Thursday, May 18, 2006

Those Passenger Lists

This isn't a Loose Change specific topic, but it is 9/11 related and a reader commented on it. It even came up on my regular blog yesterday, and it does such an excellent job of showing how conspiracy theorist think, so I figured it merited mentioning.

The conspiracy theorists claim that no hijackers were on the flight. As evidence of this they point to lists posted by CNN a few days after 9/11.

cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html
cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html
cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua175.victims.html
cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua93.victims.html

In a complete avoidance of the obvious though, they fail to recognize that this is not a list of the passengers, it is a list of the victims of the terrorist attack. Hijackers by definition, are not victims of their own crime. Is this really so hard to figure out, it is in the URL for God's sake! If you go to the link, you can even see the heading "Victims" at the top of the page. In bold letters no less. This mythology that the hijackers were not on the flight manifests is just that.

Bizarrely Loose Change even uses the hijackers supposedly non-existent presence on the flight manifests as evidence for a conspiracy, at the 1:07 mark:

Flight attendant Madeline Sweeney allegedly talked with her ground manager Michael Woodward for 25 minutes.She describes 4 hijackers. The FBI says there were 5. She says the hijackers were in rows 9 and 10. The FAA says there were all in row 8.

This is a common characteristic of conspiracy theories. You can use two completely contradicting views in support of the same theory.

How did they know this? Well, the press reported it.

The Boston Globe reported on its web site Thursday that it had obtained a copy of the complete manifest list of the planes hijacked from Boston.

The Globe said according to the manifest, Mohamed Atta, one of the suspected terrorists, was assigned seat 8D in business class on American Airlines Flight 11, directly across the aisle from Hollywood producer David Angell and his wife, Lynn, who were in seats 8A and 8B, respectively. Seated next to Atta in seat 8G was Abdul Alomari. FBI investigators have searched Alomari's home in Vero Beach.


Update: 911 Myths has a graphic, from the Boston Globe, showing the seating layout. Including those "non-existent" hijackers.

20 Comments:

At 18 May, 2006 09:03, Blogger undense said...

Well if Loose Change had to stick to the actual facts it would be a 30-second short. And that includes the opening and closing credits.

 
At 18 May, 2006 09:18, Blogger nesNYC said...

One question that has been kept from the public debate is that of the flight lists. One of the first displayed were those posted over at CNN. However, they posted those on later on 9/11 itself right from press releases to the media. The airlines DID NOT talk about victims only and when later pushed to disclose complete listings, they refused to because of "national security." Okay. We'll let that one slide.

Another "inconsistency:"

The FBI has named five hijackers on board Flight 11, whereas Ms Sweeney spotted only four.

Also, the seat numbers she gave were different from those registered in the hijackers' names.


Okay, maybe she was wrong OR the FBI was wrong. Remember, they fouled up on the identities of these guys anyway. But it’s plausible that mistakes were made.

- next -

Even in death, these "hijackers" must have left clues they were really on the planes. However, when push came to shove, the fact remain, no traces of the "hijackers" could be found, even with Dr. Thomas R. Olmsted's FOIA request of the "official" autopsy lists of flight 77. After a little digging, he found that there is no way any hijackers were on board flight 77 and mysteriously, a few other names that American did not list initially, found themselves on that list. But the fact remains, no "Arab sounding" names in sight.

Kudos for Loose Change spotlighting the passenger list inconsistencies. Given the above VERIFIABLE facts, I'd say the chances of this all being a "coincidence" or mistake on the part of the reporting parties is pretty slim. In fact, the only conclusion one can draw is that the Government is lying through its teeth. There were no hijackers and the fact that the FBI got several of the identities dead wrong solidifies this FACT all the more.

 
At 18 May, 2006 09:21, Blogger James B. said...

So the Boston Globe is lying too?

Is there anyone that is not part of the coverup?

 
At 18 May, 2006 09:32, Blogger nesNYC said...

No, the Boston Globe is reporting what they have "obtained." Who gave them this complete list after, what, 5 years? (I’m assuming you’re talking about this Thursday) Why do you take what they or the people that fed them this list say as fact?

Also, if Atta and that bunch were using fake ID's, how do they know where he was sitting? Does that all add up in your mind?

 
At 18 May, 2006 09:42, Blogger undense said...

As usual, the CT crowd ignores anything that pops their party balloon.

http://ndms.chepinc.org/data/files/3/266.pdf

Following approximately 2½ weeks of remains processing and two months of DNA analysis, 183
unique identities were generated from the remains of those killed in the attack on the Pentagon,
yielding 178 positive identifications. Some remains for each of the terrorists were recovered, as evidenced by five unique postmortem profiles that did not match any antemortem material provided by victims’ families. No identifiable remains for five of the victims known to have been killed in the attack were recovered.


Do your best to read it all nesnyc. You can make a retraction anytime after that.

 
At 18 May, 2006 09:45, Blogger nesNYC said...

undense, check the FOIA request link I posted. Contradicts what you posted. If the story about the hijackers were true, that wouldn't be the case and we'd all be in agreement. No hijackers.

 
At 18 May, 2006 09:48, Blogger Chad said...

I love how certain "reports" and "stories" are true in the eyes of CTers because it gels nicely with their warped sense of reality.

Anything that doesn't fit? Well... must be part of the conspiracy.

I must say, it's gotta be nice to always have that to fall back on. Makes it virtually impossible to ever lose an arguement.

 
At 18 May, 2006 09:51, Blogger undense said...

I'll repeat this part for you again, and bold it, since you seemd to have glossed right over it.

Some remains for each of the terrorists were recovered, as evidenced by five unique postmortem profiles that did not match any antemortem material provided by victims’ families.

Maybe your tin-foil beanie is covering your eyes?

 
At 18 May, 2006 10:04, Blogger nesNYC said...

Maybe your tin-foil beanie is covering your eyes?

The FOIA request by Dr. Olmstead conclusively links names to DNA and they do not jibe with the NDMS paper you posted. Dr. Olmstead matched the names given from the FOIA to the publicly posted names and only found 1 was inconclusive. What happened to the other 4?

No hijackers.

 
At 18 May, 2006 10:23, Blogger undense said...

Dr Olmstead conclusively did nothing regarding DNA. All he did was make a FOIA request to get a list.

His entire argument rests on the discrepancy between the AA manifest and the list of names on the autopsy. He somehow assumes that airline manifests are always perfect and correct, which is a moronic asumption, particularly for a supposed M.D.

He also claims:

They did not explain how they were able to tell “victims” bodies from “hijacker” bodies. In fact, from the beginning NO explanation has been given for the extra five suggested in news reports except that the FBI showed us the pictures to make up the difference, and that makes it so.

Well the paper I linked throws cold water on that claim, because they DO specify how they tell the difference between the hijeckers and the victims.

 
At 18 May, 2006 10:31, Blogger nesNYC said...

Well the paper I linked throws cold water on that claim, because they DO specify how they tell the difference between the hijeckers and the victims.

Oh yeah, like that passport found on the streets of NY, okay.

Still, the numbers do not match and not just by the passenger manifest but by the FOIA request itself. No hijackers on the list, not even "unknown 4." Nada.

 
At 18 May, 2006 10:39, Blogger undense said...

Still, the numbers do not match and not just by the passenger manifest but by the FOIA request itself. No hijackers on the list, not even "unknown 4." Nada.

Duh! It's a list of those who were identified, not those who remained unidentified. How do you identify the unidentified? Besides that, the paper I linked already specifes that the remains of 5 hijackers were recovered as well.

 
At 18 May, 2006 10:41, Blogger James B. said...

No, the Boston Globe is reporting what they have "obtained." Who gave them this complete list after, what, 5 years? (I’m assuming you’re talking about this Thursday) Why do you take what they or the people that fed them this list say as fact?


That article is from September 14, 2001.

The hijackers were either on the manifest, or they weren't. They aren't on it when it is convenient for your argument, and not on it when it isn't. It doesn't work that way.

 
At 18 May, 2006 13:04, Blogger JoanBasil said...

http://www.physics911.net/sagadevan.htm

"There is no documented record of the purported 9-11 terrorists making plane reservations. If they did, there would be a “record locator,” complete with details.


There is no documented record of the purported 9-11 terrorists buying or using tickets. (IDs required)

There is no hard-copy of a single printed ticket ‘copy.’
There is no record of the purported 9-11 terrorists on any of the passenger manifests, with all legitimate passengers being accounted for.

There is no record of the purported 9-11 terrorists in the autopsies.
There is not so much as a suggestion that the purported 9-11 terrorists had the requisite piloting skills—rather, the contrary.

There is no documentation (per the FBI [Mueller]) to link the purported 9-11 terrorists to the events of the day.

At least seven of the purported 9-11 terrorists are known to still be alive in the Middle East—with no questions being asked (See links below). "

(That physics911 article is mainly on the difficulty of flying a heavy plane without training. Why were these guys in those flight schools? They weren't training on simulators of big jets; they were sort-of learning to fly single engine planes.)

 
At 18 May, 2006 15:51, Blogger undense said...

If there were documentation produced the CT crowd would claim them to be forgeries.

Ho hum.

As far as 7 of the terrorists being still alive in the ME, that is incorrect. That's one of those claims using obfuscation.

 
At 02 August, 2006 17:47, Blogger STH said...

Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm

 
At 13 September, 2006 08:27, Blogger James Baker said...

A fantastic blog yours. Keep it up.
If you have a moment, please visit my airline flight site.
I send you warm regards and wish you continued success.

 
At 08 April, 2007 06:06, Blogger boredrob said...

You know, when you conduct a police interrogation you point out the inconsistencies to the subject over and over to break their story. That's how it is done.

Is there no passenger manifest for internal flights in the US? What about the ticket stubs. After all, flights were grounded hours later. Where did THEY go?

I'm not a conspiracy nut at all. I'm just curious and details are what count in such a matter.

 
At 12 October, 2007 22:41, Blogger We Demand To Be Taken Seriously said...

"They aren't on it when it is convenient for your argument, and not on it when it isn't. It doesn't work that way."
Actually that is exactly how it works. Logically that is.
They are not(emphasis) on it when it is convenient(emphasis) and {are}not(emphasis) on it when it is not(emphasis){convenient}.
Sorry but the hijackers were not on the passenger manifests and there is NO paper trail for them having been on the planes. How were the remains of those five that were identified. I remember FBI spokesperson once said "fingerprints" Ludicrous rational people don't see the government account does not add up. But maybe they are not(emphasis){rational}. :) Daniel Lewin was in sea 9B or 9D?

 
At 15 March, 2009 15:49, Blogger Richard said...

I love it. Even on a website dedicated to refuting non-governmental conspiracy theories, they get DESTROYED by people who obviously know better.

But on a serious note, it is extremely important for people to reevaluate their long-held beliefs. Most of the time this just helps you solidify existing values. But sometimes, you find out that you had been harboring false and damaging notions.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home