This is Google's cache of https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/12/329265.html.

It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Mar 24, 2017 11:12:27

GMT.
The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more
Full version Text-only version View source
Tip: To quickly find your search term on this page, press Ctrl+F or -F (Mac) and use the find bar.

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of
important social and political issues.

Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London:
2015 London Anarchist
Bookfair
2nd - 8th November:
Wrexham, Wales, UK
& Everywhere: Week of
Action Against the North
Wales Prison & the
Prison Industrial
Complex. Cymraeg:
Wythnos o Weithredu yn
Erbyn Carchar Gogledd
Cymru
Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-
8pm, Yorkshire:
Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO
Menwith Hill US Spy
Base More info: CAAB.
Every Tuesday, UK &
worldwide: Counter
Terror Tuesdays. Call the
US Embassy nearest to
you to protest Obama's
Terror Tuesdays. More
info here
Every day, London:
Vigil for Julian Assange
outside Ecuadorian
Embassy
Parliament Sq Protest:
see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see
topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel
Indymedia | Palestine
Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas
Indymedia
Regions
All Regions
Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
911: Media Published Fake Passenger Lists for AA Flight 11
Gerard Holmgren | 05.12.2005 06:03
The 911 Conspiracy Theory used by the people who said "Saddam has WMD!!!", in order to kick-start an agenda of
Fascism and military Aggression, has never in over four years been supported by evidence. Yet the media continues to
repeat it as fact.
Media Published Fake Passenger Lists for AA Flight 11
By Gerard Holmgren
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/05/288505.shtml
Copyright. May 16, 2004. This article may be freely reproduced as long as it it is not for commercial purposes. Please
include the authors name, the URL where you found it, and the copyright notice.
As everyone knows, on Sept 11 2001, 5 Arabs allegedly hijacked American Airlines flight 11 and crashed it into the Nth
Tower of the World Trade Centre at 8.46 A.M. It was part of a crime which killed approximately 3000 people.
Any crime of this magnitude, is - or should be - subject to rigourous examination by investigative and law enforcement
authorities, such as the FBI. In any crime involving the illegal use of a plane, it is obvious that one of the first investigative
steps taken by such authorities is to find out who was on the plane.
This is not a difficult thing to do. Airlines keep well organized records of everybody on any particular flight. The apparent ID
of anyone on that flight - regardless of whether they used a true or false ID - should be immediately available to authorities.
Unless authorities decide that disclosure of such information may jeopardize the investigation, it should also be easily
available to the media. It should be as simple as an exchange of faxes or emails between the media and either the airline
involved or one of the relevant authorities to which the airline has released the information. Or possibly printed copies
handed out at a press conference.
In relation to the alleged AA11, there has never been any indication that such information has been withheld for security
reasons. We have been given the clear impression that the information relating to exactly who was on that plane has been
made available to us via the media - which presumably sourced it in the manner suggested above. If the information had
been withheld, one would expect that to be known.
Supporters of the official story seem to support this view. In the face of mounting evidence that none of the Sept 11 crashes
were actually caused by the planes alleged to have been involved (some of this evidence is linked at the conclusion of this
article), supporters of the official story will often reply with a demand to know exactly what happened to the alleged
passengers, illogically imagining the lack of a specific answer to represent a flaw in the no planes/substitute planes
argument. Implicit in this demand is the belief that there is solid documentation of who the passengers were.
Anybody can put up a website, do an interview or send an email, claiming to be family or friend of a plane victim. But the
only credible, official source for such information is the airline passenger list, and the only credible source for obtaining this
information is the airline itself, or authorities and media to which the airline makes it available. One can't demand an
explanation of what happened to particular people alleged to be on the flight unless one can prove that they were on the
flight. Implicit in the official story is the assumption that such information has been established in the public domain by the
media.
It is therefore incumbent upon any serious investigator to properly examine such passenger lists and ensure that they
match with other alleged facts we have been given, and with the processes by which one would expect the information to
have been sourced.
In this context, the following statement by "USA Today" in relation to its published passenger lists is of some concern.
"Partial lists of passengers and crew killed in Tuesday's terrorist attacks, according to family members, friends, co-workers
and local law enforcement."

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
London http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/11/victims-list.htm
Oxford
Sheffield This is a very strange way to source such information. Why not get it from American Airlines or the FBI? If neither of these
South Coast were consulted, how did USAT know who's "family members, friends, co-workers" to go looking for? Or if AA and the FBI
Wales were the first source of inquiry, why a partial list from hearsay sources?
Why "local law enforcement" rather than the feds, who would surely have any complete database of the victims? This
World statement appears to make no sense at all, except to confirm that the obvious sources where any media outlet should be
looking - American Airlines and the FBI - seem to have been left out of the process. And it gets more ridiculous.

Other Local IMCs At

Bristol/South West
Nottingham
Scotland
Social Media
You can follow
@ukindymedia on
indy.im and Twitter. We
are working on a Twitter
policy. We do not use
Facebook, and advise
you not to either.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/12/victim-capsule-flight11.htm
USAT gives the following bio of one of the alleged victims.
"Tom McGuinness, of Portsmouth, N.H., was co-pilot of American Airlines Flight 11, an official at his church confirmed...He
said church pastors were with his wife when she was notified Tuesday morning. "
Surely American Airlines, the FAA or the FBI would be the only sources which could confirm who was co-piloting the plane.
A family member, who's ID can be verified would be a reasonably good unofficial source, but first one needs to find out which
family one is looking for. In the process of ascertaining that, one should have already received official confirmation. This
source is someone who claims to know such a family member - a second hand attribution to a source which is not official
anyway, and should be subject to confirmation from AA, The FAA or the FBI.
Why does USAT cite the church administrator as the source, indeed the confirmation of the information, when they can't
have found out anything about how to find the church administrator without first consulting the official source, which could
comfirm it far more authoritively ? The indications are that the church administrator contacted USAT with this claim, and
USAT accepted this hearsay at face value. If so, this is very poor journalism.

Support Us
We need help paying the
bills for hosting this site,
please consider
supporting us financially.
One can't be certain of the exact processes employed by USAT, but its fair to say that there are strong indications that its
passenger list is based on hearsay, because they had some kind of problem in obtaining the routine documentation which
one would expect to be available, but failed to give a direct disclosure of what that problem was.
By contrast, CNN, introducing its passenger list ,says
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/main.html

Other Media Projects "authorities from American Airlines, United Airlines, the Department of Defense, the New York City Medical Examiners
Office and the New York City Fire Department, have released partial lists. They are linked below."

This is a clear indication that CNN claims to have sourced its passenger information as one would expect.

The firs passenger list for AA11 which I studied was that presented by CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html
It says that there were 92 people aboard, but if you count the names listed there are 87 - and no Arabic names. On the
surface, this seems reasonable. One can speculate that CNN has published the names of all 87 innocent victims, and
deleted the names of the 5 hijackers for sensitivity reasons.

If so, why is said that American Airlines released a "partial list" ?

For the moment, lets give CNN the benefit of the doubt and assume this to be a complete list (in contradiction to what they
wrote) of the 87 innocents alleged to be on board - a list sourced from AA, whether directly, or indirectly via a law
Topics enforcement agency. A reading of the names suggests that the CNN list may actually represent only 86 people - one name
duplicated with different spelling.
All Topics
Afghanistan Robin Caplin and Robin Kaplan are listed as two different people. There is a brief bio for Kaplan, but nothing for Caplin,
Analysis except the home town.
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear Perhaps this is just an enormous co-incidence and two people with such names actually were on the flight ? Lets suspend
judgment for the moment, while we investigate further.
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism I then checked the passenger list provided by USA Today.
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/11/victims-list.htm
Culture
Ecology Again, it is described as a partial list. It contains 86 names. - one short of a complete list. Robin Caplin is missing.
Education However, two other names from the CNN list - Jude Larson and Natalie Larson - are also missing, and the list contains two
Energy Crisis names which are not on the CNN list.
Fracking
Kelly Booms and Pendyala Vamsikrishna.
Free Spaces
Gender Lets think through the possibilities.
Globalisation 1) Two of the names from the collective passenger lists are fictitious.
Health 2) Neither list is complete, and the complete list of innocents only emerges from a collective viewing of the lists - as strongly
History implied by the term "partial list" used in relation to both lists. If so, then we have 89 innocents. If this is the case, there can't
Indymedia be 5 hijackers for a total of 92 people. And yet nobody seems to dispute these two figures.
Iraq
At http://www.boston.com/news/daily/12/victims_list.htm
Migration
Ocean Defence We find a list of AA 11 victims published on Sept 13 2001, which, judging by the introduction, may have come from exactly
Other Press

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
Palestine same the source as that used by USAT today. It begins thus.
Policing
Public sector cuts "By The Associated Press. Partial list of those killed in Tuesday's terrorist attacks, according to family members, friends,
co-workers and law enforcement. "
Repression
Social Struggles Compare it with the introduction to the USAT list.
Technology
Terror War "Partial lists of passengers and crew killed in Tuesday's terrorist attacks, according to family members, friends, co-workers
Workers' Movements and local law enforcement."
Zapatista
However, this list is quite different to that published by USAT - or CNN . While not giving any summation, it contains the
names of 89 alleged innocents and introduces two new names - Robert Jalbert and James Roux. Vamsikrishna and Booms
are the two names not included from the collective CNN and USAT lists. Since it publishes 89 names as a "partial list " this
Major Reports implies a minimum of 90 innocents aboard the plane.
From the three combined lists, we now have 91 alleged innocents and 5 hijackers for an apparently undisputed summation
NATO 2014
of 92. The Boston Daily list ,in isolation, implies a minimum of 95 aboard, while the collective lists imply 96 - if one is to
G8 2013 believe in 5 hijackers. Alternatively, there must be four fictitious innocents.
Workfare
2011 Census Resistance The Boston Daily list also contains "Heath Smith", which would appear to be a substitute for "Heather Smith" named on the
Occupy Everywhere previous two lists.
August Riots
Dale Farm A year later, the Boston Daily published a very different list, seemingly without acknowledging any previous error.
J30 Strike
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/sept11/anniversary/victims/flight11.htm
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010 It contains only 87 names. Jalbert ,Roux,Caplin and the two Larsons have been dropped for Booms,Vamsikrishna and
Tar Sands another new name - Waleed Iskander - who is not alleged to be one of the terrorists. Heath Smith has become Heather Lee
G20 London Summit Smith. A person named on every other list as Antonio Montoya has become Antonio Jesus Montoya Valdes. Peter Hashem
University Occupations has been replaced by Peter el-Hachem.From the bio, it appears to be a different name for the same person While the odd
for Gaza spelling discrepancy or missing hyphen is quite plausible, this much of a name change is stretching the credibility a little. I
Guantanamo can believe that "Green" could become "Greene" or "Catherine" become "Katherine", but "Hashem" becoming "el- Hachem"
Indymedia Server - from an official passenger list - is more difficult to accept.
Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit This is most unsatisfactory. The combined lists now name 92 innocents, so if one is to believe in 92 aboard, 5 of which were
2009 hijackers, we now have 5 fictitious innocents.
We have three major mainstream media outlets, publishing 4 lists which all contradict each other about who was on board,
Carmel Agrexco
when this information should have ultimately come from one official,well organized source. We have lists claiming to be
G8 Japan 2008 "partial lists" publishing more names than should be in a complete list.
SHAC
Stop Sequani I checked another list - from the Guardian dated sept 13 ,2001
Stop RWB http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,551423,00.html
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising This also claims 92 people aboard. It published only 75 names, saying
Rossport Solidarity
"This is a preliminary, partial list of passengers aboard the flight whose next of kin have been notified. Some families asked
Smash EDO
the airline not to include their loved ones' names: these do not appear. "
SOCPA
Past Major Reports 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. 92. This creates a real headache for the official story. Is the figure of 92
correct? Should it be really be 97 - the 92 collectively listed innocents plus 5 hijackers? If so, why is everyone saying 92 ?
Encrypted Page Or were there no hijackers? If so, why is everybody saying 5 ? Or are 5 of these names fictitious ? If so,why ?

You are viewing this The Guardian list also has Heath Smith instead of Heather Smith, and Hashem rather than el-Hachem.
page using an encrypted
connection. If you There's another problem. If AA released only 75 names on Sept 13, how did the Boston Daily mange to publish 89 on the
bookmark this page or same day ? Where did it get the extra names that the airline was still withholding ?
send its address in an
email you might want to Now the list from NBC
use the un-encrypted http://www.msnbc.com/modules/wtc/victims/default.asp?p=5
address of this page.
If you recieved a warning 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
about an untrusted root same as the anniversary list from the Boston Daily.
certificate please install
the CAcert root I checked another mainstream media source - PBS
certificate, for more
information see the http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/sept11/victims/aa11.html
security page.
which entitles its list " One year later. Remembering the victims."

This agrees with the NBC and Boston anniversary lists.

Global IMC Network
Lets review the problems so far.
www.indymedia.org
From five mainstream media outlets we have four conflicting lists.
Projects
print Robin Caplin and Robin Kaplan on the same flight is difficult to believe, especially as Caplin is one of the frequently missing
radio names.
satellite tv
video The lists can't agree on the correct names for three of the passengers - Hashem/el- Hachem, Heath/Heather Smith, and
Antonio Montoya/Valdez .
Africa

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
 There are collectively 92 innocents and 5 hijackers for a total of 92 aboard.
Europe
antwerpen So these are the possibilities
armenia a) 5 of the innocents are fictitious
athens b)There were no hijackers
austria c) Some of these people were the real hijackers
barcelona d) There were 97 people aboard.
belarus
belgium I will clarify what I mean by "fictitious". It may be that the extra names represent real people, who are missing and
belgrade presumed dead. It may be that they have family and friends who honestly believe that the missing person boarded a flight
brussels called American Airlines 11. That's a matter for further research. But for five of these individuals who have been listed,
bulgaria (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
calabria accept one of the other possibilities above.
croatia
cyprus The Washington Post from Sept 12
emilia-romagna http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A18970-2001Sep12
estrecho / madiaq
galiza Introduces its list as
germany
grenoble "American Airlines partial passenger lists"
hungary
ireland and then lists 89 names, (no hijackers) implying a minimum of 95 aboard. Once again, how did it get 89 names on Sept 12,
istanbul if AA was still withholding some of them on Sept 13 ?
italy
la plana Those missing are Iskander, Vamsikrihna and Jalbert. This doesn't even agree with the missing three from the Boston
liege Daily's first list of 89, published the day after. The missing names there were Iskander, Vamsikrishna and Booms. So even if
liguria it were to be argued that the Boston Daily and the Washington Post somehow found a source of which the Guardian was
lille unaware, their lists still don't match.
linksunten
lombardia Fox news
madrid http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34223,00.html
malta
marseille lists only 81 names. It gives no summation and introduces the list as
nantes
napoli "Confirmed on board American Airlines Flight 11 Boston to Los Angeles: "
netherlands
northern england perhaps implying that this is only a preliminary list and that a complete list is still awaiting confirmation. The problem is that
nottingham imc this report is dated Sept 20, 2001. Why does it take more than 9 days to achieve the simple task of obtaining an official
paris/le-de-france passenger list? Perhaps the story about AA only releasing 75 names on Sept 12 is true, and that by Sept 20, this had risen
patras 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
piemonte 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
poland 81 names more than a week later. And yet, even those who were publishing 89 names were calling them partial lists and
portugal disagreeing on the names. Someone is fibbing.
roma
romania At http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/9/12/133231.shtml
russia
sardegna dated Sept 12, 2001, NewsMax.com introduces its passenger list thus, appearing to support the Guardian's version of how
scotland the information was being released.
sverige
switzerland "American Airlines Wednesday released a partial list of passengers and crewmembers aboard the two flights downed by
torun terrorist acts in New York and Washington. The following is a list of passengers whose next-of-kin have been notified.
toscana American has honored the requests of those families who have asked that their loved ones' names not be included. "
ukraine
united kingdom Note that like the Guardian, it does not claim to withheld the names itself. AA didn't supply the missing names.
valencia
It publishes 77 names, including Heath Smith, not Heather. And Hashem, not el-Hachem. This would appear to be the
Latin America identical source as the Guardian. So why did the Guardian - the following day - publish two less names? The lists are
argentina identical except for these two - Judy Laroque and Carlos Montoya - missing from the Guardian list.
bolivia
chiapas The same intro as NewsMax with a matching passenger list to NewsMax appears at
chile
chile sur http://archives.tcm.ie/breakingnews/2001/09/12/story23539.asp
cmi brasil
cmi sucre also dated sept 12.And also at
colombia
ecuador http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m4PRN/2001_Sept_12/78169846/p1/article.jhtml
mexico
peru and again at
puerto rico
qollasuyu http://yellowhawk33.tripod.com/html/powmia.html
rosario
santiago Except that this list is identical to the Guardian. 75 names, with Laroque and Carlos Montoya omitted. Well...almost
tijuana identical. Heath Smith has become Heather Smith.
uruguay
valparaiso Even more puzzling in relation to Smith, is why large news agencies such as CNN and USAT who one would surely expect
venezuela 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.)
Oceania
aotearoa If this is alleged to be simply a typo, why are nearly all of the other names consistently free of typos or variations (other than
brisbane who was included ) in list after list ? Why does every office typist develop a severe case of dyslexia or fumble fingers every
burma time Smith's name comes up ? In isolation, this problem would strongly indicate that some news sources are just copying

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
darwin from other news sources. Someone initially made a mistake in copying Smith's name, and this mistake got passed on to
jakarta some other lists. But that theory doesn't stand up to scrutiny. If different media outlets are simply copying each others lists
manila - without acknowledgment - why are nearly none of them the same ?
melbourne
perth Whatever the answer to this mystery, we can confidently state that media is not publishing any kind of reliable, official
qc documentation. These lists are an appalling shambles, not worth the paper that they're not written on.
sydney
This site http://www.wwnfsept11.com/AmericanAirlinesFlight11Victims.htm
South Asia
india 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
United States
arizona http://www.wwnfsept11.com
arkansas
asheville which also gave no real information about the authors or the sources.
atlanta Where did this list come from? Whoever put it together has not even uncritically copied one of the previously examined lists
Austin ( while failing to source it). They've created a new combination of names from the combined lists. Or if they've uncritically
binghamton copied it without acknowledgment from some other mainstream source which has eluded my searches, then we have yet
boston another contradictory list. Why does it imply 93 aboard ?
buffalo
chicago At this point it is worth doing some searching to see if there's any significant disputation of the figures of 92 aboard,
cleveland including 5 hijackers.
colorado
columbus 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
dc linking the sources which claim it, and I can't find anything which disputes it
hawaii
houston At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_flight_11
hudson mohawk
kansas city which describes itself as an encyclopedia about Sept 11, is a link to what is confidently described as a "flight manifest " for
la A11, although it gives no source for this information. Clicking on this link takes one to
madison
maine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11%2C_2001_Terrorist_Attack/Plane_casualties
miami
michigan which introduces AA 11 as having 93 aboard, including 5 hijackers. The list does contain the names of 5 suspected
milwaukee hijackers (All Arabic names) , so there should be 88 innocents.It specifies this directly by stating
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire "93 people: 82 passengers (including 5 hijackers), 9 flight attendants, 2 pilots "
new jersey
new mexico This makes 11 crew and 77 innocent passengers. 88 innocents in total.
new orleans
north carolina But if you count the names, there's only 92 - 5 hijackers and 87 innocents,making a mockery of the rather official sounding
north texas title of "flight manifest." The missing names are Caplin, Jude Larson, Natalie Larson, Roux , Jalbert and Iskander. The
nyc 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
oklahoma Tu. So we now have - collectively - 93 innocents and five hijackers for a total of 92 or 93 aboard.
philadelphia
pittsburgh Here are just a few of the sources which agree on the summation of 92 aboard.Most of them are sites with reasonably good
portland reputations as reliable sources of information. None of them represent sources which question the official story in any way.
richmond
rochester Crash database.com
rogue valley http://www.crashdatabase.com/cgi-bin/webdata_crashdatabase.cgi?cgifunction=Search&Date=2001
saint louis
san diego US govt info/resources
san francisco http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/blattack0911.htm
san francisco bay area
santa barbara Newsday
santa cruz, ca http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-
sarasota nymain122362150sep12,0,7355100.story?coll=ny-homepage-top-utility
seattle
tampa bay ABC News
united states http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/DailyNews/primetime_flightattendants_020718.html
urbana-champaign
vermont Massport press release
western mass http://www.massport.com/about/press01/press_news_advisory2.html
worcester
Christian Science Monitor
West Asia http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0913/p1s2-usju.html
Armenia
Beirut Airsafe.com
Israel http://www.airsafe.com/events/airlines/american.htm
Palestine
Washington Post
Topics http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/transcripts/american_text091101.htm
biotech
Washington Post
Process http://a188.g.akamaitech.net/f/188/920/1m/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
fbi/legal updates srv/nation/articles/trade091101.htm
mailing lists
process & imc docs Airdisaster.com
tech http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi_bin/view_details.cgi?date=09112001&airline=American+Airlines

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
Aviation Safety Network
http://aviation-safety.net/database/2001/010911-0.htm

WiredNews
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,46740,00.html?tw=wn_story_related
Times-Herald Record
http://www.recordonline.com/adis/62/stories/timeline.htm

The Straits Times.

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/mnt/html/webspecial/WTC/timeline2.html

World Statesman
http://www.worldstatesmen.org/index2.html

Biblia Vividia
http://biblia.com/islam/newyork.htm
Higher Praise.com News
http://www.higherpraise.org/news/ArchivedNews4.htm

http://www.disenchanted.com/dis/lookup.html?node=1535

http://www.ezl.com/~fireball/Disaster.htm

So, if we have universal agreement that there were 92 aboard - 5 hijackers and 87 innocents - why can no-one agree on who
those 87 innocents were? Which 6 of the 93 names are fictitious ?

It appears that some spin doctor became partially aware of this problem, and tried to solve it by putting up another of these
hearsay sites - again failing to provide identification or sources.

http://www.inmemoriamonline.net/List_AA11.html

According to this list, there were 90 innocents aboard, and 5 hijackers, for a summation of 95. Not a word is said about the
universally accepted figure of 92. This is simply swept aside as if the figure had never existed. It publishes 90 names - 90 of
the 93 collectively published in all of the other conflicting lists. But where did this list come from ? The site has not copied
from any of the previously examined mainstream media sites. Or if its copied (without providing documentation), from some
other mainstream source which has eluded my searches , then we have yet another contradictory list. But since this site
broke basic documentation protocol, by providing no sources, we are entitled to assume the worst. That they fabricated their
own list, by cobbling together 90 names from other collective lists - indicating that they were well aware of the
discrepancies, but failed to note three of the names - and then fabricated the summation of 95 aboard to try to make the
figures add up - hoping that no-one would notice.

The missing names are Jalbert, Tu and Vamsikrishna

At
http://www.americanmemorials.com/memorial/deathnotice_private.asp?idMemorial=1317

is a list from "ObituryRegistry.com which describes itself as " a service of AmericanMemorials.com"

Upon first viewing of the site, its not immediately apparent what the official status, if any, of this site is. Since anyone can
post anything they like on the internet, one needs to check these things carefully. So I followed some of the links to find out
more about the site and its authors, and its official status, if any. I clicked the link for AmericanMemorials.com which took
me here

http://www.americanmemorials.com/

It describes itself as the "The internet's most complete database of current obituaries and death notices. Searchable by
name,city and state, keywords and more."

It invites one to create one's own memorial for $US49.95. Following various links around the site gives no indication that it is
anything other than a commercial operation, with no official status. So it appears as if anybody could create a memorial to
anyone- real or fictitious - as long as they came up with $49.95. So lets have a look at the list for AA11.

It lists 90 innocents, and introduces two new names. Bill Weems and Timothy Ward. So we now have 95 alleged innocents.
Those missing from this list are Tu, Booms, Vamsikrishna, Jalbert and Roux.

There are now a minimum of 8 fictitious innocents -unless someone wants to suggest that there were 100 people aboard in
total -or else get creative with the practical application of abstract maths and suggest that the plane was hijacked by a
group of Arabs numbering minus three, making the total passenger load 92 - in which case the media owes an explanation
for why it keeps publishing 5 names for these minus three individuals.

Someone is fibbing.

Here is a summary of the anomalies between the lists.

Collectively, these sources list the names of 95 alleged innocents.

CNN lists 87 names, which should be a complete list ,but indicates that the list is incomplete. The 8 left out are
Vamsikrishna, Roux, Iskander,Jalbert, Tu,Weems,Ward and Booms.

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
USAT lists 86 names, citing this as a "partial list", Those missing are Caplin, Jalbert, Jude Larson, Natalie Larson, Roux,
Tu,Weems,Ward and Iskander.

NBC lists 87 names. Its the same as USAT with the addition of Iskander, but changes Peter Hashem to Peter el-Hachem.

PBS is identical to NBC.

The Boston daily lists 89 innocents and describes it as a a partial list. Those missing are Iskander,Vamsikrishna, Tu ,
Weems,Ward and Booms. It is the only list to name Jalbert.

A year later it lists 87 names, changing Heath Smith to Heather Smith, Hashem to el-Hachem , and losing Caplin, the two
Larsons, Jalbert and Roux for Iskander, Vamsikrishna.and Booms.

The Washington Post published a "partial list" containing 89 names. Those missing are Iskander,Vamsikrishna, Jalbert , Tu
, Weems and Ward .

The "we will never forget" website lists 88 names. Those missing are Vamsrikrishna, Jalbert, Booms, Tu,Weems,Ward and
Roux.

The AA11 memorial website lists 90 names and claims 95 aboard. The missing names are Vamsikrishna, Tu, Weems,Ward
and Jalbert.

Wikipedia claims a summation of 93 aboard, but lists only 92 names (including hijackers).It is the only site to list Lana Tu.
Those missing are Iskander, Caplin, the two Larsons, Jalbert,Weems,Ward and Roux. This makes it the same as the USAT
list with the addition of Tu or put another way - the same as the NBC and PBS lists except that Tu is in for Isaknder.

The American Memorials/Obituary site lists 90 names and is the only list to name Weems and Ward. It leaves out Tu,
Jalbert,Vamsikrishna, Roux and Booms.

Several sources claim that AA released 77 (or 75) names on Sept 12, but the Washington Post published 89 names the
same day, and the Boston Daily published 89 - but not the same 89 - the day after, while Fox News was still claiming that
only 81 names were confirmed a week later.
We still can't rule out the possibility that Caplin/Kaplan is a genuine co-incidence, but suspicion is justified, especially as
Caplin is one of the frequently missing names. Some lists have Peter el-Hachem, others Peter Hashem. Some lists have
Heather Smith and others Heath Smith. Most lists have Antonio Montoya but one has Antonio Montoya Valdes.

Since the media which sells us the official story universally agrees that there were 92 aboard - 87 innocents and 5 hijackers,
then 8 of these names (although we can't yet specify which 8 ) must be fictitious. If 8 are confirmed as fictitious, then we are
perfectly entitled to speculate with some validity that any number of the 95 could be fictitious.

What's even more curious is that four of these names also appear on the lists for UA 175, alleged to have hit the Sth Tower
of the WTC at 9.03. Jalbert ,Roux, Ward and Weems.

What a mess ! This crime - the murder of approximately 3000 people , and the excuse for two wars and alarming attacks on
civil liberties - and presumably more to come - is supposed to have been properly investigated and documented ? Why
should we be expected to believe who the hijackers were, when the spin doctors can't even do a credible fabrication job of a
list of innocent victims ?

It's previously been demanded by many sceptics that we need to see a verifiable official passenger list which actually
contains the names of the alleged hijackers. We can now take the implications of that further and point to the absence of
any passenger list documentation for AA11 which stands up to scrutiny as a credible document. We have nothing which
could support the existence of any of the alleged passengers on the alleged flight.

The fact is - that in nearly three years - the media has tried to give the impression that they have published valid passenger
lists, when all that has been provided is the contradictory rubbish exposed in this investigation. We are left with no choice
but to conclude that these AA11 lists are fabrications. Personal stories of those allegedly involved have been built on the
basis of these fabricated lists. As qualified earlier, some or all of them may be real people who are really missing, and may
have friends or families who genuinely believe that they got on to a flight called AA11. We don't know at this stage. But the
passenger lists as complete entities are lies.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/flight_11_passengers.html

911 Story Pulled, Returned

SURE we've got a "Free Press" in America. HA!

We were amazed that a FOX affiliate had actually done a story on 9/11 that WASN'T a "tinfoil hat" hit piece. ...So amazed
in fact that we linked to their website so other people could see for themselves. -Oh, but our amazement was short lived.

Within days, the story was killed, the transcript removed from their website, the video links taken down, and all references in
the archives were gone. POOF, just like that, it never existed.

Wouldn't you love to know who "gave the order" to make that story disappear without a trace? They must be pretty powerful,
huh?

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com
This only further reinforces what we already know: There is a deliberate effort by the mainstream media to suppress the
irrefutable evidence of a 9/11 cover up. No problem. We've got a copy of the video below. Be sure to save one for yourself
and then spread this info FAR and WIDE.

This is what the government and the corporate media criminals didn't feel you had the right to see.

http://tree3.com/video/fox.wmv

Oh, and maybe you should drop them a line...ask them why they pulled the story. Ask them why, if what the government
says is true, they're so afraid of THE EVIDENCE.

UPDATE: Unbelievable! There is apparently a battle going on at that station because the links are now back up. I went
through that site myself...all references had been removed. Now the story is back on the home page, in the archives, and
the original pages (below) have been restored. VERRRYYY Interesting.

When I first posted this story (before the links had been taken down) I said we should write the station and THANK the brave
reporters who put the piece together. Well, maybe we owe them an even bigger thanks. It looks like they not only had the
courage to report on this; they also had the courage to fight having it squashed.

http://www.wicz.com/news2005/viewarticle.asp?a=282 (Part 1)

http://www.wicz.com/news2005/viewarticle.asp?a=291 (Part 2)

http://www.stopthelie.com/911_story_pulled.html
Gerard Holmgren
Download this article in pdf format
Email this article to someone;
Submit an addition or make a quick comment on this article

Comments
Display the following 10 comments
1. Oh, brother... FTB
2. It's About A LIE Oft-Repeated Becomes "The Truth"
3. So the media get it wrong sceptic
4. A LIE repeated Is Still A LIE A Liar Lies, Even When He Speaks The Truth
5. And an idiot posting is still an idiot Observer
6. Laughable Diversion A Liar Lies, Even When He Speaks The Truth
7. Gotcha Amused
8. Iraq's WMD sceptic
9. Still at it ... how tedious magoo
10. ... M

converted by W eb2PDFConvert.com