I think that's good analysis, the use of parentheticals.  However, don't miss the point here, which is that if fake IDs were used by the highjackers, then we really don't know who they were do we?  If 6 of the 19 are proven to be alive, then at least 6 used fake IDs.  This means that probably ALL used fake IDs.  Even the famous name Mohammed Atta is probably wrong.  The other equally strong inference is that if we don't know who they were, then we don't know who they worked for.... but, as the second article points out, what's clear is who we were led to believe they were (and therefore who we were led to believe they worked for). 

Personally, I find this kind of information shocking.   I think the Hustler article title "What if everything we knew about 9/11 was wrong" is a stunning title.  It's quite possible that everything we think is really quite wrong. 

The related question then becomes:  if not them, who?  At this point, it becomes like any other conspiracy theory, e.g., who benefitted, who had the means to carry it out and who had the power to cover it up?

I'm not suggesting that I necessarily believe that any of this is actually the case, that our beliefs about 9/11 are factually incorrect.  I'm merely suggesting that it is possible that it's factually incorrect, that what we think about who did the 9/11 attacks (e.g., Al Qaeda) is in fact false.