SEARCH |
try another search
newswire international
coverage of life, politics and protest.
post your
news instantly upload your audio, video, photo or text directly
from your browser
background in-depth
analysis on capitalism and global economics from znet
features: archive 9-11: peace & justice links about contact support us get involved volunteer up coming events imc video
projects IMC Channel
http://www.indymedia.org/
Australia adelaide melbourne sydney
Africa south africa congo
Europe austria barcelona belgium finland france germany czech republic italy norway portugal russia sweden switzerland united kingdom
Canada alberta hamilton maritimes montreal ontario québec vancouver victoria windsor
Argentina argentina
Brasil brasil
Colombia colombia
Israel israel
Mexico mexico chiapas
United
States arizona atlanta austin boston buffalo chicago cleveland danbury, ct hawaii houston la madison maine minneapolis/st. paul new jersey new mexico nyc new york capitol ohio valley philadelphia portland richmond rocky mountain san francisco bay area seattle st louis urbana-champaign utah vermont dc
IMC Projects satellite tv news print radio climate IMC
IMC
Process process discussion tech volunteer mailinglists fbi/legal updates indymedia faq
IMC technlogy by cat@lyst and IMC Geeks
Get involved with the indymedia revolution at process.indymedia.org
|
webcast
news contribute an
article | administration
| This is an OPEN
PUBLISHING newswire
| email
this story | download
as PDF | print
article
The
Perplexing Puzzle Of The Published Passenger Lists, by Gary
North (english) by REALITY CHECK
1:13pm Tue Oct 16 '01 (Modified on 4:11pm Tue Oct 16
'01) |
|
|
tracking down the story of the passenger
lists: "This puzzle is no game. The United States has gone
to war on the basis of one solution to this puzzle." ". .
.the published names in no instance match the total listed
for the number of people on board. . ." "In no case does
an Arab name appear on a list, let alone one of the
alleged hijackers." How did CNN fail to count the names
accurately? Did the airlines not provide the full list of
each flight's names?
The Perplexing Puzzle Of The Published Passenger Lists
By Gary North RC-Only@agoramail.net
Gary North's REALITY CHECK Number 82 October
12, 2001
Maybe you like puzzles. I hope so. I
don't like them. I regard them as a challenge, not a game. I
avoid them because, when I cannot find a solution, my mind
won't stop working on them. Then I get very frustrated. So, I
avoid magic shows, crossword puzzles, and similar brain-
twisters.
Yet I am also a historian with a Ph.D.
Historians are trained to solve puzzles with insufficient
pieces. Historians never have all of the evidence that they
would like in order to come up with a coherent explanation of
what happened. They always want another piece in the puzzle
before they go into print. (Of course, once they go into
print, they will tend to reject any newly discovered piece
that messes up their version of the completed puzzle.) At some
point, they are supposed to come to a conclusion. They are
supposed to make a judgment about what happened.
I am
presently stuck. So, I am sending out this report. Maybe there
is someone my list who can get me unstuck.
Years ago,
I saw a movie, "My Cousin Vinnie." Vinnie was studying to be a
lawyer. He wasn't a good classroom student, but he had a
unique ability. He could figure out how things fit together.
Show him a magic trick, and he could tell you how the magician
did it. Tell him a story with a missing link, and he could
identify where the missing link was, and maybe what it was. He
could solve puzzles.
I am trying to locate Vinnie.
This puzzle is no game. The United States has gone to
war on the basis of one solution to this puzzle. We have not
yet been told what this solution is.
The puzzle begins
with the crash of four airliners. We must work our way
backward from this.
To do this, I decided to begin
with official information that was published 16 days after the
attack. To work my way backwards, I first leaped forward.
ALLEGED HIJACKERS
On September 27, the
Associated Press released a story about the hijackers. The
version that I read, published in the ATLANTA
JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, referred to these men as alleged
hijackers. I shall do the same.
I located this article
by using www.daypop.com. Daypop is the most complete archive
of recent news stories on the Web. Daypop allows you to search
for stories that are up to four weeks old.
I searched
for "passenger list" and "hijackers." Daypop produced three
pages of links -- not that many. Almost all of these links
were to the same AP story, which was published by numerous
on-line news sources. Here is the version I used.
<
FONT SIZE=+1>http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/terrorism/nation/0927hijackerlist.html<
/FONT>
The headline reads: "FBI releases updated
list of alleged hijackers." Above the headline is a link that
says, "Click here to see 19 suspected hijackers." I clicked
it. A large box popped up. It took a while for the photos to
appear. There are 19 photos, along with names. The names
appear to be Middle Eastern -- Arabs. Most of the men look
like Arabs, although a few might pass as Mexicans. Only one of
them looked vaguely like a European.
They are divided
into four lists, according to which flight they are said to
have boarded. There were five men on American Airlines Flight
77, five on AA Flight 11, five on United Airlines Flight 175,
and four on UA Flight 93 -- the flight that crashed in
Pennsylvania.
Let's return to the AP story itself. We
read the following:
As Attorney General John Ashcroft
launched a "national neighborhood watch" with the release of
the photos, FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged that
questions remained about whether an accompanying list
contained the true names of the 19.
"What we are
currently doing is determining whether, when these individuals
came to the United States, these were their real names or they
changed their names for use with false identification in the
United States," Mueller said.
The FBI director said
there was evidence that one or more of the hijackers had had
contacts with al-Qaida, the network associated with Osama bin
Laden, the exiled Saudi millionaire who is the Bush
administration's top suspect in the attacks.
This
story indicates that, as of September 27, the FBI was not
certain whether these suspects had used their real names. The
remainder of the story listed each of their names, along with
possible aliases. The aliases all look like Arab names.
I have discovered no additional information released
to the general public regarding these suspects.
I now
backtrack to the morning of September 11. The issue that I am
trying to deal with is airline security. To draw rational
conclusions about how the alleged hijackers accomplished their
acts of terrorism, we must begin with airline security.
The United States has now gone to war because of a
breakdown somewhere in airline security procedures. Yet nobody
in government is blaming the specific airlines. They are
blaming the procedures. This is why I want you mentally to go
through the procedures with me. I have hit a brick wall. I am
asking you to help me knock it down. I will show you how I
went through the procedures mentally. See if you can figure
out which step I missed.
Step One is check-in.
STEP ONE: CHECK-IN
On September 11,
airline check-in counters were the only places in the United
States that required travellers to present a photo ID in order
to travel. A photo ID meant (and still means) a card issued by
some branch of civil government. Years ago, the United States
government took the first step toward a national ID card when
it mandated the requirement that all passengers present a
photo ID card before being allowed to get on a commercial
airplane.
This means that the tightest security that
the typical American ever confronts is airport security. This
is the model for all other security systems governing the
general public.
Let's go through the check-in routine
together. Pretend that it's September 11, and you are a
check-in agent at either a United Airlines counter or an
American Airlines counter. It is your job to ask the standard
questions. "Did you pack your own luggage? Have you had it in
your possession at all times?" Then you ask for a photo ID.
The name on the ID must match the name on the ticket. The
photo must match the person presenting the card.
I
began with American Airlines, Flight 11. This was the plane
that crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center. I
began with the list of passengers. This was not difficult. The
passenger lists for all four planes are posted on CNN's
Website.
Click on the link. This is a long link for
the formatting of my newsletter. If it is broken on your
screen, you will have to paste it into your Web browser's
address box. This will take two steps.
< FONT
SIZE=+1>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html<
/FONT>
The CNN page says that there were 92 people
on board. I suggest that you print out the list. Part of my
exercise was to count the names of the passengers. Besides,
you never know when a Web page will disappear.
Do you
have the print-out in front of you? Count the names. I get 86
names, including the crew. But the CNN page says 92 people
were on board.
None of the 86 names is an Arab name.
This is very, very strange. First, how did the CNN
list-compiler know that there were 92 people on board? Five of
them are not listed. Second, how did anyone get on board who
was not on the list of ticketed passengers?
To get
onto the flight legally, each passenger had to have a ticket
with his or her name on it. Each passenger had to present a
photo ID to the check-in agent. The check-in agent was
supposed to look at the picture and the person, and then make
a judgment. Was it the same person? If the mandated procedure
was followed, the check-in agent decided that the ticket's
name, the photo ID's name, the photo, and the ID-holder's face
all matched. If there was any doubt, the check-in agent was
supposed to ask for some other form of identification. If
there was none, the person was not allowed to board the plane.
We are told by the United States government that five
Arabs somehow got through this initial screening procedure.
How did they do this? This is puzzle number one regarding
Flight 11. Puzzle number two has to do with the incomplete
passenger list.
Airlines keep a list of passengers on
board. This is for insurance purposes, should there be a
crash. It is also for the purpose of notifying relatives after
a crash. It is also for the purpose of in-cabin screening.
"Has everyone paid who is on the plane?" And, finally, is
there a hijacker on board?
On American Airlines Flight
11, there were no Arab names on the passenger list. So, how
does the government know who the hijackers were?
Why
does CNN's Web page list 92 dead, when there are only 86 name
listed? Who was the non-Arab?
I have seen nothing
about government accusations against American Airlines for
substandard check-in security procedures. In fact, I have seen
nothing about the discrepancy between the published names and
the published numbers regarding how many people were on board.
Let's go to American Airlines Flight 77. This plane
crashed into the Pentagon.
< FONT SIZE=+1>http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html<
/FONT>
We are told that 64 people were on board. I
count 56, including 6 crew members. There is no explanation
offered for the absence of 8 names. There is no Arab name on
this list.
Something is definitely wrong here.
What about United Airlines? Did the company's
employees follow the same check-in procedure? Presumably, they
did. I checked Flight 175, which crashed into the south tower.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua175.victims.html
There were 56 people on board, according to CNN's
summation. I printed out the list. I counted the names. Once
again, they don't add up. The summation says there were 2
pilots, 7 flight attendants, and 56 passengers. I counted the
names. The total is 56 -- the number attributed to the
passengers. Nine names are missing. None of the listed names
is Arab.
This leaves United Flight 93, which crashed
in Pennsylvania. It had 45 people on board, according to the
summation.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua93.victims.html<
/FONT>
Again, there is a discrepancy. Only 33 names
appear on the list. A dozen names are missing. Among the
missing names are the four Arabs who allegedly hijacked the
plane.
So, the published names in no instance match
the total listed for the number of people on board. CNN really
should offer an explanation for this discrepancy.
In
no case does an Arab name appear on a list, let alone one of
the alleged hijackers.
How did CNN fail to count the
names accurately? Did the airlines not provide the full list
of each flight's names? Perhaps so.
This raises the
next question. How did the airlines know how many people were
on each of these flights? The airlines must have had a list
for each flight. What possible reason could they have had for
not releasing the full lists? Finally, why are there no Arabs
listed on any of these lists, let alone the specific Arabs
identified by the Attorney General and the head of the FBI in
an Associated Press story?
I do not understand how 19
Arabs could have evaded the check-in procedures. I also do not
understand why every passenger's name is not on the published
lists.
I have seen no other source of the passenger
lists. (Another search word: "manifests.") It has now been
over a month since the attack. Where is a complete list? I
don't know. Where is a complete list of all four flights that
has the alleged hijackers' names on it? I don't know.
Finally, where is some enterprising reporter who is
trying to get answers? I don't know.
What about Step
Two?
STEP TWO: ON-BOARD SEATING
There were
multiple terrorists in the cabin of each plane when the plane
left the ground. They did not get there through the
ticket-screening system. Or did they? If they did, then how?
I assume here -- again, maybe I am wrong -- that they
got there through another entrance. Maybe they were part of
the food service team.
These were all cross-country
flights. The planes were loaded with lots of fuel, which is
why they were selected: flying bombs. On cross-country
flights, passengers still are given meals, not just pretzels
and soft drinks. The number of meals is supposed to match the
number of people on board, or at least come close.
Flight attendants have a list of passengers and their
assigned seats. This is to enable them to identify passengers
who have requested special meals, such as kosher meals. It is
also to enable them to identify people who have not bought a
ticket. Flight attendants are supposed to know who has been
assigned to which seat.
It is September 11. Here is
the situation: there are an extra five men on three flights,
and four extra men on Flight 93.
You have already seen
the photos of these men. If I had been a flight attendant, and
I saw five extra men who looked like they did -- young,
Arabic, and without tickets -- I would have asked them to
explain why they were on board. I would not have assumed that
they belonged there.
Are we to assume that on four
separate flights, none of the flight attendants noticed that
something was wrong? Are we to believe that they failed to
notice that five or four extra passengers were on board who
were not on the passenger list? Furthermore, these men looked
as though they were of one ethnic group. They all had Arabic
accents, I presume.
Why did the flight attendants
ignore all this? There is no indication from the government
that these men took over all four planes while the planes were
still on the ground. Even if they had, the pilots would not
have taken off if there were hijackers on board. They would
have waited to hear the demands, and the demand to "take off
now" would have been refused by at least one flight crew --
and I believe all four.
We need a theory of the
co-ordinated hijacking that rests on a plausible
cause-and-effect sequence that does not assume the complete
failure of both the check-in procedures and the on-board
seating procedures on four separate flights on two separate
airlines. If the explanation does rely on a theory of check-in
procedural breakdown, where is the evidence?
I have
heard no such theory from the government. I have heard no such
theory from the news media. In fact, I have heard neither the
government nor the mainstream media even mention these
perplexing problems. Perhaps you have. If so, I would like to
see the Web link or a reference to the newspaper or other
source where these matters have been discussed.
I
don't mean this or that discussion forum devoted to conspiracy
theories. I mean the mainstream press. It is very peculiar
that the mainstream media and the government have not offered
a detailed theory of how the hijackers evaded both the
check-in procedures and the pre-takeoff seating procedures.
Perhaps some airline industry publication has dealt
with this. If so, I would like to see the document.
I
would also like to see passenger lists that include every
passenger's name. I want to see 19 Arab names on these
complete lists.
If these updated lists are ever
released, I want to see that they match the original lists
that were not released immediately. I want to know that any
new names have not been added retroactively. I want evidence
-- from travel agencies' records and credit card records --
that everyone on each plane's updated passenger list actually
bought a ticket.
Is this to much to ask? So far,
apparently it is.
CONSPIRACY THEORIES
Conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen. Well, not all
of them. We have gone to war based on one of them. But I don't
see how anyone can make an accurate judgment about who was
behind the attacks until he has a plausible explanation of how
the hijackers got onto the planes and were not removed.
I am not interested in any theory about who did it
until I have a plausible explanation for how he did it.
The key to discovering who planned this attack is
inescapably tied to the procedures used by his agents to do
it.
I don't see how they did it, yet I know that three
planes crashed into highly visible targets. A fourth plane had
veered off course, and it seems plausible that it was part of
a co-ordinated attack. This has yet to be proven, but it seems
plausible.
We keep hearing about plastic knives and
box cutters. But we hear nothing about how these 19 men took
plastic knives and box cutters onto four planes, and no one
noticed that anything was amiss until the planes were in the
air.
So, you tell me. How did 19 Arabs get onto these
planes and then remain inconspicuous until the planes were
aloft?
CONCLUSION
I have no conclusion. I
told you this at the beginning. I am stuck.
I am
looking for Vinnie. Maybe you're Vinnie. After you have drawn
your own conclusion, and it seems reasonable, let me know.
But before you do, please run your theory by someone
whose judgment you trust. See if that person thinks your
theory is plausible. See if he or she can pick holes in it.
Don't make me your first guinea pig. I want to be at least
second. Third would be even better.
We need to get the
division of intellectual labor working here. As the Bible
says, "Two are better than one; because they have a good
reward for their labour. For if they fall, the one will lift
up his fellow: but woe to him that is alone when he falleth;
for he hath not another to help him up" (Ecclesiastes 4:9-10).
If you have no logical explanation, join the club.
Maybe you know a potential Vinnie. Use your FORWARD button to
send him or her a copy of this report. Ask for feedback.
Notice to all would-be Vinnies: with each forwarding,
e-mail software adds either a carrot -- this is a carrot: --
or a vertical line. This pushes the text to the right. If you
have received this after several forwardings, the text may be
difficult to read. You can get a fresh copy by sending an
e-mail to puzzle@kbot.com, or click this link and then click
SEND:
mailto:puzzle@kbot.com
Somewhere out there is a person who can solve this
puzzle. There has to be a solution. I just don't know what it
is.
In future issues of this newsletter, I will report
on any conclusions that look plausible to me.
If
you're not yet a subscriber, and you want to read what some of
these conclusions are, you can subscribe for free. Send an
e-mail to this address: unstuck@kbot.com, or click on the link
and then click the SEND button:
mailto:unstuck@kbot.com
You will receive a welcome letter from me within a few
seconds. It will explain what my newsletter is all about.
______________________
P.S. Send your proposed
solution to solution@kbot.com You will receive a short
autoresponder-generated letter telling you that I have
received it. This way, you will know that your solution got
through to me.
To subscribe to Reality Check go to:
http://www.dailyreckoning.com/GetReality.cfm
add
your own comments
| |
About
passenger lists (english) by Mulberry
Sellers 2:04pm Tue Oct 16 '01 |
|
|
A little research on the Titanic disaster might prove
instructive here. For an accident which was intensively
investigated by both a British Court of Inquiry and the United
States Senate, and by myriad historians over 89 years, no
definitive list has ever been produced of either the lost or
the saved.
Even though the survivors were presumably
in a position to be accurately enumerated, at least five
different totals were published, ranging from 703 to 803.
The survivors list from the Carpathia, which rescued
all who were saved, includes 135 names which do not appear on
White Star's (the Titanic's owners) passenger list. Some of
the discrepancies appear to be typos or misspellings of
ethnically diverse names, but many are unexplained and
unreconciled.
There's also confusion about the crew,
stemming from the fact that some who signed on did not sail
with the ship, and that replacement crew were taken on.
The point here is that confusion about passenger lists
in a transport disaster is hardly unheard of, and that the
systems which generate them don't always (or perhaps even
usually) work perfectly. They take on importance after the
ship has hit the iceberg, or the plane the building, but
during the departure preparations, would getting an absolutely
accurate list be seen as vital enough to merit being anal
retentive about? | |
You can't
handle the truth!! (english) by Dylan
2:31pm Tue Oct 16 '01 |
|
|
Sorry, this has all become so surreal that I half expect
Jack Nicholson to walk in here in a military uniform and start
shouting. Excellent post. These are all questions that I
have agonized over myself for the past month. I have presented
the very evidence that you have posted to many
politically-minded critical-thinkers with whom I associate.
Like you, I have yet to come up with much in the way of
conclusions. One detail you missed that you might not know
is that there was a telephone conversation between an
emergency operator and a flight-attendant on one of the doomed
flights. The flight-attendant told the emergency operator the
seat numbers that the actual hijackers had been assigned.
These seat numbers did not correspond to the reported seat
numbers of the alleged hijackers. This was reported on CNN.com
but the story has since been removed. I'm certain that you are
all but too aware that many media stories that do not fit with
the "official story" have been removed from the news logs.
This is rather curious in itself. If I find the report I will
forward it to you. There has been a disturbing and
recurring pattern in the media coverage so far. Any reports
that do not fit with the accepted version of events are
systematically dropped. To me this suggests collusion between
the authorities and the media. I wish you luck in your
endeavour and I will assist in any way that I can but I fear
that if you get close enough to the truth you may have an
unexpected career change from amateur investigative journalist
to worm farmer. | |
Chain of
Evidence (english) by Andy 3:07pm Tue
Oct 16 '01 |
|
|
Gary's comments touch on the lack of a presentation of the
chain of evidence related to the process used to "determine"
the identities of the hijackers. Specifically, what agent or
agency produced the names? How were the names produced and
what is the origin of the photographs and their link to the
names? Were the names chosen because they were the only Arabic
names on the lists. I noticed that there were no other Arabic
names on the lists? Was there cross referencing done through a
law enforcement data base of known or suspected "terrorists?"
It should be noted that a "determination" of identity
definitive enough to justify a declaration of war on a
specific target group was accomplish virtually overnight -very
impressive detective work, but not to be taken at face-value,
given the track record, i.e. 1. failing the prevent the first
World Trade Center attack when a government informant gave
very detailed warnings to the FBI handlers and even offered to
neutralize the actual bomb; 2. a history of massive fraud in
the FBI's crime lab. The failure to make a satisfactory
case linking these events to Osama bin Laden stems directly
from this seminal failure to establish a chain of evidence.
If the vaunted journalists of the American fifth estate do
not pursue this line of inquiry, the evidence may be lost to
history and the fog of war.
| |
withheld from
release? (english) by whoknows 4:00pm
Tue Oct 16 '01 |
|
|
There is a list of victims for the two UA flights at the
United website. I can't find a similar list at the AA site.
About UA 93 they correct the number of passengers from
38 to 37 because one of them had bought two tickets.
It seems that all the lists of victims are released as
"partial lists of victims" (see http://www.ual.com/site/primaryPR/0,10026,1534_885,00.html
for UA flights and http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/9/12/133231.shtml
for AA flights) with the following statements:
- At
the request of the victims' families, a number of names have
been withheld from release (United). - American (Airlines)
has honored the request of those families who have asked that
their loved ones' names not be included.
There are 35
names missing on the whole.
There are supposed to be
19 hijackers with Arabic names. As there are no Arabic names
on the list of victims they must belong to the category
"withheld from release" - though I doubt wether it was their
families who were asking for that...
| |
A thought
(english) by tgrgrl 4:11pm Tue Oct 16
'01 |
|
|
Just an observation in regards to the different terms used
in your commentary and the CNN lists. You refer to "passenger
lists," inclusive of ALL passengers, while the CNN website
refers to the lists as lists of victims. This may be why no
Arab names appear within. Of course, it still doesn't add up
to the supposed number of passengers, but it may explain why
none of the names listed are Arabic.
| |
|