List of victims on Flights

[scienceplease]

Ok, I want to cross check the list of victims on the flights

I go to Site 1

http://www.september11victims.com/september11victims/

which proclaims "profiles of all the victims"

I type in "Flight 175" and get a very short of victims. There should be more. There appears to be some limitation with the microsoft database.

I google "Flight 175 Passenger List", Site 2

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/victims/ua175.victims.ht ml

and at random type in four names:

Graham Berkeley, 37, of Xerox Corp. was from Wellesley, Massachusetts.

(Not on other list at Site 1)

John Cahill was from Wellesley, Massachusetts.

(not on other list at Site 1)

Carl Hammond, 37, was from Boston, Massachusetts

(Not on other list at Site 1)

Peter Hanson

(Yes, listed on Site 1, including wife and daughter)

Ok other way around.

Marie Pappalardo (On site 1 but not site 2)

So what is definitive in this area!?

[marky 54]

i have no idea, there is a list of names we are told are the victims list. i have also seen a shoddy poor quality, photocopied many times, supposid manifest with suspious looking lines under hijackers names or larger spaces inbetween names and penned over areas, something anybody could fake. i have no idea where you can find a easy to read copy of the flight manifests that confirms without doubt that the said names and hijackers were on the stated flights and the document is authentic and has'nt been tampered with in any way, i would advise starting a thread in critics corner, however do not expect a welcomed or helpful response interms of banter, however they should beable to provide you with the list that is 'offical' after a number of personnal slur's to get their daily ego boost to put them in good stead for the rest of the day or to releave their tentions of a stressful day.

if CNN got it right, maybe you should check their victims list, (don't have a link). or search for old threads in critics corner(on this site) where the supposid flight manifests with hijackers names included was linked to(don't have the a link or time currently to search and provide, sorry).

everybody else(general public) accepts it as fact(as sold by the media) and anybody who dos'nt and wants confirmation is labelled a conspiracy theorists for not outright trusting what has been said without ferther proof.

if different sites have different lists or differ in anyway i can only say it dos'nt suprise me. however any errors will simply be put down to an 'adminstration type' error, no investigastion would be needed to see why names are different on different lists as long as it can be explained with an excuse.

this is the world we live in now, it is now goverments and the media who say "sorry the dog ate it" or "whoops i spilt my coffee on it". proof or confirmation seem to be things of the past where a lot of events are concerned, instead a hit piece against those who ask questions seems to be how they confirm their version of events is true. anyone wishing to look properly before concluding are labelled conspiracy theorists and told they should believe what they have been told, goverments would never lie about anything.

if you find something that cannot be put down to an 'adminstration error' or confirmation and proof the flight manifests are 100% authentic(which is all those who ask questions wish to confirm) please link it and good luck with your research.

sorry i could'nt give links but i hope ive pointed you in the right direction for supposid factual lists that you can check against if all your others searches have turned up different results making it impossible to know which one to take as fact or the one which is given as fact by the offical version of events.

[scienceplease]

Many thanks for the full and interesting reply.

I don't suppose the Official 9/11 Commission Report would contain the definitive list would it? But I was expecting that this wouldn't be open to this amount of controversy. I read somewhere about a relative of victim of one of the flights trying to tie into other such people to form a support group and finding no other such people. I was thinking that doing research for the relatively few number of people on the flights would be somewhat easier than the victims at the WTC, for instance...

I guess I'm missing something about the egos etc, I presume you believe there are multiple apologists and dis-informers on the forums intent on spoiling any research.

[marky 54]

[scienceplease]

Sorry about that. Paranoia strikes again.

I was more interested in something "definitive" rather than "official" - if they are the same then that would be fine. Personally I would prefer something independently compiled.