Please provide support for the notion that these are "alleged" hijackers -- all of the mainstream media reports describes these people as the hijackers. There's nothing "alleged" about it. Morton devonshire 22:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
There is no trial, and the "mainstream" media has often reported that between 1-7 of the hijacker names are still alive, that identities could have easily been stolen, even Porter Goss and others have said (pp) "There is no way we can be certain that these were not stolen identities", so it's "alleged" until somebody proves otherwise. Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 23:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Erroneously Accused would be less pov. 'Wrongly accused' in US speech generally connotes a deliberate slanderous or libelous attack actionable by lawsuit against the accuser.
On the above point, in US practice, all accused are alleged until they are convicted unless dead... which should apply in this case to quite a few. Best regards // FrankB 03:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
The group title is coded as "20th hijacker suspects", however this link does not appear when implemented (i.e. on the page 20th hijacker). I do not know how to fix this. LukeSurl t c 20:04, 11 September 2011 (UTC)