Originally posted by deltaboy
Originally posted by talisman
Okay now what of the Arab names not on the Autopsy report? Anyone care to take a stab at it?
Did you even read my response? The hijackers' families did not volunteer to provide any DNA to identify the remains that are designated as
unknown.
They do not need dna samples to extract the origin of ethnicity, please correct me if I'm wrong.
via
The CNN report 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 enforcement agency. A reading of the names suggests that
the CNN list may actually represent only 86 people - one name duplicated with different spelling.
Robin Caplin and Robin Kaplan are listed as two different people. There is a brief bio for Kaplan, but nothing for Caplin, except the home town.
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.
I then checked the passenger list provided by USA Today.
USA today
Again, it is described as a partial list. It contains 86 names. - one short of a complete list. Robin Caplin is missing. However, two other names from
the CNN list - Jude Larson and Natalie Larson - are also missing, and the list contains two names which are not on the CNN list.
Kelly Booms and Pendyala Vamsikrishna.
Lets think through the possibilities.
1) Two of the names from the collective passenger lists are fictitious.
2) Neither list is complete, and the complete list of innocents only emerges from a collective viewing of the lists - as strongly 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 be 5 hijackers for a total of 92
people. And yet nobody seems to dispute these two figures.
We find a list of AA 11 victims published on Sept 13 2001, which, judging by the introduction, may have come from exactly same the source as that used
by USAT today. It begins thus.
"By The Associated Press. Partial list of those killed in Tuesday's terrorist attacks, according to family members, friends, co-workers and law
enforcement. "
Compare it with the introduction to the USAT list.
"Partial lists of passengers and crew killed in Tuesday's terrorist attacks, according to family members, friends, co-workers and local law
enforcement."
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 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 of 92. The Boston Daily list
,in isolation, implies a minimum of 95 aboard, while the collective lists imply 96 - if one is to believe in 5 hijackers. Alternatively, there must be
four fictitious innocents.
The Boston Daily list also contains "Heath Smith", which would appear to be a substitute for "Heather Smith" named on the previous two lists.
A year later, the Boston Daily published a very different list, seemingly without acknowledging any previous error.
It contains only 87 names. Jalbert ,Roux,Caplin and the two Larsons have been dropped for Booms,Vamsikrishna and another new name - Waleed Iskander -
who is not alleged to be one of the terrorists. Heath Smith has become Heather Lee Smith. A person named on every other list as Antonio Montoya has
become Antonio Jesus Montoya Valdes. Peter Hashem has been replaced by Peter el-Hachem.From the bio, it appears to be a different name for the same
person While the odd spelling discrepancy or missing hyphen is quite plausible, this much of a name change is stretching the credibility a little. I
can believe that "Green" could become "Greene" or "Catherine" become "Katherine", but "Hashem" becoming "el- Hachem" - from an official
passenger list - is more difficult to accept.
This is most unsatisfactory. The combined lists now name 92 innocents, so if one is to believe in 92 aboard, 5 of which were 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, when this information should
have ultimately come from one official,well organized source. We have lists claiming to be "partial lists" publishing more names than should be in a
complete list.
I checked another list - from the Guardian dated sept 13 ,2001
Link
This also claims 92 people aboard. It published only 75 names, saying
"This is a preliminary, partial list of passengers aboard the flight whose next of kin have been notified. Some families asked the airline not to
include their loved ones' names: these do not appear. "
Fair enough. So this list is unable to be fully tested for consistency with either of the other four conflicting lists. However, it does agree on the
number of people aboard. 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 ? Or were there no hijackers? If so, why is everybody saying 5 ? Or
are 5 of these names fictitious ? If so,why ?
The Guardian list also has Heath Smith instead of Heather Smith, and Hashem rather than el-Hachem.
There's another problem. If AA released only 75 names on Sept 13, how did the Boston Daily mange to publish 89 on the same day ? Where did it get the
extra names that the airline was still withholding ?
Now the list from NBC
NBC
It lists 87 names for a summation of 92, and is the same as the USAT list, except for the addition of Iskander. That is - the same as the anniversary
list from the Boston Daily.
I checked another mainstream media source - PBS
PBS
which entitles its list " One year later. Remembering the victims."
This agrees with the NBC and Boston anniversary lists.
Lets review the problems so far.
From five mainstream media outlets we have four conflicting lists.
Robin Caplin and Robin Kaplan on the same flight is difficult to believe, especially as Caplin is one of the frequently missing names.
The lists can't agree on the correct names for three of the passengers - Hashem/el- Hachem, Heath/Heather Smith, and Antonio Montoya/Valdez .
There are collectively 92 innocents and 5 hijackers for a total of 92 aboard.
So these are the possibilities
a) 5 of the innocents are fictitious
b)There were no hijackers
c) Some of these people were the real hijackers
d) There were 97 people aboard.
I will clarify what I mean by "fictitious". It may be that the extra names represent real people, who are missing and presumed dead. It may be that
they have family and friends who honestly believe that the missing person boarded a flight called American Airlines 11. That's a matter for further
research. But for five of these individuals who have been listed, (although we can't at this stage specify who ) the belief that they were on AA11 is
proven to be false - unless one is to accept one of the other possibilities above.
If this angle alone isn't enough for an actual transparent investigation, I don't know what else could come up.
AAC
[edit on 23-5-2007 by AnAbsoluteCreation]
[edit on 23-5-2007 by AnAbsoluteCreation]
[edit on 23-5-2007 by AnAbsoluteCreation]
