[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Diseases Increase Exponentially With Each Added Vaccine Given to Babies

Mexican cartels boast of increased lethal firepower, including some weapons from the U.S.

US Military Bases in Europe Declare Highest Security Alert in a Decade Amid Terror Threats

5 Devices You Cant Hide From- The Government Alphabet Agencies

How your FedEx driver is helping cops spy on YOU

‘Historically ludicrous’: Jewish leaders speak out against comparing vaccine passports to Holocaust

Israeli Officials Hiding Data About Forced Starvation of Gaza Prisoners:

How the F*** Are You Going to Put All These White People Ahead of Kamala?

Protests Erupt In Paris After Marine Le Pens Party Wins Big In Parliamentary Elections

Supreme Court Rules Trump Has Immunity For Official Acts, Likely Delays Trial Past Election

Rising Debt Means a Weaker Dollar

Lefties losing it: Sky News host roasts 'leftie' Jill Biden after Trump rant

JiLL THe SHRiLL...

Lefties losing it: Jill Biden ‘gaslights’ crowd after presidential debate

Why will Kamala Harris resign from her occupancy of the Office of Vice President of the USA? Scroll down for records/details

Secret Negotiations! Jill Biden’s Demands for $2B Library, Legal Immunity, and $100M Book Deal to Protect Biden Family Before Joe’s Exit

Mark Levin: They lied to us about Biden

RIGGED: Pfizer cut deal to help Biden steal 2020 election

It's Dr. Kimmy date night!

Glenbrook Dodge will raise a new American flag just before the 4th of July

Horse's continuing struggles with getting online.

‘Trillion dollar trainwreck’: US super stealth fighter is eating the next generation

Who Died: June 2024 Week 4 | News

MORE TROUBLE FOR OLD JOE

"Gestapo" Müller - Hunting Hitler's Secret Police Chief

How Michelle Obama Could Become Democrats' Nominee after Biden's Terrible Debate, with Steve Bannon

Was This Lethal Spitfire Ace Killed by His Own Tactics?

Welsh Police Pay Home Visit To Man For Displaying Reform UK Political Sign

Liz Harrington Drops a BOMBSHELL on How Georgia Was Stolen

Trudeau govt to make all bathrooms in Parliament buildings GENDER NEUTRAL


9/11
See other 9/11 Articles

Title: New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon
Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/
URL Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6133
Published: Jun 24, 2007
Author: Scholars for 9/11 Truth
Post Date: 2007-06-24 22:16:28 by robin
Ping List: *9-11*     Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 461
Comments: 44

New study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon

By Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Global Research, June 24, 2007


Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77, which The 9/11 Report claims hit the Pentagon. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.

Madison, WI (PRWEB) June 21, 2007 - A study of the black box data provided by the government to Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11. "We have had four lines of proof that no Boeing 757 hit the building," said James Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. "This new study by Pilots drives another nail into a coffin of lies told the American people by The 9/11 Commission":

The new society, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained its 2002 report on American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757 that, according to the official account, hit the ground floor of the Pentagon after it skimmed over the lawn at 500 mph plus, taking out a series of lamp posts in the process. The pilots not only obtained the flight data but created a computer animation to demonstrate what it told them.

According to the report issued by Pilots for 9/11 Truth (http://pilotsfor911truth.org/), there are major differences between the official account and the flight data:

a. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events.

b. All Altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles.

c. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense "5 Frames" video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn.

d. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time.

e. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon.

As Robert Balsamo, co-founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, observes, "The information in the NSTB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001." The study was signed by fifteen professional pilots with extensive military and commercial carrier experience. They have made their animation, "Pandora's Box: Chapter 2," available to the public at http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Pandora's+Black+Box%3A+Chapter+2 .

According to James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (http://911scholars.org), this result fits into the broader picture of what happened at the Pentagon that day. "We have developed four lines of argument that prove--conclusively, in my judgment--that no Boeing 757 hit the building. The most important evidence to the contrary has been the numerous eyewitness reports of a large commercial carrier coming toward the building. If the NTSB data is correct, then the Pilot's study shows that a large aircraft headed toward the building but did not impact with it. It swerved off and flew above the Pentagon."

Fetzer, who retired last June after 35 years of teaching courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, expressed pleasure over the Pilot's results, which, he said, has neatly resolved the most pressing issue that remained about the Pentagon. He added, "We have previously developed several lines of argument, each of which proves that no Boeing 757 hit the building," including these four:

(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible.

(2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when one was shown on "The Factor". At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible. There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757.

(3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory--flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level--physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.

(4) Flying low enough to impact with the ground floor would have meant that the enormous engines were plowing the ground and creating massive furrows; but there are no massive furrows. The smooth, unblemished surface of the Pentagon lawn thus stands as a "smoking gun" proving the official trajectory cannot be sustained.

Members of Scholars have contributed to a new book that analyses the government's official account, according to which 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacked four commercial airliners, outfoxed the most sophisticated air-defense system in the world, and committed these atrocities under the control of a man in a cave in Afghanistan. Entitled, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007), it includes photographs of the hit point before and after the upper floors collapsed, the crucial frame from the released videos, and views of the clear, smooth, and unblemished lawn.

"Don't be taken in by photos showing damage to the second floor or those taken after the upper floors collapsed, which happened 20-30 minutes later," Fetzer said. "In fact, debris begins to show up on the completely clean lawn in short order, which might have been dropped from a C-130 that was circling above the Pentagon or placed there by men in suits who were photographed carrying debris with them." The most striking is a piece from the fuselage of a commercial airliner, which is frequently adduced as evidence.

James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995. "It was the kind of slow-speed crash that would have torn off paneling in this fashion, with no fires, leaving them largely intact." Fetzer has been so impressed with his research he has invited Hanson to submit his study to Scholars for consideration for publication on its web site, 911scholars.org.

"The Pentagon has become a kind of litmus test for rationality in the study of 9/11," Fetzer said. "Those who persist in maintaining that a Boeing 757 hit the building are either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired. Unless," he added, "they want to mislead the American people. The evidence is beyond clear and compelling. It places this issue 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

Subscribe to *9-11*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: robin (#0)

No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

Nonsense.

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-24   22:20:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Cynicom, SKYDRIFTER (#1)

It could be disinfo spin, there's been some lately.


Ron Paul for President

robin  posted on  2007-06-24   22:22:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: robin (#2)

It could be disinfo spin, there's been some lately.

Conspiricists can spend their time debating who, what, when, and where of 9/11, thats good.

Wasting time on the nuts and bolts of the operation is a waste.

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-24   22:33:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Cynicom (#3)

Spending time disproving the govt's story is worthwhile. It's only natural to try and figure out what really happened. I'm pretty sure the no-plane theory won't wash.


Ron Paul for President

robin  posted on  2007-06-24   22:35:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: robin (#4)

I'm pretty sure the no-plane theory won't wash.

Never debate religion or conspiracy. No one wins.

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-24   22:44:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Robin, Jethro Tull, Christine, Honway, Aristeides, Diana, All (#0)

(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible.

(2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when one was shown on "The Factor". At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible. There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757.

(3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory--flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level--physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.

(4) Flying low enough to impact with the ground floor would have meant that the enormous engines were plowing the ground and creating massive furrows; but there are no massive furrows. The smooth, unblemished surface of the Pentagon lawn thus stands as a "smoking gun" proving the official trajectory cannot be sustained.

All factual, but incredibly brief.


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2007-06-24   23:01:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Cynicom, farmfriend, SKYDRIFTER (#1)

No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

So, if I understand youse, you are saying that a 757 DID hit the pentagon. And, I assume, that one hit the WTC-7 as well, correct?

Curious minds want to know. Cause I have always been curious as to why no wings or tail have ever been found..... of couse, I am sure they could have... I don know.... been COMPLETELY pulled into the pentagon where they were COMPLETELY consumed by the tens of thousands of galleons of.... I don know.... ice cream? carried on the plane. When the ice cream burned, that is. Course, that still leaves the engines...... unaccounted for as I undertand it, and they really do not burn that well.... at least not completely. Like the wings and tail must have. And the seats. And the people, of course.

I don know, cause I really have not spent much time thinking about this, but these small inconsistensies just seem to latch onto my attention. Know what I mean.

The Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

richard9151  posted on  2007-06-24   23:31:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: robin (#0)

The government is hiding hundreds of video surveillance tapes of the Pentagon area on 9/11. That sums up their position - hide the evidence and lie, lie, lie until you have to change the story again.

ratcat  posted on  2007-06-24   23:51:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: SKYDRIFTER (#6)

but incredibly brief.

KISS ;)

christine  posted on  2007-06-24   23:58:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: robin (#0)

Pilots for 9/11 truth? What's up with that?

Sounds similar to Scholars for 9/11 truth. Or, gasp, Jews for (fill in the blank) _____.

Why is it that certain occupations think they have more credibility than others when it comes to 9/11 truth? I am a software engineer, but I never, and would never, consider something as silly as "software engineers for 9/11 truth."

The video of WTC7 collapsing is all the proof someone that possesses common sense needs to see to know that 9/11 was an inside job. You could be a burger flipper at McDonalds and see this. These groups IMHO have ulterior motives. I don't trust them.

God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]

RickyJ  posted on  2007-06-25   0:15:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: robin (#0)

Of course no 757 hit the Pentagon.

Join the Ron Paul Revolution

Lod  posted on  2007-06-25   0:20:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: richard9151.skydrifter (#7) (Edited)

I assure you that NO 757 hit the Pentagon.

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

IndieTX  posted on  2007-06-25   0:20:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: robin (#0) (Edited)

"The Pentagon has become a kind of litmus test for rationality in the study of 9/11," Fetzer said. "Those who persist in maintaining that a Boeing 757 hit the building are either unfamiliar with the evidence or cognitively impaired. Unless," he added, "they want to mislead the American people. The evidence is beyond clear and compelling. It places this issue 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon."

Oh, this paragraph explains it all. The fruitcake, "beam me up" Fetzer, is promoting this as a "litmus" test for rationality in the study of 9/11! Yeah, that about says it all right there. Fetzer is trying his best to keep the truth of 9/11 from coming out by saying off the wall things like this. He is not a 9/11 truther in any way shape or form.

Fetzer do you want a real litmus test for 9/11 rationality, the video of WTC7 collapsing, that's it and you know it, you two faced clown. Watch out for those space beams Fetzer! LOL!

God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]

RickyJ  posted on  2007-06-25   0:35:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: robin (#0)

There WAS NO plane. It was likely a cruise missile.

"I wish outerspace guys would conquer earth and make people their pets, because I'd like to have one of those little basket beds with my name on it." ~ Jack Handey

wudidiz  posted on  2007-06-25   1:08:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: richard9151 (#7)

So, if I understand youse, you are saying that a 757 DID hit the pentagon. And, I assume, that one hit the WTC-7 as well, correct?

No 757 at the Pentagon, or Shanksville!

SEE -

http://home.comcast.net/~skyd rifter/exp.htm

(Pack a lunch!)


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2007-06-25   1:50:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: RickyJ, Original_Intent, FormerLurker, Calamity, Robin, IndietTX, Burkeman1, HOUNDDAWG, wbales, farmfriend, innieway, JC Harris, Cynicom, Richard9151, ratcat, iodwick, christine, Zipporah (#13)

Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.

* Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ...

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. …

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. …

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history." http://www.physics911.net

Commander Ted Muga, U.S. Navy (ret) – Retired Naval aviator (Grumman E-1 and E-2). Retired Pan-Am commercial airline pilot (Boeing 707 and 727).

* Interview Alex Jones Show 4/11/07:

Alex Jones: Recap Hani Hanjour's maneuver, what they claim -- go through the maneuver they claim he did and then what supposedly happened there at the Pentagon ...

Commander Muga: The maneuver at the Pentagon was just a tight spiral coming down out of 7,000 feet. And a commercial aircraft, while they can in fact structurally somewhat handle that maneuver, they are very, very, very difficult. And it would take considerable training. In other words, commercial aircraft are designed for a particular purpose and that is for comfort and for passengers and it's not for military maneuvers. And while they are structurally capable of doing them, it takes some very, very talented pilots to do that. ...

When a commercial airplane gets that high, it get very, very close to getting into what you refer to as a speed high-speed stall. And a high-speed stall can be very, very violent on a commercial-type aircraft and you never want to get into that situation. I just can't imagine an amateur even being able to come close to performing a maneuver of that nature.

And as far as hijacking the airplanes, once again getting back to the nature of pilots and airplanes, there is no way that a pilot would give up an airplane to hijackers. ...

I mean, hell, a guy doesn't give up a TV remote control much less a complicated 757. And so to think that pilots would allow a plane to be taken over by a couple of 5 foot 7, 150 pound guys with a one-inch blade boxcutter is ridiculous.

And also in all four planes, if you remember, none of the planes ever switched on their transponder to the hijack code. There's a very, very simple code that you put in if you suspect that your plane is being hijacked. It takes literally just a split-second for you to put your hand down on the center console and flip it over. And not one of the four planes ever transponded a hijack code, which is most, most unusual. ...

Commercial airplanes are very, very complex pieces of machines. And they're designed for two pilots up there, not just two amateur pilots, but two qualified commercial pilots up there. And to think that you're going to get an amateur up into the cockpit and fly, much less navigate, it to a designated target, the probability is so low, that it's bordering on impossible." Appears half way through the second hour segment at http://www.realradioarchives.com

* Member: Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice Association Statement: "Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice is a non-partisan organization consisting of independent researchers and activists engaged in uncovering the true nature of the September 11, 2001 attacks."

* Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers."

Major Douglas Rokke, PhD Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Director U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project. 30-year Army career.

* Article 8/19/05: Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001 "When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile's impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile." http://www.rense.com

Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. 20-year Air Force veteran.

* Contributor to 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out 8/23/06: Account of Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. "I believe the Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research. ...

It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics. ...

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile".

... I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon.

... More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."

Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Former Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. Commercial pilot for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years, flying 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777 ’s. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines airplanes that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC).

* Article 7/17/05: "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple." … Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn."…

"For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand," said Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying." http://www.arcticbeacon.com

* Audio Interview 9/16/04: Regarding Flight 77, which allegedly hit the Pentagon. "The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous...

It’s roughly a 100 ton airplane. And an airplane that weighs 100 tons all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and parts after it hits a building. There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. … The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77. We think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile." http://911underground.com

* Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers."

Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army – Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director. Decorated with the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam. Also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area. Founder and former CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company (15 years). Former Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division (15 years). Private pilot.

* Statement to this website 3/23/07: "As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire. Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed. Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon? If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there.

Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control. No way! With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there's no way all four of them could!

Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is nearly impossible for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757. Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled "terrorists".

Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a "Conspiracy Theory" does not change the truth. It seems, "Something is rotten in the State."

Col. Pierre-Henri Bunel, French Army (ret) – Army intelligence and artillery officer. Graduate of École Militaire of St. Cyr. Expert in the effects of artillery weapons and explosives. Served in the Gulf War as battlefield damage assessment officer and aide-de-camp to French General Michel Roquejoffre. Bunel was one of four French officers decorated by General Norman Schwarzkopf for service in the Gulf War. Also Served in French and NATO operations in Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Yugoslavia. 24-year army career.

* Essay included in Pentagate by Thierry Meyssan (2002): Regarding Department of Defense photos of the Pentagon on 9/11 - "This image of the impact on the Pentagon is very instructive as to the nature of the explosion. ... It corresponds to a detonation of an explosive with high energetic power. The explosion does not correspond to a deflagration of kerosene [as would result from the impact of an airliner]. ...

One distinguishes at ground level, starting from the right-hand side of the photo and going to the base of the mass of white vapor, a white line of smoke. ... As opposed to the smoke that would come out of two kerosene-fueled engines, this smoke is white. The turbojets of a Boeing 757 would in fact leave a trail of much blacker smoke. The examination of this photo alone already suggests a single engine flying vehicle much smaller in size than an airliner. ...

The last photo was produced by the Department of Defense and published on a Navy Web site. In examining it, one can see an almost circular hole topped by a black smudge, This perforation is about seven feet in diameter and is situated in the wall of the third line of buildings working inward from the façade. It is supposed to have been made by the nose of the plane. That would mean that the nose of the aircraft, a radome of carbon fiber that is far from being armored, would have traversed without destroying them six load-bearing walls of building considered to be rather solid. ... The appearance of the perforation in the wall certainly resembles the effects of anti-concrete hollow charges that I have been able to observe on a number of battlefields. ...

This photo, and the effects described in the official version, lead me therefore to think that the detonation that struck the building was that of a high-powered hollow charge used to destroy hardened buildings and carried by an aerial vehicle, a missile." http://www.voltairenet

Steve DeChiaro – Pentagon survivor. Founder of DSCI, a defense contractor. Mr. DeChiaro was walking into the Pentagon's south parking lot entrance when the Pentagon was hit on 9/11. He immediately went to the impact area and started evacuating the injured and the dying. For his heroic efforts that day, Mr. DeChiaro was awarded the Medal of Valor, the Defense Department's highest civilian award for courage and valor.

* Article 8/1/02: "Instead of following the streams of people away from the Pentagon, Steve DeChiaro ran toward the smoke.

As he reached the west side of the building he saw a light post bent in half.

"But when I looked at the site, my brain could not resolve the fact that it was a plane because it only seemed like a small hole in the building," he said. "No tail. No wings. No nothing." http://web.archive.org

Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career.

* Video 7/11/06: "One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?

<

"I wish outerspace guys would conquer earth and make people their pets, because I'd like to have one of those little basket beds with my name on it." ~ Jack Handey

wudidiz  posted on  2007-06-25   3:27:22 ET  (6 images) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: IndieTX, wudidiz (#12)

I assure you that NO 757 hit the Pentagon.

You know what I find frightening?

That so many Americans will passionately defend that steaming pile of made-for-TV neocon drama.

I suspect that many are simple reactionaries who can't deal with the possibility of DEMS taking power by default, and these same people don't fully appreciate the true evil in our midst.

And, perhaps some know evil very well and they want to let the Prince Of Darkness know that they're willing to make the trade-souls for power-at any time.

I mean, we must have graduated thousands of torture-with-battery-charger-electricians from the former School Of The Americas now known as WHINSEC.

We have no reasonable expectation of "loyalty to the people" from any of them. They want to hide their true purposes and missions from us.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2007-06-25   4:24:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: wudidiz (#16)

Conspiracy

Conspiracy...

Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.

A low number of people combined to do evil is relatively easy to control. However when hundreds are involved over a period of several years, that control falls apart.

Experts with credentials do not and have not produced one person that has admitted they were involved in any grand hoax on the American people.

There were about 50 people that testified they SAW the AA aircraft hit the Pentagon. Perhaps these experts would want to start there and find at least one person that was a part of the conspiracy.

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-25   5:25:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Cynicom (#18)

Cyni, just to back off the conspiracy trail a tad.....might it be possible that 911 was known to some government elements, yet allowed to happen anyway?

Jethro Tull  posted on  2007-06-25   7:58:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Jethro Tull (#19) (Edited)

..might it be possible that 911 was known to some government elements, yet allowed to happen anyway?

Jethro...

Very possible. Was the government involved and or had knoqwledge??? Very possible.

I have no quarrel with those that would argue that, most likely would agree.

Spending countless hours as to whether the AA aircraft did or did not strike the Pentagon is childish in the extreme. That only detracts from finding the root perpetrators that "conspired" in the beginning.

Those 50 or so people that SAW the aircraft are still out there, their names all in the records, they are real people.

The terms "experts" and "credentials" are always paraded out front to somehow justify someones opinions as being the proper conclusion or solution.

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-25   9:17:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Cynicom (#20)

I can't argue with a thing you said, Cyni.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2007-06-25   10:17:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: robin (#0)

James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995.

What ?!?

I gotta hear more about this.

The "Department of Defense" has never won a war. The "War Department" was undefeated.

Indrid Cold  posted on  2007-06-25   10:24:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Jethro Tull (#21)

I can't argue with a thing you said,

I am an expert at nothing, have zero credentials, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last week.

Seriously, I did purchase a BS meter for three bucks a long long time ago.

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-25   10:26:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: SKYDRIFTER (#15)

(Pack a lunch!)

LOL!

The Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

richard9151  posted on  2007-06-25   11:41:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: wudidiz, RickyJ, Original_Intent, FormerLurker, Calamity, Robin, IndietTX, Burkeman1, HOUNDDAWG, wbales, farmfriend, innieway, JC Harris, Cynicom, ratcat, iodwick, christine, Zipporah (#16)

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile".

I will put this simply; this is, to me, the clearest evidence of what did and did not happen on 911. ALL of the facts about the Pentagon. And, it will make the most impact on the military as well, as more and more of them become aware.

AND, to me, there can be no doubt that this evidence will be the most compelling to the majority of Americans. Rather than a collaspe of a building (WTC-7) that may be beyond the ability of many to process and make sense of. That is just a fact.

Look at who we are speaking of! There was a news piece on Yahoo yesterday that makes the point that, NOW, TODAY, 42% of American believe that Saddam was directly involved in 911, and that is UP FROM 36% just a month ago!

I think that those percentages will correspond pretty closely to those Americans who live in front of the tele, and it shows very well how much control of their thinking actually exists.

But the manner in which the various groups are putting this info together, and what it shows, in all of its particulars, is what is needed if and when a major break through is made and the total of the info begins to be made VERY public. I suspect that day may not be that far off.

The Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

richard9151  posted on  2007-06-25   12:10:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: richard9151 (#25)

There was a news piece on Yahoo yesterday that makes the point that, NOW, TODAY, 42% of American believe that Saddam was directly involved in 911, and that is UP FROM 36% just a month ago!

Paradoxically, that seems like good news to me. Now, since Saddam's already been lynched, can't we put the idea out there that the guy who did 9/11 is dead, mission accomplished, glorious victory, and now it's time for the legions to haul ass for home?

Nah, never mind. That's not gonna fly in the Knesset Congress.

- - - - - - - - - - -
Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under. -- H. L. Mencken

Enderby  posted on  2007-06-25   12:15:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: HOUNDDAWG (#17)

That so many Americans will passionately defend that steaming pile of made-for-TV neocon drama.

Yes, and they are the same ones who will join in the witch hunt for naysayers and dissidents when the stasi-SS-roman inquisition comes into full-bore operation. The direction of the building momentum is unmistakeable, the polarization is reaching the point of no return. History provides a plethora of compelling arguments for where we are headed that is [crystal clear] if we disassociate ourselves from the distractions of the present and see with an objective eye. A glimpse back through the lens of history bears a dismal portend of the stark image of the beast system beheld in the looking glass of the future.

Our country has no shortage of the hateful and ignorant, as it has always been. Perfect droids for tyranny. Mindless and Heartless Tyranno-droids posing as patriots. Remember the words "if you're not with us you're against us". That will be the mantra of justification for the wicked.

lightmind  posted on  2007-06-25   12:18:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Cynicom (#20)

Spending countless hours as to whether the AA aircraft did or did not strike the Pentagon is childish in the extreme. That only detracts from finding the root perpetrators that "conspired" in the beginning.

Who did 9/11 is an important question, but first it must be determined if the truth of what happened on 9/11 has been covered up by our government. If the government did cover up the truth of what really happened that day then one must ask why? The only logical answer is that they were involved with 9/11 and are now covering their asses. WTC 7 is all the proof anyone should need to see that our government has actively been covering up the truth of 9/11 for over 5 1/2 years now.

God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]

RickyJ  posted on  2007-06-25   12:25:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: RickyJ (#28) (Edited)

If the government did cover up the truth of what really happened that day then one must ask why?

Yes...

Indeed one would have to be very naive not to believe that the government at the very least knew of the coming event, even if not complicit.

As you say, knowing "who" would answer all of the other questions.

As FDR once said, "historiucal events do not just happen, they were a long time in preperation"...

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-25   12:41:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Enderby (#26)

Nah, never mind. That's not gonna fly in the Knesset Congress.

LOL! But, on further reflexion, that ain't so funny cause it is so true!

The Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

richard9151  posted on  2007-06-25   12:42:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: richard9151, lightmind (#25)

Good posts from both of you.

And one can only wonder why a perfectly manicured lawn like the Pentagon would require tons of crush-and-run gravel and sodding after 9/11, since there was no damage (only evidence?) to be covered up.

I suppose that if something shiney poked through the grass and was later revealed to be a component that could only have come from a Global Hawk, well, as long as tons of new material have been trucked in that's all the plausible deniability The Donald would require.

Like a rat all he needs is the width of his rat face for clearance and he'll squeeze his toady bureaucrat/tyrant disgusting fat body through the presumptive guilt and into the land of the pardoned FOG's.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2007-06-25   12:47:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Cynicom, ALL (#18)

A low number of people combined to do evil is relatively easy to control. However when hundreds are involved over a period of several years, that control falls apart.

You make the assumption, based on conjecture, that such an evil would have been known by hundreds, and that those hundreds would be incapable of remaining silent. First you overestimate the number required and second, you underestimate the loyalty to the Luciferian StateInc of those that would have been involved.

Your unwillingness to consider any but the government line is purely Cognitive Dissonance, a basic psychological defense mechanism, and a dangerous position.

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

IndieTX  posted on  2007-06-25   12:47:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: IndieTX (#32)

You make the assumption, based on conjecture, that such an evil would have been known by hundreds, and that those hundreds would be incapable of remaining silent. First you overestimate the number required and second, you underestimate the loyalty to the Luciferian StateInc of those that would have been involved.

Only one scientist's and one fire fighting professional's heads had to be displayed on pikes and everyone else in those fields got the message.

When it comes to enforcing BushCo's tyranny people don't really need to be told when info they possess could result in a one car accident on some lonely road with no witnesses.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2007-06-25   12:58:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Indrid Cold, SKYDRIFTER (#22)

James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995.

Intriguing idea, new to me too.


Ron Paul for President

robin  posted on  2007-06-25   13:04:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: IndieTX (#32)

You make the assumption, based on conjecture

Not really...

The law of averages comes into play here.

When we have a secret shared by two, the chances of discovery are possible but not probable. When the number is increased by a multiple of ten the chance of discovery now becomes very real.

When one reads of numerous government agencies, and dozens of government employees somehow supporting some grand plot or hoax one has to call a halt and bring reality into the debate.

Cynicom  posted on  2007-06-25   13:20:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: HOUNDDAWG (#31)

And one can only wonder why a perfectly manicured lawn like the Pentagon would require tons of crush-and-run gravel and sodding after 9/11, since there was no damage (only evidence?) to be covered up.

I imagine the fire trucks and other vehicles tore it up pretty good.

The "Department of Defense" has never won a war. The "War Department" was undefeated.

Indrid Cold  posted on  2007-06-25   14:06:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Indrid Cold (#36)

I imagine the fire trucks and other vehicles tore it up pretty good.

Right.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2007-06-25   14:35:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: robin (#0)

Madison, WI (PRWEB) June 21, 2007 - A study of the black box data provided by the government to Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11.

So what happened to all the passengers who were on the plane that didn't hit the Pentagon?

Mister Clean  posted on  2007-06-25   15:04:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Cynicom (#20)

Spending countless hours as to whether the AA aircraft did or did not strike the Pentagon is childish in the extreme. That only detracts from finding the root perpetrators that "conspired" in the beginning.

Fine, but no 757 hit the pentagon.

"I wish outerspace guys would conquer earth and make people their pets, because I'd like to have one of those little basket beds with my name on it." ~ Jack Handey

wudidiz  posted on  2007-06-25   20:24:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Cynicom (#5)

I'm pretty sure the no-plane theory won't wash.

Never debate religion or conspiracy. No one wins.

How about facts?

"If you ever go temporarily insane, don't shoot somebody, like a lot of people do. Instead, try to get some weeding done, because you'd really be surprised." ~ Jack Handey

wudidiz  posted on  2007-06-25   20:39:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (41 - 44) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]