From: "Margaret" <margaret-AT-rie.net.au> Subject: AUT: Fw: interesting Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 10:26:19 +1100 > From: "Janice" <Janice_G-AT-free.net.nz> > Subject: Please Help Solve This Perplexing Puzzle of the Passenger Lists. > All research and comments welcomed ! > http://www.indymedia.org/print.php3?article_id=78575 > > The Perplexing Puzzle of the Published Passenger Lists (english) Thursday 25 > Oct 2001 > author: by Gary North > > Some fundamental questions to provoke the legitimacy of a war on > Afghanistan. How do you inflict mass destruction on a nation without solid > proof? > web link > http://globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR110A.html > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- > > Please Help Solve This Perplexing Puzzle of the Published Passenger Lists > by Gary North > Reality Check, Number 82, 12 October 2001 > Centre for Research on Globalisation, globalresearch.Ca. 20 October 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. > http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/terrorism/nation/0927hijackerlist.html > 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: 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. > http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA11.victims.html > 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. > http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/AA77.victims.html > 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 > 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 too 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. > 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-AT-kbot.com, or click this link > and then click SEND: mailto:puzzle-AT-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. > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- > - ---- > Author's note: > 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-AT-kbot.com, or click on the link and then click the SEND button: > unstuck-AT-kbot.com You will receive a welcome letter from me within a few > seconds. It will explain what my newsletter is all about. > > - -------------------------------------------------- > The URL of this article is: > http://globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR110A.html > Copyright, Gary North, Reality Check, 2001. For fair use only. --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005