the other airplanes had phones built on board?

How could Barbara Olson have made a call via a seat phone when the Boeing 757 (AA 77) had no seat phones?
How could cell phone calls be made when the technology needed was not available in the planes of that type until 2004?


FBI, proven a liar, always a liar!

The only people that still talk about "the hijackers are still alive" are either people too lazy to look things up for themselves or people who just do not want to accept the truth.

This is the typical responds from Deniers, who believe mainstream News sources, and Government propaganda.

Originally posted by thedman

Reached by NEWSWEEK, one relative of Ziad Jarrah, the hijacker believed to have piloted Flight 93 into a Pennsylvania field, expressed just this kind of ambivalence. "Of course we want to get back his remains, but we are not planning to make any contact before things get clarified," said the relative, who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation. He couldn't bring himself to admit that Jarrah had carried out the atrocities. "Maybe he participated," he says. "Maybe there is something we don't know." But then he paused. Perhaps, he conceded, his relative was indeed involved and he himself was just "engaging in wishful thinking." Admitting it outright, Professor El Fadl says, would run counter to the prevalent belief in countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt that the attacks were actually an anti-Arab conspiracy perpetrated by the Bush administration. If he were related to one of the hijackers, he says, "I'd be scared for the harm that might befall the rest of my family by the Saudi or Egyptian government if I showed an interest," he says. "There is an environment of fear in countries like Saudi Arabia; it's hard to describe. The culture of terror is suffocating."

I wonder if these are the same relatives of Ziad Jarrah who have recently been outed as a MOSSAD agents?

Sources involved in the investigation were quoted as saying that Jarrah was inducted into the Mossad in the mid-1980s and was charged with gathering information on Palestinian organizations operating in Lebanon and Syria.

www.jpost.com...

That must have been fun at family gatherings with at least 2 people being MOSSAD and one person being Al-Queda.

I dont think i believe this given this information.

FORENSIC DNA TESTING There have been two main types of forensic DNA testing. They are often called, RFLP and PCR based testing, although these terms are not very descriptive. Generally, RFLP testing requires larger amounts of DNA and the DNA must be undegraded. Crime-scene evidence that is old or that is present in small amounts is often unsuitable for RFLP testing. Warm moist conditions may accelerate DNA degradation rendering it unsuitable for RFLP in a relatively short period of time.

DNA Testing: An Introduction For Non-Scientists

I imagine it would have been FORENSIC DNA TESTING,but i might be wrong.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999


How did they identify the hijackers so quickly?

reply to post by cashlink


Im sorry, this thread is about the remains of the hijackers, not whether or not Flight 77 had seat back phones. Unless you are referring to the calls the flight attendants made, and as stated, they were made using the onboard equipment that the flight crews have access to communicate with their respective airlines. Please try to stay on topic

Originally posted by dantrav
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

 

I am sorry, but i believe the official story is a crock.

The only "official story" is the canard by that name invented by the 9/11 Truth Movement to keep truthers gullible. They want you to believe there is just a "story" and no evidence.

The rest of us will rely on the massive independent evidence which the 9/11 Truth Movement has been incapable of refuting.

Originally posted by cashlink
Because there where no remains and no highjackers, all you diehard Government believers have no proof of any highjackers but the word of your master G- BUSH and the lying Government and your sold out Press! You all have” NO PROOF”!

You are one of the most gullible truthers out there, cashlink. You'll believe any false story your leaders tell you.

Your knees must be awfully sore from kneeling before the God of 9/11 "Truth."

reply to post by thedman


Looks like Edman and his trolls believe everything the
current government has spoon feed them.

And you call truthers nutcases with tinfoil hats.

The next thing youre going to blame Bin Laden for the
collasped of the econcomy....

reply to post by driveshaft08


Umm, that would be "Thedman", "spoon fed", "collapse" and "economy". I must point out that the thread is about the remains of the 9/11 hijackers, not the "I need remedial spelling classes" thread.

Would also point out that knowing Thedman and his posts on here, he does not depend on anyone spoon feeding him anything, he goes out and finds the information for himself. You have three separate government agencies (federal, local) saying that they have identified the remains, why does that knowledge scare you?

I am a "truther". No I dont stay away from this thread.

The hijackers could have been on the planes. The planes were remote controlled, the terrorists could not have flown them so well to hit both towers and the Pentagon especially, they were in the same boat with the passengers.

What about the "heroic battle" in flight 93 ? Maybe there was such a battle.
Flight 93 did not crash, I say it exploded then crashed.

Why did the hijackers sacrificed themselves ? Maybe they didn't. Maybe CIA told them just to hijack the planes the usual way. Or they were just made to board the planes, to travel somewhere and that was all. I am sure they did not pilot the planes. The flight instructor said they could not fly a Cessna.

[edit on 5-1-2009 by pai mei]

If you fail to see the truth in all the evidence supplied by the doco Loose Change, the 25 high ranking military and govt officials now calling for a re-investigation of 9/11, Bush's reaction to the event on the day, Silverstein admitting to 'Pull' the building (no:7) after insuring it for billions 6 weeks earlier, numerous proven lies from Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld on film, elementary debunking from govt officials, expert explosive contractors stating the collapses didnt gel with the norm, no debri of any planes at any sites, alleged hijackers turning up alive, strange white USAF plane overhead in NY and Washington etc...........then I refuse to argue with any of you because "WHEN YOU ARGUE WITH A FOOL, 2 FOOLS ARE ARGUING".