Did Hani Hanjour get on board Flight 77?

[paulthompson]

Here's Hani Hanjour supposedly being checked through Dulles Airport security on the morning of 9/11:



Here he is captured on an ATM video a week before (he's the one further back, in the dark shirt):



Does that look like the same person to you? Not only has he gained a lot of pounds in a few days, in my opinion, but I just noticed today that he gained a beard, too! The beard addition makes no sense, since they were supposedly travelling under their own names, using their real passports and so forth. Imagine if Hanjour got a thorough inspection and they discovered a false beard!

Hanjour is consistently described as skinny, slender, or even waif-like. For instance: "Barely over 5 feet tall, skinny and boyish, Hanjour displayed a temperament and actions that were out of sync with those of his fellow pilots..." Cape Cod Times (10/12/02)

Keep in mind that after 2 days, Ashcroft announced there were 18 hijackers, not 19. It was announced there were 4 hijackers on Flight77, not 5. Hanjour was added a day later. Why wasn't he in the original list? According to the Washington Post:

"His name was not on the American Airlines manifest for the flight because he may not have had a ticket."

He didn't have a passenger seat number, either, the only hijacker not to have one.

Then there's his flying skills, which is a long story. But in brief:

At Freeway Airport in Bowie, Md., 20 miles west of Washington, flight instructor Sheri Baxter instantly recognized the name of alleged hijacker Hani Hanjour when the FBI released a list of 19 suspects in the four hijackings. Hanjour, the only suspect on Flight 77 the FBI listed as a pilot, had come to the airport one month earlier seeking to rent a small plane.... However, when Baxter and fellow instructor Ben Conner took....Hanjour on three test runs during the second week of August, they found he had trouble controlling and landing the single-engine Cessna 172. .....chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard declined to rent him a plane without more lessons.

http://www.newsday.com/ny-usflight232380680sep23.story

...the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees to the right to approach the Pentagon from the west, whereupon Flight 77 fell below radar level, vanishing from controllers' screens, the sources said.... Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm... Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14365-2001Sep11.html

So how do we know he was on that plane? I strongly suspect someone else flew that plane. Further, the only released footage of the hijackers in the airports where they took off for their hijacked flights is footage of the Flight 77 hijackers. Yet we know they at least have footage of the Flight 93 hijackers, too, and they haven't released or discussed that. Why? I'd argue that we would find other similar visual discrepancies.

[paulthompson]

1. by the way...

Onoce I started looking this up, I'd found Killtown has been here before, thinking the same thing. Check out his webpage on Hanjour here:

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/hijackers.html

[seatnineb]

10. What is interesting.......

.....is that the lighting has no effect on Khalid Al-Midhar's hairline......

Khalid Al-Midhar as shown by the FBI......



....and as he appears at the airport....



So why the discrepancy with Hani.....

.......as shown by the FBI.....




.........and as shown in the same airport......

[spooked911]

14. Considering there is no date/time stamp on this video

it seems quite likely it is some sort of re-enactment.

But surely they could have found somebody more balding to play Hani Hanjour!

[seatnineb]

16. Agreed......

It is a glaring mistake......and it may indicate that whoever is behind this have not planned things out aswell as we often think they would have.......

[Dancing_Dave]

58. The neo-cons do rely on "there's a sucker born every minuit"

A bit to much. ;-)

"You can't fool all the people all the time, but you can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on". --President George W. Bush

[FreedomAngel82]

56. Two VERY different men

They are very different men. The facial features are too different.

[gbwarming]

2. Here's another quote about Hanjour's skills, not cited very often.

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/deceptions/nynewsday_sep23.html

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 got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said.

[seatnineb]

8. Shouldn't the question be.........

........which Hani Hanjour could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it!

[DulceDecorum]

3. Did Mohammed Atta get on the plane?

The Omission report says that some passengers appear to have boarded after the plane left the gate.

I am glad to see you delving in this direction, Paul.
More so, in view of the BTS records concerning the whereabouts of both American Airlines jetliners on that morning.

Have you checked into the credentials of the ORIGINAL pilots?
Do a time-line for each one of them and see what comes up.
There is a sketchy one of Victor Saracini hanging around here somewhere.

PS.
Every time I post something similar what you just did,
a bunch of chihuahuas mistake me for a chalupa.
How is it that they leave you alone?

[spooked911]

4. LOL.

"Every time I post something similar what you just did,
a bunch of chihuahuas mistake me for a chalupa."

You crack me up, Dolce.

[spooked911]

5. But anyway-- how can passengers board after the plane has left?

Does anyone have an explanation?

[DulceDecorum]

7. Very easy --- for Arabs.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spooked911]

6. You're right-- they don't look anything alike. Maybe the guy who got on

was the Pakistani fighter pilot?

Of course, isn't that Dulles video suspicious anyway, since it didn't have a time/date stamp on it?

[Old and In the Way]

9. Different person, I think. Look at the hair, too.

Maybe that could be a wig, but the facial features don't resemble the other pic in the ATM video at all.

BTW, what were the flight skills of the other hijackers on 77? Was Hans added because none of the others had any previous flying record?

[John Doe II]

11. Hair implantation

Compare the hair of th two guys.
The official photo shows Hani with light hair. The guy at the airport has apparently profited of a hair implanation ....!

[John Doe II]

12. Hair II

Look here at Hani's here just one week before 911 .....



http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2001/Nov-04-Sun-2001/opinion/17360280.html



Pretty impressive transformation................................................................................!

[seatnineb]

13. Game ,set and match

......there is now no question........

There are 2 Hani Hanjours...

Great find again John Doe II!

[spooked911]

15. Yes-- once again the government story is a lie.

Man, this is getting tiring.

[StrafingMoose]

62. And two Atta's!

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,556630,00.html

Jees, I guess the official story will someday be know as the operation that took 38 hijackers to be executed :P

If we apply the same logic to present, there might be two Bush's :freak:

[paulthompson]

17. So where are the usual naysayers?

Does anyon argue that the Hanjour in the airport security video looks like the other Hanjour pictures? Or for once can we have some concensus on this board that the resemblance is dubious at best?

[spooked911]

18. I think we have consensus for sure.

So-- what do we do now?

[Bolo Boffin]

20. I'm going out on a limb

But I'm going to qualify this statement greatly and explicitly.

1. I don't see any problem with identifying the two faces as the same. To my eyes, the distortion of the airport Hani picture doesn't rule out the face there with being the same as the other Hani pictures.

2. I also don't see any problem with the body shape. Yes, the airport Hani seems to be a bit stouter, but that could be due to the cut of his shirt.

That said, the hairline looks different, enough so that I'd want to know how that's explained. The two pictures are taken at different angles, but I don't think that's enough to explain the difference. Is he wearing a hairpiece? Don't know. Did someone else board as Hani, someone different from the ATM Hani? Could be.

What is this supposed to prove?

[DulceDecorum]

21. Ay chihuahua !

1. I don't see any problem with identifying the two faces as the same.
2. I also don't see any problem with the body shape.

That said, the hairline looks different, enough so that I'd want to know how that's explained. The two pictures are taken at different angles, but I don't think that's enough to explain the difference.

What is this supposed to prove?

[spooked911]

23. I really wonder where you find this stuff! LOL.

[spooked911]

22. Get real. You're stretching credulity here.

Just how far are you willing to bend logic to support the official story?

[Bolo Boffin]

26. Please to explain how I bend logic?

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[John Doe II]

29. Well

1. The face of our Hani is thin and long. The face of Hani at the airport if round and indicates the guy just went for a casting of "Supersize me".

2. The body shape certainly can't be due to the cut of the shirt; In both cases the two Hanis have shirts close to the body. In one case he's thin in the other case he is well not really slim. and this also shows in his face.

At least you recognise the difference of the hairline.

Is he wearing a hairpiece? Don't know. Did someone else board as Hani, someone different from the ATM Hani? Could be.

May I wonder why once again and again the Independent Commission didn't ask and try to answer this question??
Wouldn't it be interesting to know if somebody else boarding as Hani? Would it interest you?

Is he wearing a hairpiece?
Excuse why the hell should he?
If he has the passpotrt of Hani the master pilot then maybe he really should try and look like him......

[John Doe II]

30. 5 feet, skinny and boyish

Does this descrition correspond to the Dulles video?

"Barely over 5 feet tall, skinny and boyish, Hanjour displayed a temperament and actions that were out of sync with those of his fellow pilots..."
-Cape Cod Times (10/12/02)

Thanks to Killtown!

[Bolo Boffin]

31. You really can't conclude anything from that checkpoint photo

Not about the face and hair. The hairline looks different, but the face and the body could be Hani. It could just as easily be the guy he's standing next to in the ATM photo as well. The picture is so distorted that you really can't tell much at all about the person in the photo.

I maintain that the ATM Hani could still be the checkpoint Hani. The checkpoint picture is that distorted.

[DulceDecorum]

32. Genii in the bottle?

Hani Hanjour
Obtained a commercial pilot's license in April 1999 from the Federal Aviation Administration. The license expired six months later because he failed to complete a required medical exam. In 1996, he received flight training for a few months at a private school in Scottsdale, Ariz., but did not finish the course because his instructors thought he was not proficient enough. He listed his address as a post office box in Taife, Saudi Arabia, but he also has been linked to addresses in San Diego and Hollywood, Fla. His name was not on the American Airlines manifest for the flight because he may not have had a ticket.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/graphics/attack/hijackers.html

Maybe Hani just "smoked" his way onto the plane.
That would account for the "distortion."

[spooked911]

35. Has anyone official ever explained why certain hijackers didn't appear on

the flight manifests? Wouldn't this be a fairly important issue?

[spooked911]

67. Does anyone know how Hani Hanjour, the extremely poor pilot, managed to

get a commercial pilot's license??????

[seatnineb]

33. You are talking rubbish......

Truth of the matter is that the guy at Dulles...........



.....looks more like one of the fl175 hijackers,...Hamza Alghamdi......



......who also has a mutating face....

[spooked911]

34. Good job!

The weirdest things about the Dulles video are
1) the lack of a time/date stamp.
2) this hijacker seems to have a beard-- I thought all the Al Qaeda guys were supposed to shave off their beards and extra body hair before the attack?
3) this hijacker is clearly not Hani Hanjour-- there is no doubt about that.

[Bolo Boffin]

36. :eyes:

I keed.

I actually agree with you.

The checkpoint Hani, in that one distorted photo, looks more like Hamza Alghamdi, either one, than the ATM Hani.

Mutating face? I'd say weight loss accounts for the second picture. Or gain for the first, but the second looks older than the first.

Again I ask: What does this prove?

There is room inside the accepted explanation for mix-n-match hijackers. We know they stole identities and doctored passports. So what if the hijacker who had been using the identity of Hamza Alghamdi used the identity of Hani Hanjour that day? Flight 77 still crashed into the Pentagon after being hijacked by al-Qaeda terrorists.

Has it ever occured to you that the Feds not releasing everything they know cuts both ways? That perhaps the release of disinformation is possibly motivated not only to hide one's own culpability, but to mask what one actually knows about the enemy, to keep them guessing?

Of course if that's not Hani Hanjour boarding that plane, that's going to trash all of those endless pages about how Hani can't fly. Anybody know if Hamza could fly a plane?

[John Doe II]

37. Sorry Bolo

There is room inside the accepted explanation for mix-n-match hijackers. We know they stole identities and doctored passports. So what if the hijacker who had been using the identity of Hamza Alghamdi used the identity of Hani Hanjour that day?

Sorry, but Hazma is supposed to have been aboard UA 175....

Has it ever occured to you that the Feds not releasing everything they know cuts both ways? That perhaps the release of disinformation is possibly motivated not only to hide one's own culpability, but to mask what one actually knows about the enemy, to keep them guessing?

If one says Hani boarded AA 77 if he didn't board what the hell does this mask "what one actually knows about the enemy, to keep them guessing"?
Whith this logic you really can explain all cover-ups!

Bolo, the Hani story is very simple:
Do you think only the hairline is different in the pics?
Then please explain why Hani needed different hair that day? Shouldn't be to good idea to have a different hairline if one travels with Hani's passport?

And if you consider the possibility that Hani didn't board and didn't fly the plane and you write:

Again I ask: What does this prove?

May I ask you
Why does the Commission lie about the identity of Hani?
Do you consider a story a cover-up if all official explanations are proven to have been lies or does one clear lie in the official explanation raise your eyebrowse?

[Bolo Boffin]

39. You're avoiding my point.

The hijackers stole identities. They used them as necessary. Maybe that's a jumbled mess, but it doesn't prove "all official explanations" to have been lies.

This is not even a clear lie. It's based on one extremely distorted picture! And my point: So what if some other al-Qaeda hijacker used Hani Hanjour's passport and flew that plane into the Pentagon? What does that prove? That the government hasn't figured it all out yet? That the investigators aren't telling us everything they know?

What does that prove? It's clear that you want to use this as a gateway into darker stories about 9/11, but is it necessarily so?

[John Doe II]

40. So I take it

that for you it's not a problem if an "Independent Commission" tells you this is Hani Hanjour although it's not Hani and they knew it's not him??
Are you happy to accept something like this because your government only lies because for good reasons?
Well, in that case the good thing is you really don't have to worry about anything surrounding 911 even the question what would have happened to the Hani from the ATM photo....... if he apparently didn't board the plane.

[Bolo Boffin]

44. Does the Independent Commission tell me this is Hani Hanjour?

I sure would like to see a better shot of this. Do you have any links to a better one?

Or would a better one be detrimental to your thesis?

[seatnineb]

42. You are avoiding the point......

The distorted pictures in question have no effect on the hairline of Khalid Al-Midhar....





So why the discrepancy with Hani....

[Bolo Boffin]

46. Are you paying attention?

I've already said that it looks more like the other hijacker than Hani, mmkay?

You've got lots of pictures. Is that the best you can do on the checkpoint Hani picture?

[John Doe II]

49. It's the only one and the official one

I looked around with several search engines but I didn't find any other.
And the official statement is that this is our Hani. And this, I'm sorry, is a clearcut lie.

[Bolo Boffin]

50. How about a video link?

The original video from which this capture comes must be around somewhere.

For example, we hear lots about the "fat" Osama, and a single distorted still is invariably used in those arguments. But watching the actual video (and even seeing other stills) the "fat" Osama becomes the plain old Osama that we've all seen before.

Can we at least look at the video of the checkpoint Hani? And I've been looking myself, I promise.

[John Doe II]

51. I looked around

Killtown's page shows 6 images of the video and there I found the following link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/18/terror/main624663.shtml

At the side you have to look in the video list. Yet I didn't manage to see the video but an advertisment.
Maybe you're more lucky.

[StrafingMoose]

63. Ok so you replace one lie with another?

"The hijackers stole identities. They used them as necessary"

You can kiss the 9/11 Commision Report goodbye then!

[paulthompson]

43. Regarding switched hijackers...

Here's an interesting entry from my timeline:

February 2001: Two Hijackers Seen Living in San Antonio with Swapped Identities
At least six people with no connections to one another later claim they recognize hijackers Satam Al Suqami and Salem Alhazmi living in San Antonio, Texas, until this month. The management of an apartment building says the two men abandoned their leases at about this time, and some apartment residents recognize them. However, all the witnesses say that Suqami was going by Alhazmi’s name, and vice versa. (SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, KENS 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS, 10/1/01) One pilot shop employee recognizes Alhazmi as a frequent visitor to the store and interested in a 757 or 767 handbook, though he also says Alhazmi used Suqami’s name. (KENS 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS, 10/3/01) The apartment-leasing agent also recalls a Ziad Jarrah who once lived there in June 2001 and looked the same as the hijacker. (SAN ANTONIO EXPRESS-NEWS, 9/22/01; ASSOCIATED PRESS, 9/22/01 (B)) Local FBI confirm that a Salem Alhazmi attended the nearby Alpha Tango Flight School and lived in that apartment building, but they say he is a different Salem Alhazmi who is still alive and living in Saudi Arabia. (KENS 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS, 10/4/01) However, that “Salem Alhazmi” says he has never been to the U.S. and has proven to the authorities that he did not leave Saudi Arabia in the two years prior to 9/11. (WASHINGTON POST, 9/20/01) The FBI does not explain Satam Al Suqami’s presence. Neither hijacker is supposed to have arrived in the U.S. before April 2001.

So yes, there may have been switched identiies.

But I find the notion that the FBI knows better than we do and it's not for us to question their wisdom or some such thing to be absurd. All evidence suggests that they're covering up certain truths for illegitimate and even criminal reasons. One example would be the ties between the hijackers and people in Saudi Arabia via Osama Basnan and Omar al-Bayoumi. Senator Graham sees a cover up there for political reasons having to do with the huge influence Saudi Arabia has in Washington. But that's just one example of many.

Time and time again the FBI has supported simplistic notions about the 9/11 plot that has let the important trails go cold and let criminals go free. Read the chapter in my book on Nabil al-Marabh. If that guy isn't a guilty terrorist than nobody is, and I've uncovered even more evidence on him since then. He was probably one of the 9/11 operational masterminds, as the FBI originally declared to be. Yet they simply dropped all charges and deported him to Syria last year.

It is any wonder that not a single accomplice of the 9/11 plot has ever been successfully convicted anywhere? Heck, the FBI claims there weren't even any accomplices at all, in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary. In fact, one can't point to a single successful important terrorism conviction in the US, period, since 9/11.

There's been a massive cover up of the truth for no legitimate reason. Perpetrators of the 9/11 plot are going free. Have you been blind to all the reports of the Bush Administration's manipulation of the intelligence agencies to get them to say what they want to hear, not what they think the truth is? How anyone could still trust the FBI's good intentions on 9/11 is beyond me.

[Bolo Boffin]

45. Paul

Where have I suggested that "the FBI knows better than we do and it's not for us to question their wisdom"? All I am suggesting is that they might have reasons for letting disinformation out that are more...innocent (FLOABW) than many here are willing to admit. That suggestion doesn't and shouldn't imply any approval of mine to that at all. It's only throwing another possibility out there.

Read the chapter in my book on Nabil al-Marabh. If that guy isn't a guilty terrorist than nobody is, and I've uncovered even more evidence on him since then. He was probably one of the 9/11 operational masterminds, as the FBI originally declared to be. Yet they simply dropped all charges and deported him to Syria last year.

That could be. al-Marabh could also now be a double agent. That also could be.

My main point, Paul, is that many of the conspiracy theories around here seem to cling to this switching of hijackers. I'm demonstrating that this doesn't threaten the accepted theory at all. Most of what I read is a lot of baiting to switch people over to laughable theories like Flight 77 denial and missile pod nonsense.

Have you been blind to all the reports of the Bush Administration's manipulation of the intelligence agencies to get them to say what they want to hear, not what they think the truth is?

Nope. The Bushies really like people who tell them what they want to hear. No argument from me at all on that. Repeat: I don't view the
FBI as benevolent and wise. That isn't necessary (thank God) to still subscribe to the accepted theory.

[paulthompson]

47. Al-Marabh etc

"All I am suggesting is that they might have reasons for letting disinformation out that are more...innocent (FLOABW) than many here are willing to admit."

I would agree in theory, but in practice I know a hell of a lot about 9/11, and I don't see any benign or innocent reason for their actions. Take for instance Sibel Edmonds' allegation (backed up recently by an Inspector General's report, btw) that her boss in the FBI deliberately sabotaged translation work in the weeks immediately after 9/11, translation work that related to threats at the time about potential follow up attacks. In other words, one of these messages not translated in time could have meant the death of many. So what happens? The whistleblower Edmonds gets fired, and the boss gets promoted! Promoted! The boss should be tried and convicted and given a very harsh sentence, in my opinion. There's no benign explanation for the FBI backing him up, except for CYA (cover your ass) or worse (the bosses of this boss was happy with what he did).

There's a pattern. You say al-Marabh could be recruited as a double agent. But how on Earth could he possibly prove he wouldn't go and commit crimes again after being a major participant in 9/11? It would practically akin to letting Hannibal Lecter out. And he was released to Syria, of all places, where the US can't get to him if he were to turn around and give the finger.

And his release is part of a pattern. Look at Osama Basnan. The San Diego FBI agent Steve Butler testified before the 9/11 Commission that his investigation showed ties between Basnan, Basnan's pal al-Bayoumi, the hijackers, and the Saudi government. Basnan was in US custody at the time of this testimony. Within a month, the US deported Basnan to Saudi Arabia. Five days after that, a Newsweek story about Basnan and al-Bayoumi broke and he became this big wanted man, and the FBI said they were looking for him. But they already had him and let him go days before, knowing all that info Butler gave!

Or look at Mohdar Abdullah. The 9/11 Commission discovered that he may have had advanced warning of the attacks and even boasted about it in custody, yet he was let go just weeks before the commission's report came out. Some of the commissioners said they couldn't figure out why he was let go.

Or Anwar Al Aulaqi. Again, let go. The 9/11 Congressional Inquiry pointed out that the FBI investigation into him was closed “despite the imam’s contacts with other subjects of counterterrorism investigations and reports concerning the imam’s connection to suspect organizations.” When this came out, the FBI announced they'd discovered evidence he had advance knowledge of the plot, and a few days later Newsweek quoted one of his neighbors who said Al Aulaqi told him in August 2001 he was leaving for Kuwait: “He came over before he left and told me that something very big was going to happen, and that he had to be out of the country when it happened.”

Are you beginning to see a pattern yet, or should I continue? Time and time again, the FBI has let the real terrorists go.

One cannot continue to believe the official theory when one realizes how many facets of it the FBI and other such agencies have obviously lied about. You would be a fool to do so, like a battered housewife coming back home to an absusive husband and saying for the Nth time, he's not going to hit me this time.

I will agree that then leaves the question of what really happened wide open. The disproving of one theory doesn't necessarily mean that another theory has been proven and should be believed. Maybe, for istance in this case, CYA and political pressures is all there is to it. But no rational person can continue to believe the official version on 9/11 once they've been exposed to enough information.

[paulthompson]

48. One more thing on the topic of hijacker associates

Look at this FBI document from November 2001 uncovered by the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry. It concludes that the six lead hijackers “maintained a web of contacts both in the United States and abroad. These associates, ranging in degrees of closeness, include friends and associates from universities and flight schools, former roommates, people they knew through mosques and religious activities, and employment contacts. Other contacts provided legal, logistical, or financial assistance, facilitated U.S. entry and flight school enrollment, or were known from (al-Qaeda)-related activities or training.”

Now look at what FBI Director Mueller said in public testimony in June 2002: “While here, the hijackers effectively operated without suspicion, triggering nothing that would have alerted law enforcement and doing nothing that exposed them to domestic coverage. As far as we know, they contacted no known terrorist sympathizers in the United States.”

What's the fiendish brilliance of Mueller completely lying about this, when they let all these associates go? All of them! At least 14 of the hijackers' associates were under investigation even BEFORE 9/11 and none of them are in jail today!

Bolo, it's very understandable to be critical of MIHOP or LIHOP. Skepticism and healthy debate is needed on this, as on all things. But I don't understand how you consistently support the official theory as you do when it is so patently a bunch of lies. I could point out so many more lies from Mueller alone: "There were no warning signs that I’m aware of that would indicate this type of operation in the country," "There was nothing the agency could have done to anticipate and prevent the attacks," etc...

In fact, I would be hard pressed to think of one thing the FBI has been honest about re: 9/11.

[seatnineb]

41. Like the OCT that you believe in.....you are in a mess....

......But let's believe what you say........and assume that Hamza Alghamdi replaces Hani hanjour aboard Flight 77.......

Well first of all Hamza Alghamdi is nothing more than:

Now, let me turn to the remaining hijackers, the individuals we believe were the "muscle" on the flights, responsible for keeping the passengers under control.

Waleed al Shehri (AA#11) and Satam Alsuqami (AA#11) arrived on April 23, 2001 at Orlando, Florida.

Majed Moqed (AA#77) and Ahmed Alghamdi (UA#175) arrived on May 2, 2001 at Dulles International Airport.

Mohand Alshehri (UA#175), HAMZA ALGHAMDI (UA#175), and Ahmed Alnami (UA#93) arrived on May 28, 2001 in Miami, Floria

Ahmed al Haznawi (UA#93) and Wail al Shehri (UA#l1) also arrived in Miami but on June 8, 2001.

Fayez Banihammad (UA#175) and Saeed Alghamdi (UA#93) arrived on June 27, 2001 at Orlando.

Satem al Hazmi(AA#77) and Abdul Aziz al Omari (AA#11) arrived in New York on June 29, 2001.

As told by FBI boss ,Robert Mueller III

Well we know Hani was a useless pilot.......but it looks like Hamza could not fly at all.........

[John Doe II]

61. Problem is, Bolo

the Commission claims that it's him.
Can you please tell me how then can claim that??

[Frederik]

59. sigh...

"What is this supposed to prove?"

Why do you assume that it is "supposed to prove" anything? Nobody has claimed that this, alone, is proof of anything. What it is, though, is further confirmation that the "official" story, as presented by the FBI and the 9/11 Commission report, is dubious and appears to be partly fictitious.

The Hani Hanjour who couldn't fly a Cessna did not perform the manoeuvres of the plane that hit the Penagon, and the man at the ATM machine, identified as Hani Hanjour, does not appear to be the man, also identified as Hani Hanjour, who borded Flight 77.

[Andre II]

68. Well,

why in the first place is the Dulles photo presented as showing Hanjour if even the dumbest person sees that this is never the Hanjour.

[ramblin_dave]

19. If Hanjour wasn't on flight 77 then who could have

flown the plane? Were any of the other alleged hijackers known to have piloting skills?

[DulceDecorum]

25. The "hijackers" fo Flight 77 are mostly alive

so we really ought to go and ask them how they pulled this caper off.

[medienanalyse]

38. some additional Hanjour facts

But first of all @ Dulce: If hijackers existed they are dead. If there are people alive with the names of alleged hijackers they are not hojackers but innocent people.

There is no place to joke about that.

Now to Hanjour:
Well known is: he was no. "19". The first "informations" noted 18 hijackers. So why did H. buy a ticket together with Moqed? http://finaledition.pbpost.com/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=3e58dda020a78Mpqaweb1P11013&doc=document.html&url=http%3a%2f%2fpqacontent1%3a10001%2fservlet%2fcom.infonautics.panama.content.document_repository.RetrieveDocumentForDisplayServlet%3fpublisherName%3dPalm%2bBeach%2bNewspapers%252C%2bInc.%26publicationName%3dThe%2bPalm%2bBeach%2bPost%26providerName%3dCox%2bInteractive%2bMedia%26publishingDocID%3d12890039

Why did Marlene not state that Hanjour in the simulator-school was identical with the FNI-foto?
http://www.azstarnet.com/attack/10920Rpmb--Attacks-Arizon.html


Hanjour lived in Phoenix: : http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel01/092701hjpic.htm


but it was Hanjoor. Double oo. : see Tim O'Meilia ,Cox News Service am 15. Oktober 2001 („Hijacker Entered U.S. in 1990, Officials Believe”):
„Hanjour war erst 19, er stammte aus Taif in Saudi Arabien, als über ihn das erste Mal 1990 berichtet wurde in den USA. Er schrieb sich in einen 8-Wochen-Kurs für Englischsprecher als Zweitsprache an der University of Arizona in Tucson ein, wo sein älterer Bruder studiert hatte. Trotz des Kurses und der zeitdauer, die er in den United States verbrachte, blieb seine Beherrschung der Sprache bruchstückhaft, den Leuten der Mietwagenfirmen, Vermietern und Hotelangestellten zufolge.“


http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/news/101001_nw_terror_attacks_hanjour.html

He lives in the U.S.A. and learns English. And needs refrehers in the same school?

(Tim O'Meilia für den Cox News Service am 15. Oktober 2001)


http://www-tech.mit.edu/V121/N67/terror.67w.html
Here the trail is layed out. Somebody Hanjour with Arizona-history , but livong in New York in a New-Jersey-car and ontaining a Florida-dribers licence in Virginia driving too fast.
The policeman will remember the situation. Like Jarrah driving too fast.


Three weeks after the stop, Hanjour mailed in a money order to pay a $70 fine and $30 in court costs, Arlington General District Court Clerk Kimberly Reazey said Tuesday. http://www-tech.mit.edu/V121/N67/terror.67w.html

JIM YARDLEY wrote 4.Mai 2002 („A Trainee Noted for Incompetence“):
”Mr. Hanjour, "It was more of a very typical instructional concern that 'you really shouldn't be in the air.' "
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/04/national/04ARIZ.html?

Und somit haben wir eine fünfte Cockpitkonfiguration: der Nichtskönner übte also auch an einem 737-Simulator. Faszinierend: Nun sind es schon fünf Modelle, an denen er sich austobte um einen Piloten zu markieren.
Denn um nichts anderes handelt es sich: es wurde wieder einmal ein zweiter Mann angeheuert, der unter falschem Namen Spuren legen sollte, Die Indizien deuten darauf hin. Beweisen können es nur die, die Zugang zu den Akten haben. Wie unpraktisch, dass das evtl. eben diejenigen sind, die alles einfädelten. Immerhin ließe sich durch Zeugenbefragungen das Indiziennetz engmaschiger stricken.


Excuse me not to have sort the German sentences out, no time anymore, translation later.

[John Doe II]

52. Video footage of Hanjour at Dulles

Here's what the CR has to say about this famous photo of Hanjour that shows a person that appears to NOT to be Hanjour:
The checkpoint featured closed-circuit television that recorded all passengers, including the hijackers, as they were screened. At 7:18, Mihdhar and Moqed entered the security checkpoint.

Mihdhar and Moqed placed their carry-on bags on the belt of the X-ray machine and proceeded through the first metal detector. Both set off the alarm, and they were directed to a second metal detector. Mihdhar did not trigger the alarm and was permitted through the checkpoint. After Moqed set it off, a screener wanded him. He passed this inspection.

About 20 minutes later, at 7:35, another passenger for Flight 77, Hani Hanjour, placed two carry-on bags on the X-ray belt in the Main Terminal's west checkpoint, and proceeded, without alarm, through the metal detector. A short time later, Nawaf and Salem al Hazmi entered the same checkpoint.

The interesting thing to remark is that Hanjour passed the security alone. That means the people watching the video couldn't deduce that this must be Hani (although he looks different) because he's in company with four people that clearly could be identified as hijackers.
Therefore what I would like to know:
Based on what could the Commission come to the conclusion that the person shown in the video footage is indeed Hani?

[John Doe II]

53. Hani Hanjour or Hani Hanjoor

Another set of two Hanis....
Behind this weird question lies the fact that the three visa applications of Hani show considerable differences:
(This is based on finding of medienanalyse and Mathias Bröckers)











Not only his family name is different. Shouldn't the family name in the visa application be based on the name given in the passport?
His handwriting changed.
His height changed.
His passport number changed.
Ok that his telephone number changed is no problem :p

[spooked911]

54. Fascinating! This needs more study!

So Hani had a double, it looks like.

Awesome documents there.

[Frederik]

60. Appears to be

two Hanis. Interesting.

[FreedomAngel82]

55. Oh wow

Wow. Another one. There was some guy from California and he was a middle eastern man and he was in college. Someone stole his information and he contacted the police and told about it but he never got back his information and papers. :\ How can someone grow a full beard in a few days and grow some pounds?

[Dancing_Dave]

57. So Hanjour was added to the official myth because they needed a "pilot"

And the neo-cons made it a long way basing their careers on the old American saying "there's a sucker born every Minuit", so they didn't expect us to ask more questions!

And we'd be to traumatized to even think for ourselves anymore, awwwwwe. :nopity:

But not forever! :headbang:

[philb]

64. at least 7 of the alleged 19 are known to be alive and not involved

and Hani wasn't the name originally among the group of 19 as I remember. Wasn't he a last minute subsitute when someone else listed turned out to be problematic?

[petgoat]

65. "at least 7 of the alleged 19 are known to be alive and not involved"

" Hani wasn't the name originally among the group of 19"

The topic post says that originally Ashcroft said there were 18, and
four aboard flight 77, but later Hani was added to the suspects list.

Thank you Paul, for your great work.

[HughBeaumont]

66. No comment, but praise -

Reading your book and just glowing at the uncovering. Splendid work all around. I'm a MIHOP'er all the way. It's a pity that these victims and their families will most likely NEVER be avenged.

Apparently Hani was a mighty shitty pilot on most accounts. The angles and flight patterns just don't add up.