If one subscribes to the official story then he was a hijacker and was apparently killed on 9-11. If one does not subscribe to the official story then the possibility for the hijacker to be alive is plausible.
As a matter of administrivia, whether or not one "subscribes" to a particular account of what occurred on September 11th, 2001 has no bearing on what is and what is not. One can only incorporate various elements and come to their own belief about what took place and what did not.
And if an individual is alive - regardless of his name - he couldn't have been one of the hijackers, could be? There are some additional fallacies of logic to this whole subset of theories, but I'll bring those up later.
Do you believe in the official story, ie 19 hijackers, box cutters, OBL is the mastermind?
I believe that the United States was attacked on September 11, 2001, by individuals striking back at us for foreign policy decisions and actions made over a number of decades. As to whether a group called al Qaeda, led by an individual named Osama Bin Laden was specifically behind it, I have little reason to doubt...this country did, after all, train and equip such groups in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s...but I'm not married to that assertion, and personally I think it's a rather insignificant detail in the grand scheme of things.
With respect to specific details about how the hijackings occurred, it's my opinion that the best guesses are pure speculation, and knowing that the government prohibited private companies from protecting their own property, well, I think it's quite possible that the hijackers had more than simple boxcutters, although that too wouldn't surprise me terribly.
*****
The part of all this conspiracy mongering I find most provocative is that there is evidently a requirement to believe that every element, the entire scope of what is called the "official" story is fabricated. Anything short of not adhering to the MIHOP/LIHOP tale is heresy, including the portion of that account which places the blame singularly, squarely, on the Bush Administration alone.
A curiously meticulous parceling, that. ;-)
e
P.S. I guess Doug R has given up on my challenge. Unsurprisingly, and wisely on his part. |
