I checked another list - from the Guardian dated sept 13 ,2001
This also claims 92 people aboard. It published only 75 names, saying:
“This is a preliminary, partial list of passengers aboard the flight whose next of kin have been notified. Some families asked the airline not to include their loved ones' names: these do not appear. “
Fair enough. So this list is unable to be fully tested for consistency with either of the other four conflicting lists. However, it does agree on the number of people aboard. This creates a real headache for the official story. Is the figure of 92 incorrect? Should it be really be 97 - the 92 collectively listed innocents plus 5 hijackers? If so, why is everyone saying 92 ? Or were there no hijackers? If so, why is everybody saying 5 ? Or are 5 of these names fabricated ? If so, how,why and by whom?
The Guardian list also has Heath Smith instead of Heather Smith. It has Hashem not el-Hachem
There’s another problem. If AA released only 75 names on Sept 13, how did the Boston Daily mange to publish 89 on the same day ? Where did they get the extra names that the airline was still withholding ?
Now the list from NBC (sinne moved)
[Here is a spot where they admit Holmgren had a point and tried to work their way out of it. And whoever wrote it is still pretending the Airlines gave "manifests" - untrue.]
It lists 87 names for a summation of 92, and is the same as the USAT list, except for the addition of Iskander.That is - the same as the anniversary list from the Boston Daily.
I checked another mainstream media source - PBS which entitles its list “ One year later. Remembering the victims.”
This agrees with the NBC and Boston anniversary lists .
Lets review the problems so far.
Of five mainstream media outlets only three agree. And one of these has published two conflicting lists.
Robin Caplin and Robin Kaplan on the same flight is difficult to believe, especially as Caplin is one of the frequently missing names.
The lists cant agree on the correct names for three of the passengers - Hashem/el- Hachem, Heath/Heather Smith, and Antonio Montoya/Valdez .
There are collectively 92 innocents and 5 hijackers for a total of 92 aboard.
So these are the possibilities
a) 5 of the innocents are fictitious
b)There were no hijackers
c) Some of these people were the real hijackers
d) There were 97 people aboard.
I will clarify what I mean by “fictitious”. It may be that the extra names in question represent real people, who are missing and presumed dead. It may be that they have family and friends who honestly believe that the missing person boarded a flight called American Airlines 11. That’s a matter for further research. But for at least five of these individuals who have been listed (although we can’t at this stage specify who ) the belief that they were on AA11 is proven to be false - unless one is to accept one of the other possibilities above.
The Washington Post from Sept 12 2001 [page moved]
[Here is a more up-to-date site showing images of alleged evidence in the Moussaoui "trial" which are purported to be "manifests" - though they are not official releases of the airlines but are contentions of the government. The research site also mentions:
There are several other facts that undermine the credibility of the FBI's published list of suspects [beside the contradictory lists of names and numbers of alleged victims]. One is the existence of a handful of reports in mainstream newspapers of those suspects proclaiming their innocence after the attack]
Washington Post introduces its list as:
“American Airlines partial passenger lists”
and then lists 89 names, (no hijackers) implying a minimum of 95 aboard. Once again, how did it get 89 names on Sept 12, if AA was still with-holding some of them on Sept 13 ?
Those missing are Iskander, Vamsikrihna and Jalbert. This doesn’t even agree with the missing three from the Boston Daily’s first list of 89, published the day after. The missing names there were Iskander, Vamsikrishna and Booms.
Fox news
lists only 81 names. To be fair, it gives no summation and introduces the list as
“Confirmed on board American Airlines Flight 11 Boston to Los Angeles: “
implying that this is only a preliminary list and that a complete list is still awaiting confirmation. The problem is that this report is dated Sept 20, 2001. Why does it take more than 9 days to achieve the simple task of obtaining an official passenger list? Perhaps the story about AA only releasing 75 names on Sept 12 is true, and that by Sept 20, this had risen to 81. If so, then those who were publishing 89 names on Sept 12 and 13 have some explaining to do. But if they were telling the truth, then the Guardian has some explaining to do,and so does Fox in relation to why it was only able to confirm 81 names a week later. And yet, even those who were publishing 89 names were calling them partial lists and disagreeing on the names. Someone is fibbing.
Dated Sept 12, 2001, "NewsMax.com" introduces its passenger list thus:
“American Airlines Wednesday released a partial list of passengers and crewmembers aboard the two flights downed by terrorist acts in New York and Washington. The following is a list of passengers whose next-of-kin have been notified. American has honored the requests of those families who have asked that their loved ones' names not be included. “
It publishes 77 names, including Heath Smith, not Heather. And Hashem, not el-Hachem. This would appear to be the identical source as the Guardian. So why did the Guardian - the following day - publish two less names? The lists are identical except for these two - Judy Laroque and Carlos Montoya missing from the Guardian list.
The same intro as NewsMax with a matching passenger list to News Max appears here also dated sept 12, and also here
Except that this list is identical to the Guardian. 75 names, with Laroque and Carlos Montoya omitted. Well...almost identical. Heath Smith has become Heather Smith.
Even more puzzling in relation to Smith, is why large news agencies such as CNN and USAT who one would surely expect to have also received this early list, made the same mistake in relation to Smith, naming him as Heather.(Unless Heather is correct and sources such as the Guardian and NewsMax somehow made Heather into Heath.
Sources seem to be split on the question of whether Smith is Heath or Heather. And yet, if this is alleged to be simply a typo, nearly all of the other names have consistently been free of typos in list after list. Why does every office typist develop a severe case of dyslexia or fumble fingers every time Smith’s name comes up ? In isolation, this problem would strongly indicate that some news sources are just copying from other sources. If they happen to be copying from a list which says “Heather”, then that's what appears in their list. But that theory doesn’t really solve the problem. If different media outlets are simply copying each others lists - without acknowledgment - why do so many lists contradict each other so much?
Whatever the answer to this mystery, we can confidently state that media is not publishing any kind of any official documentation. These lists are an appalling shambles, not worth the paper that they’re not written on.
This site makes no comment on the total number aboard, but if you count the names you’ll find 88 innocent victims. It’s the same as the CNN list with the addition of Iskander. The authors of the site do not identify themselves or their sources in any way, so I went to the home page
which also gave no real information about the authors or the sources. So, where did this list come from? Whoever put it together has not even uncritically copied one of the afore mentioned lists ( while failing to source it) They’ve created a new combination of names from the combined lists. Or if they’ve uncritically copied it without acknowledgment from some other mainstream source which has eluded my searches, then we have yet another contradictory list. And it not address the problem that this list implies 93 aboard?
At this point it is worth doing some searching to see if there’s any significant disputation of the figures of 92 aboard, including 5 hijackers. In relation to the five hijackers, it would appear not. The 5 hijacker story is so integral to the official myth, that it’s not worth linking the sources which claim it, and I can’t find anything which disputes it.
This site [defunct as of June 25, 2012] makes no comment on the total number aboard, but if you count the names you’ll find 88 innocent victims. It’s the same as the CNN list with the addition of Iskander. The authors of the site do not identify themselves or their sources in any way, so I went to the home page
[ This site is - http://www.wwnfsept11.com/ and is also gone.]
which also gave no real information about the authors or the sources. So, where did this list come from? Whoever put it together has not even uncritically copied one of the afore mentioned lists ( while failing to source it) They’ve created a new combination of names from the combined lists. Or if they’ve uncritically copied it without acknowledgment from some other mainstream source which has eluded my searches, then we have yet another contradictory list. And it not address the problem that this list implies 93 aboard?
At this point it is worth doing some searching to see if there’s any significant disputation of the figures of 92 aboard, including 5 hijackers. In relation to the five hijackers, it would appear not. The 5 hijacker story is so integral to the official myth, that it’s not worth linking the sources which claim it, and I can’t find anything which disputes it.
At Wikipedia is a link to what is confidently described as a “flight manifest “ for A11, although it gives no source for this information.
which introduces AA 11 as having 93 aboard, including 5 hijackers. The list does contain the names of 5 suspected hijackers (All Arabic names) , so there should be 88 innocents.It specifies this directly by stating
“93 people: 82 passengers (including 5 hijackers), 9 flight attendants, 2 pilots “
This makes 11 crew and 77 innocent passengers. 88 innocents in total.
But if you count the names, there’s only 92 , 5 hijackers and 87 innocents, contradicting the summation of 93. This makes a mockery of the rather official sounding title of “flight manifest.” The missing names are Caplin, Jude Larson, Natalie Larson, Roux , Jalbert and Iskander. The reason why six names have been dumped from the collective list of 92 to make 87 is that this list has a new name - Lana Tu. So we now have - collectively - 93 innocents and five hijackers for a total of 92 or 93 aboard.
You’ll notice that I’ve linked to a google cache for Wikipedia’s “flight manifest”, because after I published this article, Wikipedia then changed it’s list to be consistent with CNN’s list. This is how their site looks now.
[In any case, Wiki still has it wrong. And I copied the site so if they change it at least there will be further documentation for that. Wiki now says first there was 87 + hijacker, (which would be 5, for a total of 92) . Then later in the same article it's "the September 11 flight carried 81 passengers and 11 crew members." which adds up to 92 - but what happened to the hijackers? Over 10 years later and they still have the passenger lists / exactly who was there and who died, wrong.]
