NP Rank:
9/11 Misinformation: Flight “Passenger Lists” Show “No Hijacker Names”
9/11 Misinformation: Flight “Passenger Lists” Show “No Hijacker Names”
The assertion that 9/11 passengers lists “contained no Arab names” is frequently seen in the 9/11 truth movement.[1] For example, this article by Enver Masud is headlined, “Why are there no Arab names on the passenger list for the planes used in the September 11, 2001 attack…?”[2] The 9/11 website 9/11 Hard Facts claims, “[On] officially released passenger lists provided by the airlines to the media, no Arab names appear on any of the four passenger lists.”[3] In David Ray Griffin’s 9/11: The Myth and the Reality, he repeats the claim that, “[Their] names should be on the flight manifests. But the flight manifests that have been released contain neither the names of the alleged hijackers nor any other Arab names.”[4] As well, Michael C. Ruppert, citing Gary North wrote, “Another easy and non-debatable hole is with the passenger lists and the hijackers. Gary North, Ph.D. - a history professor… relied on lists published by CNN… Official reports state that there were only 19 hijackers. Second, none of listed passenger names are Arabic, Muslim… The government needs to provide an explanation for this glaring discrepancy.”[5]
In fact, the U.S. Government withheld the actual passenger lists for years. An earlier version of Jim Hoffman’s page on the passenger lists reported correctly that there was previously “no public evidence… Researchers who have attempted to obtain this information from the airlines have been rebuffed.”[6] However, many 9/11 researchers mistakenly cited “victim lists”—not passenger lists. From the 911 research website, Jim Hoffman explains:
“According to the official story, teams of four and five Islamic hijackers took over Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93. Victims lists for the four planes published by CNN and elsewhere are free of Arab names… This fact has been highlighted as suspicious by some researchers describing the lists as passenger manifests. However, these lists are not passenger manifests, but lists of victims… CNN describes its criteria for including persons in its memorial in a pop-up window labelled ‘About this site’… ‘(Those identified by federal authorities as the hijackers are not included)…’ In July of 2006 a large collection of documents was published on a website containing prosecution and defense exhibits for the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui… The faxes, reproduced below, include the names of the alleged hijackers.”[7]
Referring to “victim lists” as if they were “passenger lists” would be significantly misleading. The CNN website frequently cited reveals that the alleged hijackers were intentionally not included.
What about the security videos? Airport officials and the U.S. Government are either refusing to release them or claiming that they do not exist. Unbelievably, the Boston Herald reported a few weeks after 9/11 that, “Logan International Airport is missing… surveillance cameras… Logan officials acknowledged the ‘deficiency’…”[8] This is significant because two of the flights originated from Logan airport on 9/11. As Jim Hoffman confirms, “The public has not been treated to any video showing any of the alleged hijackers at Boston Logan Airport, the origin of Flights 11 and 175, or Newark Airport, the origin of Flight 93.”[9] Citing Michael Taylor, president of American International Security Corp, Jim Hoffman reports that “Newark airport does have video cameras in its departure lounges. So does Dulles International Airport… the FBI has refused to release any video from these airports.”[10] In 2004, USA Today released images from a “surveillance video from Washington Dulles International Airport the morning of Sept. 11, 2001” which showed “four of the five hijackers being pulled aside to undergo additional scrutiny after setting off metal detectors.”[11] The video was only obtained after a lawsuit from the “Motley Rice law firm… representing some survivors' families who are suing the airlines and security industry over their actions in the Sept. 11 attacks.”[12] Unusually, the video does not have a time stamp on it. The only other video evidence does not come from airports involved in the 9/11 attack. On their way to Logan International Airport in Boston, the Boston Globe reported images showing “Mohamed Atta and… Abdulaziz Alomari, passing through a security checkpoint at the Portland, Maine, airport at 5:45 a.m. on Sept. 11.”[13]
Elias Davidsson claims that, “Airline personnel traditionally see off passengers… one would have expected to see, hear and read international media interview airline employees under headlines such as ‘I was the last to see the passengers alive’. Yet no such interview is known to have taken place. The 9/11 Commission does not even mention the existence of any deposition or testimony by airline personnel that witnessed the boarding of the aircraft. And even the identities of these employees remains secret: As a response to this author’s request to interview American Airlines employees who saw off passengers of flight AA77, the airline responded that their identities cannot be revealed for privacy reasons.”[14]
By refusing to release evidence, the U.S. Government is actually encouraging speculation and misinformation. As Hoffman also explains, there are other problems with the official story in relation to the hijackers including, “the existence of a handful of reports in mainstream newspapers of those suspects proclaiming their innocence after the attack… Six of the 19 suicide hijackers identified by the FBI shortly after the attack by name, photograph, and other personal details reported themselves alive… [and] the reported lack of piloting skills of the suspects.”[15]
However, as Ruppert correctly points out, “Every journalist makes mistakes from time to time. The New York Times, CNN, the Washington Post, all of them publish hundreds of corrections every year. It’s the journalist who does not acknowledge and correct errors who cannot be trusted.”[16] Ruppert does not endorse the claim that “no hijacker names appear on the passenger lists” in his book Crossing the Rubicon.[17] Promoting mistakes even after they have been pointed would be an example of disinformation.[18]
By withholding evidence pertaining to the 9/11 attacks like the airliner passenger lists, videos of passengers boarding the planes on 9/11, and videos of the Pentagon attack, the U.S. Government is actually encouraging misinformation. For years, there was no verifiable evidence that the alleged hijackers were on the passenger manifests because the U.S. Government refused to release these documents. By not releasing these documents, the U.S. Government actually encouraged speculation that the hijackers names did not show up on the passenger lists. However, there is a difference between asserting “evidence is being withheld” and “there is no evidence”—only the first claim can be verified. Misinformation benefits the U.S. Government and its cover-up of the 9/11 crimes. As Thomas Pynchon explains, “If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.”[19]
[1] Ran Prieur, 9/11 FAQ, http://www.ranprieur.com, September 5, 2006
[2] Enver Masud, 9/11 Commission Report: Why No Arab Names on Passenger List? July 26, 2004
[3] 9/11 Hard Facts, Flight Manifests and Passenger Lists, http://www.911hardfacts.com/
[4] David Ray Griffin, 9/11: The Myth and the Reality, http://www.911truth.org/, April 5 2006
[5] Michael C. Ruppert, It’s A Lie, From The Wilderness Publications, http://www.copvcia.com/, October 15, 2001
[6] 9/11 Hard Facts, Flight Manifests and Passenger Lists
[7] Jim Hoffman, Passenger Lists: Victims Lists, Passenger Manifests, and the Alleged Hijackers, http://911research.wtc7.net/, page last modified: August 27, 2008
[8] Doug Hanchett and Robin Washington, “Logan Lacks Video Cameras.” Boston Herald September 29 2001
[9] Hoffman, Airport Video: No Video Shows Hijackers Boarding Targeted Flights, http://911research.wtc7.net/
[10] Hoffman, Airport Video: No Video Shows Hijackers Boarding Targeted Flights
[11] The Associated Press, Video shows 9/11 hijackers' security check, http://www.usatoday.com/, July 21, 2004
[12] The Associated Press, Video shows 9/11 hijackers' security check
[13] Denise Lavoie, Company helps 9/11 probe after losing one of its own, Associated Press. September 11, 2002.
Paul Thompson’s 9/11 timelines cites news reports that the alleged hijackers were “caught on security cameras visiting a gas station, two ATMs, and shopping at a Wal-Mart. The next morning they fly back to Boston.” Paul Thompson, Context of 'February 2008: Considerable Video Footage of 9/11 Hijackers Remains Unreleased', Complete 9/11 Timeline
[14] Elias Davidsson, No evidence that Muslims hijacked planes on 9/11, http://www.aldeilis.net, February 8, 2008
[15] Hoffman, Passenger Lists: Victims Lists, Passenger Manifests, and the Alleged Hijackers
[16] Michael C. Ruppert, MICHAEL RUPPERT RESPONDS TO VICTOR THORN'S TEN QUESTIONS, http://www.fromthewilderness.com/, October 7, 2004
[17] Hoffman, Passenger Lists: Victims Lists, Passenger Manifests, and the Alleged Hijackers
[18] Arabesque, 9/11 Disinformation and Misinformation: Definitions and Examples, http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/
[19] Thomas Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow, page 251.





Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (5)
at 13:58 on August 28th, 2008
Maybe it's just my fantasy, but I recall videos from airport security cameras on TV of some of the 'alleged' hijackers in airports and about to board the planes in question.
at 20:53 on August 28th, 2008
"I recall videos from airport security cameras on TV of some of the 'alleged' hijackers in airports and about to board the planes in question."
Yes, you did see this, but these videos were taken from Maine. I provide a link to the original source in my article:
the Boston Globe reported images showing “Mohamed Atta and… Abdulaziz Alomari, passing through a security checkpoint at the Portland, Maine, airport at 5:45 a.m. on Sept. 11."
Denise Lavoie, Company helps 9/11 probe after losing one of its own, Associated Press. September 11, 2002.
In other words, these images were not taken from the airport they flew from which was Logan airport in Boston. And absurdly, "Logan International Airport is missing… surveillance cameras… Logan officials acknowledged the ‘deficiency’…"
You've got to be kidding me.
at 22:12 on August 28th, 2008
arabesque, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Excellent article- it's not correct to say that passenger lists have not been provided; victim's lists were provided, the hijackers names were known- passenger lists were provided at the Moussaoui trial and had the hijacker names. However, these were fax copies and made available afterward on the generally disingenuous but sometimes accurate 911Myths.com. Problem with these "official" lists is they were fax copies and not authenticated; who can accept that as "credible" evidence being offered by the govt- how did that get past Moussaoui's attorneys and the judge and jury? As far as I know, the claim that authenticated lists have not been provided is correct.
Furthermore, Davisson's claims about no airline employee interviews seems to be correct; i could not find any in Lexis-Nexis search just now of 104 hits for airline employee interview hijacker passenger from Sept 11, 01 to Sep 11, 02.
The lack of video tape being produced (2) is another correct claim, as far as i know. If the government has nothing to hide, why are they hiding everything? Are they trying to fuel controversy, speculation and circulate mis and disinformation, or is there something wrong with the passenger lists, or some combination of both? Given that at least six (6) alleged hijackers turned up alive after 9/11- and some of the them had paid fines and bought tickets for flights after 9/11. The govt. is holding the bag, and those in charge have shown themselves to be corrupt and deceitful in other ways; they need to produce the evidence and testify in public under oath, in answer to real questions.
"By withholding evidence pertaining to the 9/11 attacks like the airliner passenger lists, videos of passengers boarding the planes on 9/11, and videos of the Pentagon attack, the U.S. Government is actually encouraging misinformation."
And it's not just the lists that are a problem, it's many things; the controversy over what hit the Pentagon is another classic; they should just release the hundreds of videos they have of what approached and hit the Pentagon, the C-130, helicopter and E4B- as well as the hundreds of photographs they have of the wreckage and damage. The fact that anything was able to hit the Pentagon is proof something inexcusable went wrong, and those responsible were promoted, rewarded and benefitted from policy and budget changes.
at 03:49 on August 29th, 2008
Good list, bad list ? In any case the US occupied the wrong countries Afghanistan and Iraq. The right countries for potential agressors 9/11 would be Saudia Arabia and Algeria. What an error, why ?
at 11:29 on September 14th, 2008
I dont care if the names are on the flight list or not they still have killed tousands of people, damaged the hearts of many people around the world, and struck fear into even the devils core.