9-11 and the IMPOSSIBLE: The Pentagon
Part One of An Online Journal of 9-11
At the 9-11 Pentagon, the world witnessed a fire and suggestions of explosions. Airport fire trucks rushed to the scene of a purported “crash” site - without discovering an airplane. There is no viable evidence of burning jet fuel. Just the statement, They say it was an airplane. The pre-collapse Pentagon section showed no ‘forward-moving’ damage. The damage is at the wrong location. The expected “crash” damage doesn’t exist. There was no particular physical evidence of the expected “wreckage.” There was no tail, no wings; no damage consistent with a B-757 “crash.” Even the Pentagon lawn was undamaged! The geometry of the day certifies the ‘official’ account as a blatant lie. The few aircraft parts discovered at the Pentagon are highly suspect. The dramatic “witness” accounts lack supporting physical evidence - with the exception of those who described the incredibly few aircraft parts. All images show that the building wasn’t aggressively searched for survivors. Lacking any ‘expected’ clues, one is left to ask Who said this was an airplane crash, in the first place?
The purported Flight 93 crash site in Pennsylvania is quite similar.
Since 9-11, it was discovered that there was no expected Air Force fighter response. By all appearances, the expected fighters were held back from interfering with; or witnessing the unfolding events. The fighter onboard electronics would have not only offered an intercept target, but would have displayed and recorded the forbidden reality of the day. Of particular interest would be the fate of two obviously missing airliners.
The alleged hijackers apparently were not on board the aircraft! Their names were not on any passenger manifests - yet shown. The ‘names’ of at least seven of the alleged hijackers were discovered to be still alive - with no questions being asked about whom the real hijackers were. No attempt has been made to discover the “known terrorists.” There were at least four hijackers — all evidence pointing to their being highly qualified jet pilots - not zealous Arab wannabes.
As the names of “al Qaeda” and “bin Laden” continue to be pandered in the shadows of ‘terrorism,’ journalists continue to discover that the bin Laden family was given the treatment of royalty, immediately following 9-11.
This just can’t be, yet ……
The legacy of 9-11 is that America - and its Constitution - is far more threatened from the White House, than the caves of Afghanistan.
This site pleads for the preservation of the U.S. Constitution, the admirable American sense of justice and the proud traditional American way of life.
Blind faith is self-inflicted! Whenever confusion is encountered, it is necessary to somehow find a grounding point,”call it a benchmark.”That undeniable and absolutely trustworthy point of reference. Next, it’s necessary to gather ACCURATE peripheral data, which can be trusted - no matter how kind or how harsh it may be. Thereafter, whether lost in the woods - or in politics- the truth may be discovered. Such is the case with 9-11.
The “official version” of 9-11 just doesn’t stand up, against even elementary scrutiny. Despite the “official” denials, there were overwhelming warnings of suicide hijackers; but no warnings to the public or to airline pilots. The selective maintenance of a badly outdated hijacking procedure set the operational stage for the “official” version of 9-11.
In David Ray Griffin’s book on the 9/11 Commission Report — “The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions” - Griffin addresses the Report; describing these same issues, in great detail. Griffin reveals where the Report is flawed and how. It should be noted that the observations of this Web site are not the least bit unique.
A little bit at a time, America - and the world - is taking a step back to examine 9-11, 2001 for what is factually represented:
- Terrorism warnings without response.
For the most dramatic impression, let’s start with the scene of the 9-11 Pentagon —
A fire and apparent explosion. The airport fire trucks rushed to the scene, failing to discover any evidence of an airplane. Examining the photos and videotape of the day, it’s obvious that the fire is neither competently fought (if the “official account is the least bit accurate), nor is the target building aggressively searched for survivors by the supposed rescuers. A secret facility with no security; before, during or after. An attack on the nation’s military headquarters — with no police or military perimeter set up. Hundreds of casualties anticipated; without a consistent ambulance response. All the rescue assets are on location, but held back from the fire scene.
One is challenged to discover how much more could be wrong in such a picture.
Disregarding passionate and otherwise tempting lies, the only truth which can be trusted in the “official” account of 9-11, is that two aircraft hit the WTC towers. The rest is an incredible collection of clever lies and obstruction of truth. “I didn’t SAY it; I repeated it” doesn’t equate to telling the truth. Especially when the information ’sources’ keep their jobs.
While it stretches anyone’s imagination, it is appropriate to examine the extent of where the selective airline security procedures left America — and the world. By all indicators, the American airline industry is set for another 9-11. Airport security has gone from being a joke to a being a Gestapo joke.
Again, there’s that peculiar nagging issue, concerning 9-11 - the alleged hijackers apparently were not on board the aircraft! Their names were not on any passenger manifests - yet shown. The names of at least seven of the alleged hijackers are still alive - with no questions being asked about who the real hijackers were. Obviously, there were at least four hijackers. We may be certain that they were highly qualified jet pilots - not Arab wannabes.
To even begin to comprehend what happened on 9-11, one has to first observe that all warnings of 9-11 were blocked with great prejudice. Thereafter, it must be noted that there were no official repercussions against those who, by accident or design, facilitated 9-11 - as pandered to the world. No reprimands, no resignations, no investigations at any office or departmental level, certainly no prosecutions. Not even an official name-calling session. Just the seeming statement, “Damn, I hate it when that happens!”
Thereafter any “official” investigations into the details of 9-11 are blocked - from the White House!
The events of 9-11 didn’t just kill thousands, cost billions and precipitate wars - nay, War Crimes - pursuant to the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Accords and the Nuremberg Precedents, which the U.N. Charter embraces. Conveniently, few American citizens or soldiers have the faintest clue as to what those documents say. Ignorance can be as effective as a lie! The post 9-11 events injected both horror and compelling questions upon the American population, in particular. History will be America’s jury; the verdict is quite obvious.
Disregarding raw American pride, patriotism and prejudice; War Crimes DID happen from America! At the time of this writing, they continue.
The 9-11 Pentagon epitomizes the issues of that day. As time goes on, certain issues persist in their demand for hard answers.
The greatest horror of 9-11 was the killing of the American Constitution — for no good excuse whatsoever! The U.S. Constitution delivered and maintains the American way of life. If that document is abandoned — or destroyed; traditional America goes with it. Freedom and justice, as the entire world has come to know it, is defined, essentially, by the U.S. Constitution. What America HAD, the world wants. If the Constitution is reverted to the status of a political relic, the entire world faces the sunset of justice and freedom.
As it stands, the U.S. “powers” are going around the world meting out Gestapo justice in secret trials. Such is even proposed by the current President, exclusively naming him - personally; not his office - as the ultimate authority in the post 9-11 Presidential Military Order on terrorist tribunals.
Amazingly the President reserves the right to try “unlawful combatants,” while sanctifying U.S. corporations farming out mercenary (unlawful combatant) forces in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq. Somehow the world is expected to make a distinction between “mercenary” and “contractor.”
There was no shortage of authority or power in the Constitution to prevent 9-11; it cannot totally prevent massive and methodical corruption; it can punish such deeds - including the related conspiracy. The necessary investigation powers were in place; before 9-11. The so-called “whistle blowers” got the shaft; 9-11 came from within!
The obviously pre-written “Patriot Act” was totally unnecessary; and an act of pure tyranny. Those in doubt of the previous statement need to observe cases such as Martha Stewart, who were charged with a crime, for having entered a “not guilty” plea at their trial. She wasn’t alone; that’s “tyranny,” as America knows it.
The very essence of American justice is that a person is regarded as innocent, until proven guilty. Thus, the “not guilty” plea is sacred to the American judicial system. In another bizarre case, an Internet Service Provider (ISP) was imprisoned for the postings of one of his customers; the customer wasn’t touched. Such is on par with criminally charging a Mailman for delivering a porno magazine.
In order to preserve the American way of life, one must look very closely at the events of 9-11. The missing information is more compelling than what has been pandered as “truth.” If those actually responsible are not brought to justice, America is in dire straits.
Returning to that day …
Given all the “mysteries” surrounding 9-11, it is necessary to refer to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s philosophy:
“When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains — however improbable — must be the truth.”
For anyone to understand how bizarre their world can get, it is at least “interesting” to start with certain basics at the Pentagon and Flight 77. Among the alleged “wreckage,” no tail, no wings, and no damage consistent with such a “crash.” Even the Pentagon lawn was undamaged; so much for the infamous security videotape fireball!
Seismic monitors will register a sonic boom, but the seismic monitors don’t reveal anything suggesting such an aircraft impact. ONLY AT THE PENTAGON!
The strongest suggestion is that the wrong seismic time frame was cited, relative to the actual impact. What would ‘other’ data show? What happened in the vicinity of 9:31?
(9:31 versus the “official” 9:38)
The horizontal strike on the WTC towers, a thousand feet up, registered a major seismic spike - but nothing at the Pentagon.
Clearly an illusion was created at the 9-11 Pentagon; using the very best of “Perception Control.” Start with the actual crash of an aircraft carrying thousands of gallons of Jet-A fuel -
Notice another detail in this picture; the corner of the building is impacted, with the bulk of the fuel burning OUTSIDE of the building. That leaves the question, What collapsed the center columns?
At the 9-11 Pentagon, we are supposed to believe that a 757, traveling at 300 Knots dove over a batch of construction equipment, immediately adjacent to the Pentagon wall, then leveled out; and did a totally perfect strike at the convenient “Least-Risk Point.” Thereafter, it morphed its way through three rings of the Pentagon, turning left and right through the linking hallways, leaving a handful of aircraft pieces which defy accountability. All that, without damaging or burning the Pentagon lawn! All that by a pilot known to be an idiot at the controls of a small plane.
It’s more than IMPOSSIBLE: it’s absurd!
There’s another strange matter - the collapsed portion of the Pentagon wasn’t in the alleged path of the purported 757 center-of-mass; yet that portion which allegedly was in that path didn’t collapse! That should have been damage from the purported right wing.
In the elementary physics of the purported strike, according to the proposed impact angle, the aircraft tail would have rotated to the left, breaking off major pieces of its structure - including the tail section.
As George Nelson, Colonel, USAF (ret.), pointed out, NONE of the found” parts have part numbers or serial numbers on them; not at the Pentagon and not at Pennsylvania! For production control, manufacturers stamp such ‘part’ numbers on virtually EVERY piece of an aircraft. The major components are found with the manufacturer’s serial numbers. Clearly, someone went to a lot of trouble to ’sanitize’ the 9-11 pieces. Anyone with experience around aircraft accidents will cite the total lack of serial-numbered parts as IMPOSSIBLE.
Step back, for a moment. Try to imagine a trans-continental flight with hardly any passengers and no cargo. The flight reversed course and arrived back in the D.C. area unexpectedly, yet there is no record — or even ‘tales’ - of ATC directing aircraft away from the “rogue aircraft,” no ATC warnings, no pleas for other aircraft to look for the “missing” aircraft, no continuous calls from ATC, attempting to establish contact — on any frequency. There were no TCAS (mid-air collision) alarms, with aircraft in a busy terminal area scattering for clear airspace. Nor were there any secondary TCAS alarms from the otherwise expected chaos.
The FAA order for all aircraft to land hadn’t yet been announced, when the supposed 757 hit the Pentagon; there would have been an abundance of conflicting aircraft at the Dulles and Reagan airport areas.
For those unfamiliar, the TCAS system allows the transponders of different aircraft to electronically warn each other of a collision threat — with computerized audio and visual warnings in the cockpits of the planes involved. “Hard” warnings generate audio and visual commands, for the pilots to climb or descend to evade a collision.
Remember that the FAA claimed the aircraft circled and descended from 7,000 feet, overhead the Pentagon. Only a functioning transponder would yield an FAA digital display, indicating the altitude. In the world of facts, they can’t have it both ways. The transponder was either on or off. All of that assuming that the aircraft was factual. If there was an aircraft actually involved, an Air Force fighter for example, it made a low pass; it didn’t hit the Pentagon!
Beyond the ‘normal’ tight airspace restrictions, such a site automatically becomes Prohibited”airspace for pilots. No pilot in his/her right mind would go near the area - without an ‘official’ directive.
Again, if the purported 757 transponder had been ON, it would have caused ATC and TCAS warning chaos with innumerable aircraft within the Baltimore/Dulles/Reagan Airport areas, as the aircraft approached the Pentagon. Yet, there were no questions asked about that discrepancy!
As a minimum, the FAA hasn’t indicated why they just watched the close-in approach of the purported aircraft, without making any attempt to warn anyone. It would have violated Dulles Airport airspace, as well as threatened “Prohibited Airspace,” with the FAA just watching. If the FAA is being honest; where’s the appropriate accountability? If there was no airplane, the obvious lie was a serious felony!
The witnesses -
The witnesses who came forward were rather typical of all aircraft accident witnesses - they described what they believed was true. It’s nearly impossible to have an aircraft crash that someone doesn’t see it on fire - in the air; often with an associated explosion. That’s just an accepted quirk of human nature. Witness testimony is always corroborated against physical evidence - if such exists.
Typical was one eloquent witness who poisoned his own statement by describing his having “heard” the aircraft pull up; a maneuver would not make a noise. That statement was later changed to power-up.
Given the physical magnitude of the event, the physical evidence would corroborate reliable witness accounts - yet, the physical corroboration is nearly 100% lacking.
Some witnesses may have actually been casual individuals, versus “plants.” We’ll never know, for sure. But, there is one detail which eliminates 99% of the “witnesses,” instantly - what they DON’T describe!
No one described being terrified by the noise of a low-flying jet aircraft.
The aircraft was alleged to have passed low over major buildings, yet no one describes it as “big;” certainly not “deafening.” A B-757 is supposed to have passed low over so many people, yet no one was frightened by the overwhelming noise of a 757, doing 300 Knots. That noise would have been more memorable than most visual details.
The approach-departure “Doppler Effect” would have left a frightening impression, as the frequency of the engine noise built, then faded. Still, there are no such descriptions.
The required path would have taken the aircraft extremely low over a major highway. Yet, there aren’t hundreds of witnesses who saw - or heard - ANYTHING. Drivers eventually stopped for the Pentagon fire; they didn’t stop for a low-flying aircraft.
Nor did any group of people abandon a building or even run to a window to see what had to be a major event of some sort. Nor do you hear of any sounds of the crash. One bang; that’s about it. A 757 hitting the Pentagon would have made one hell of a racket; as recorded in the WTC impacts. For all the recorders in the Pentagon, there is no trace of an audio recording of the event. A secure”building which can’t produce a viable image of the 9-11 events; not likely.
Supposedly, the collapsed section had just been rebuilt to be blast resistant. According to the pre-collapse photos and videotapes, the requisite impact” areas show no signs of being externally struck. For all their blast resistance,”the walls just morphed”a B-757? The right side showed a maximum of fifteen feet of lateral penetration” damage. What collapsed the interior? The right wing”which clearly couldn’t have penetrated the outer wall - per the photos? The ten-minute fire?
THE SILENT WITNESS -
RADAR! The data is recorded. Does anyone remember the Defense Radar on TWA-800 and Egypt Air 990? What radar imagery couldn’t be discerned by human eyes in real-time was available for later review, and documentation - whether FAA or military radar data.
According to Congressional testimony, the radar data was reviewed and analyzed for selected material; where is it? The military is hiding the most important witness of all!
The public was presented with computer-generated imagery to suggest 9-11 radar data; but the imagery was only a visual emulation of the purported flight paths. Where did that imagery come from? Who was so ‘connected?’ That imagery hangs on the brink of conspiracy”and Obstruction of Justice!
The FAA claimed they saw the aircraft on radar, circling and descended from 7,000 feet, overhead the Pentagon. Where is the data?
While the FAA primarily depends on aircraft having a transponder (yielding such things as a digital altitude readout), they can also “see” a certain amount of raw “Primary Returns.” Only the Defense Department radar can discern altitude from “raw” returns. The military radar is oriented around “seeing” primary returns, sneaking into our airspace, and maneuvering within. Yet, the military and FAA radar systems - of all indicators - are the silent witness.
Just try to imagine the “Prohibited Airspace” of Washington, D.C. area not being protected to the maximum, by the most sophisticated military radar; or monitored by satellite imagery! IMPOSSIBLE!
Just the CIA headquarters, across the river from the Pentagon, would have terrific amounts of radar data; where is it? The CIA building is the benefactor of the Prohibited Airspace,”not the Pentagon.
Imagine, also, the Pentagon - of all institutions - NOT being able to provide such a record. WHY? Because the radar data supporting the “official” account couldn’t have existed. The PR value would have been incredible - if that data actually existed. In perfect propaganda control, no one mentioned the radar records. The public was not to be taught any tricks. The mass media wouldn’t get involved in the obvious. WHY?
Certainly, the fighter ‘non-intercept’ issue is a major story, by itself — obscured in the mysterious cloud of “national security.” That aspect is beyond the pale of “impossible.” At a minimum, we know from documentation that the fighters which were launched from Langley “cruised” to the Pentagon; there was no hurry. Why should they hurry?? There were obviously no airplanes to intercept!
SO MANY BOOKS, WEB SITES - AND ALL THOSE PICTURES -
To the world of the legitimately curious, one’s attention should first go to an early view of the airport fire trucks, attacking the blaze.
Note the un-collapsed wall and the firemen, obviously not concerned with the building occupants. No hand-lines are deployed and oriented toward the building. There are no firemen with shiny aluminized protective hoods donned, prepared to penetrate a jet fuel fire, in a rescue attempt. No suggestion of an aircraft crash.
The fact is that there were tremendous firefighting resources dispatched to the Pentagon; what happened to them?
In the picture below, the vehicle tracks betray these fire trucks as the first to the scene. There is no suggestion of an aircraft crash and the expected fuel fire - NONE! The firemen should be in aluminum-clad suits, with hand-lines extended to the building, to “penetrate” the fire, looking for survivors of the building or the supposed aircraft. The clue is in the background smoke; indicative of a structural fire, coming from the interior rings.
Next, go to the famous Associated Press photo (next picture) on the cover of “The Big Lie” - Thierry Meyssan. (The contents of that book is a MUST for any serious American.)
Second to Myessan’s first book is “The War on Freedom” - by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed. Together, they tell a concise and well-documented truth, versus raw assertion in the mainstream media.
The second Thierry Meyssan book, “Pentagate,” adds to the political issues, further demonstrating the discrepancies, which should NOT have escaped any law enforcement agency or official.
As to the official”investigation, David Ray Griffin’s book on the 9/11 Commission Report — “The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions” is a must-read.
Additionally, there are many writers such as John Kaminski, who are passionately dedicated to solving the political mysteries behind the horror of 9-11. The desperately needed answers are both the key to America’s obscure past and serve as a predictor of an obviously murderous future. Those such as essayist and author, Kaminski, are as famous for clear, but blistering rants, posted on hundreds of websites around the world.
Kaminski’s work is collected in two books, “America’s Autopsy Report” and another, due out soon titled “The Perfect Enemy.”
In the background of 9-11 is the patently phony “Gulf of Tonkin Incident,” which precipitated the buildup to the corrupt Viet Nam War. 9-11 registers as a grander version of that event, with accompanying American tyranny. However unpopular it is to say, the wars precipitated out of 9-11 are War Crimes!
Thus it’s mandatory for America, in particular, to gain a firm grip on the details behind the9-11 fraud. After the legacy of Nazi Germany, America totally lacks the ability to say, “We didn’t know!”
Those such as Kaminski (however incendiary they may be) convincingly illustrate the motives and goals powering those persons within the American government who collectively engineered an atrocity, which almost instantly killed thousands of American citizens, merely to enrich the privileged and powerful. To date, that effort is a shameful success.
However controversial such WORKS may be, their content - ironically - offers phenomenally more trustworthy fact and plausibility than the pandered “official” positions, since 9-11.
Understanding the mechanics, motives and politics of what really happened before, during and after 9-11 is crucial to the prevention of the total destruction of the American Constitution and the traditional American way of life.
History is clear that whatever calamity happens to America, happens to the remainder of the globe. Hence, the American version of “globalization” is to be feared with serious and grievous trepidation.
Whatever anyone may think of the authors, the essence of the presented issues are well written and, unfortunately, compelling.
While the “regular” mass media has done a remarkable job of presenting the ‘official’ version of 9-11, there is a rapidly growing consensus of free-thinkers, offering responsible analysis of 9-11. This information is found in books, videotapes, DVDs and, of course, online. Although many of the Internet sites lack the exposure of commercial marketing, there doesn’t seem to be an end to the list of sites which parallel, in part or in whole, the contents herein. One such “Link Central” site is found at Citizens for a Legitimate Government. Granted, there are a significant number of exclusively “wacko” online sites, as well.
Returning to the Pictures ….
Look at the picture below. As later pictures will illustrate, the left-hand column of smoke is coming from a burning car. The right-hand smoke column is coming from a large portable generator unit. Where’s the “aircraft” smoke? The column of smoke to the interior of the building comes from a hole in the “C” ring, far from the supposed exit hole of the “aircraft.” (This picture was taken during an ‘evacuation’ of the site; fearing a second strike.)
Pictures demonstrate that there are three holes in the “C” ring. [Third ring from the building exterior.] Those three holes are sufficiently distant from each other to make any person wonder what actually happened.
There should be no doubt that this is a legitimate photo. Other photos show the airport fire-trucks having been at the fire scene, putting down the fire - with the roof line intact. In the photo above, the roof has collapsed and the airport fire trucks have withdrawn to an ‘evacuation’ position. In theory, there may be struggling survivors in the building. The un-burned jet fuel (mythical) could re-ignite. Yet the crew who can do the most good has withdrawn.
The picture shows, among other things, a lull in the Pentagon fire, sometime after the alleged initial fiery explosion, illustrated in the phony Pentagon security video. The fire equipment and ambulances are standing by - as though waiting for something to happen. How long had they been there? Look closely, the roof has collapsed. What was going on, that they should just wait? What was known? Why wouldn’t fire equipment heroically rush toward the obvious fire, on the Pentagon, of all buildings? Why is the scene not crowded with rescue personnel?
Notice that the column of dark smoke on the right roughly marks the alleged impact point. Notice the third-floor windows behind the heliport “control tower” cab — in good condition; they will later be pouring out flames - mysteriously. Note the number of windows from the smoke damage to the “columns” to the far left - behind the heliport tower “cab.” Later you will see fire pouring out of these, begging the question, “How did such a fire develop, with all that fire equipment just sitting there?” That’s no minor question!
Even with a report of another aircraft inbound, the majority of the rescue equipment is too close to be in a true “evacuation” position. If another strike was feared, it certainly wouldn’t be at the same site.
The most damning part of the pictures associated with the Pentagon, is that there is clearly no attempt to penetrate the interior, so as to save aircraft(?) occupants or possibly employee lives; Pentagon or contractors’. A videotape exists, which verifies that statement; it’s not just idle opinion.
This is the Pentagon! Just imagine, there isn’t even a well-developed fire, yet there is no major attempt to extinguish what fire there is - NOR to try to rescue anyone; while a rescue would be relatively easy. By any reasonable standard, this picture should show columns of water pouring into the flaming windows - there are none! Within any measure of “reasonable expectation,” the lawn should be crowded with fire trucks and ambulances. None of the famous ‘aluminum-clad’ suits are seen; indicating the purported hydrocarbon fire. What did they know?
For that matter, on a Tuesday, where were the contractors? There’s an interesting question, by itself. Was this another event on the order of the BATF people getting the morning off in the Oklahoma City bombing?
With a few seconds of thought, it should be clear that the emergency crews had no reason to think that an aircraft had hit the Pentagon. The “usual” pieces were not in evidence. The area was under construction; probably reported to be free of workers, or other occupants.
In the pictures of the collapsed portion, offices above the strike zone are free of fire damage, with offices far distant in full blaze. Are we to believe that the sprinkler system worked at the impact zone, but not further away?
Again, notice the obvious lull in the “fire,” in the picture below. The collective of the Pentagon pictures and videotape illustrates a strange delay in attacking the fire. On the Pentagon, in particular, there is something incredibly strange in that thought. In the background history, there is no accountability for such delays.
Once again, in the timeframe of this scene, a pullback was ordered by the FBI (per the After-Action report), pending the purported crash of Flight 93. Supposedly, another attack was feared on the Pentagon. Strangely, the building wasn’t evacuated, just the rescue crews. WHY? As one views this particular image, above, there is no doubt that a plane did not hit the Pentagon. There is no hole big enough to swallow a 757. There is no distinctive impact damage to the façade of the building, from the supposed high-speed wings and tail. The damage behind the construction fence demonstrates that nothing could hit that low, without taking out the fence and equipment/buildings in the construction area.
The post-collapse photo, above, makes it additionally clear that there was no damage to suggest a 757 strike. Remember that the damage is essentially at ground level. The construction trailers stand in the way of the alleged 52-degree wing path; but they are untouched! Even an 8-foot high cable spool, immediately to the left of the construction fence is untouched.
In the various pictures, notice the open fire station stall door - no splattered jet fuel to torch the building. Most importantly, remembering the imagery of the fireball, notice the green leaves on the tree next to the Pentagon wall - post impact!
Notice the three trailers behind the fence. Two will later burn to the ground - with the fire department on site!
Notice another detail, the fire truck (above) is Arlington Rescue 161. The absence of the airport trucks identifies this photo as being taken after the site evacuation order, delivered at 10:15 - due to a possible inbound aircraft (Flight 93). However, that flight was known to have crashed at 10:06. The “All-Clear” was sounded at 10:38.
In the picture below, the fire coming from the interior of the Pentagon instantly makes one ask what the fire departments were doing all day. Notice how far from the purported impact zone the fire is located. Once again, the Pentagon should have had incredible fire-fighting resources brought to bear. The continuation of the “burn” is utterly bizarre! One can only speculate that the “burn” was quite methodical; lacking an alternate and rational explanation.
The maneuvering of the fire trucks on the Pentagon lawn attests to the hardness of the ground. Yet, almost immediately, dirt and gravel was put over the entire lawn, hiding any remaining forensic evidence. BUT WHY?? A “special” access road to the damage site is conceivable; why the ENTIRE lawn? Note in the right-hand picture the material conveniently available for that ground cover. That’s asking a lot of “coincidence!”
SIMPLE GEOMETRY TELLS THE TRUTH!
Look to the evidence provided by elementary geometry. From the bottom of the 757 engines to the mid-line of the wing spar is right at ten feet. Add eight feet for the fence / cable-spool height & you have a wing impact at 18 feet - absolute MINIMUM! That assumes a one-inch clearance of the fence and/or cable spools. Any such impact would be on the second floor - IF there had been a 757!
Whether thinking in terms of a high-wing or low-wing aircraft, the lack of forward-moving impact damage and basic geometry tells the same truth - no possible airplane!
According to the “official” ASCE report, the ‘fuselage’ damage indicated a pattern consistent with an impact angle of 52 degrees. Thereafter, one has to question why the primary impact zone did NOT collapse - but the single peripheral (right wing) zone did - assuming one accepts the “official” account. In the “official” theory, the wings “folded;” they supposedly were threaded into the building, along the side of the fuselage. Then, how does one account for that collapse damage, far to the right side of the impact centerline? One also has to ask why there isn’t something similar seen on the left side of the purported fuselage strike zone.
The extent of the immediate damage to the right side of the purported impact point extends for approximately 20 feet. That doesn’t even begin to suggest a wing, extending from a 15-foot diameter fuselage!
Neither the reasonably anticipated forward-moving aircraft impact damage NOR the fire damage - from the distribution of fuel - is evidenced; or even suggested!
Just the occasion of the “crash” at that construction site is far too “convenient” to be any form of “coincidence,” relative to a seeming “random” terrorist strike. Imagine a terrorist picking the “Least-Risk Location” - even by chance!
Yet, we’re to believe that there were THREE such “least risk” strikes. IMPOSSIBLE!
No pilot will claim to be able to hit such a spot as the Pentagon base — under any conditions — in a 757 doing 300 Knots. As to the clearly alleged amateur pilots: IMPOSSIBLE!
Add the aerodynamic issue of “Ground Effect.” A high-speed wing would create a compression layer between the wing and the ground. The wing could NOT descend into that “Ground Effect” region, without the aircraft being in a pronounced dive - which is an impossibility - relative to the “official” story. Such a dive would have left a distinctive seismic impression (below); and a crater.
If the aircraft had been magically leveled off at the last second; with the wing(s) hitting that low, the engines would have broken off, leaving an impact impression in the lawn, with the nose of the aircraft plowing a ditch into the building.
We’re to believe that the aircraft hit level; leaving no seismic signature; the central impact being on the floor-line of the second story (below).
More impossible is an amateur pilot deciding to slip a B-757 through the ground floor window of the Pentagon construction site, versus taking the easy and extended target of the roofline - guaranteeing that the strike would do the most damage to human life, in particular.
Yet, look where the factual damage took place; with no suggestion of a 300 knot forward impact:
Any terrorist sophisticated enough to crash a 757 into ANY target would scope out the most desired points, for the intended “effect.”
In all pictures of the Pentagon damage, the exterior columns are broken next to the ground - impossible, relative to a “wing” strike, which should have been above the first floor.
Note the lack of “effort” in the photo, immediately below. Not a hose line or a ladder truck to be seen; and no ambulances. Remember, this was the Pentagon.
In the images above, note the vertical column, next to the purported entry hole on the second floor. Not even a small plane could have hit at the purported location, without destroying the column; inwardly. Note the general good condition of the windows; this wasn’t a major impact zone of a B-757.
Most close-up pictures of this area - portraying the ground floor - display the whole exterior columns - on the right of the damaged section - being broken uniquely to the side; they are not pushed inward. See below -
Also, notice the fire on the floor of the second story, where the aircraft is supposed to have impacted. If the floor is present, it’s certain that an aircraft didn’t enter there. It’s also certain that the vertical fin and horizontal stabilizers would never have morphed” their way past that point.
In the picture above, notice the lateral range of the damage, to the right of the purported impact hole; possibly ten feet! That range of damage barely accounts for more than the width of the purported fuselage, let alone any wing”or engine”damage.
The exterior columns (below) to the left of the damaged exterior section are shattered, with the dangling rebar bent outward.
Next, it’s necessary to ask, “Then, what DID cause that damage?” One next has to ask the same question of the interior damage.
The predominant smoke color in the photo (immediately above) is clearly NOT that coming from burning jet fuel. That will be true in all the photographs of the Pentagon strike — and Flight 93, in Pennsylvania. In all pictures of the Pentagon fire, the ONLY prominent “thick black smoke” emanates from the burning generator unit, within the construction area fence, not from anything associated with the supposed aircraft. An aircraft full of fuel, crashing at 300 Knots will NOT experience a delay in the full burning of its fuel. This isn’t a case of “Backdraft.”
Notice that in the first of the photographs, above, there is another fire going behind one of the most inner rings of the Pentagon. Later — yes, LATER - the fire which we’re to believe broke out from a 52-degree “aircraft” strike will appear. BUT, in the first fire shown, the fire is the wrong location for the alleged 52-degree “aircraft” strike.
In the various pictures of the Pentagon on 9-11, the wall of the “C” ring (immediately above) has three burn holes in the wall. The biggest of these - with the most smoke evidence - is to the left of the narrow bridge, and far from the alleged “punch-out” hole (arrow), with the scattered aircraft parts - some burned; some not. The supposed exit hole has the least in the way of smoke-staining on the wall.
In the pictures of the “official” exit hole, it’s apparent that what few parts are shown, there isn’t enough metallic mass to account for the hole. The incongruous fire patterns of the three exit holes are highly suspect, by themselves. The aircraft parts didn’t split to the left and right, as though a damage ‘team;’ then blast two more holes, 90 degrees to their diverted direction of travel. Without being able to see the damage continuity from the outer ring to the “C” ring; we’ll never be sure.
Remembering the image of the WTC aircraft strike, noe the minimal impact and consequent fire damage on the Pentagon from such a terrible (purported) crash. IMPOSSIBLE!
Let’s take the time to examine the basic purported crash”mechanics, from images -
- of the events from an elementary point of view:
In the image above, the placement of the equipment and cable spools attests to the factual wing damage - IF - the ‘official’ account was accurate.
Above, the impact dynamics are shown.
Above, the “Level Flight” dynamics are shown. In level flight, the aircraft would have destroyed the fence. The generator unit would have been struck by the engine, tearing the engine off the aircraft. If the engine had cleared the obstacles, the majority of the damage would have been predominantly above the second story.
A crows view:
In level flight, the right engine would still snag the construction area fence. Again, the primary damage would have been on at least the second floor.
The maximum damage is approximately 20 feet from the supposed fuselage. That portion of the purported “wing” mass should have easily sliced inward.
The picture above demonstrates the real-world dynamics of the purported “Pentagon Crash!” The right wing has broken at the root, while the left wing breaks forward - it’s design doesn’t allow for “negative” (forward moving) loads. In this crash, the impact of the right wing cause a left-hand rotation of the aircraft. The left wing - not being stressed for that motion - snapped forward; breaking with the dynamics of the impact. NOTHING even remotely similar is witnessed, or even suggested, at the 9-11 Pentagon - including the damage to the building!
PERCEPTION CONTROL (Hybrid Propaganda)
In the same fashion as the acceptance of the “Politically Correct” concept, Americans have been conditioned to detest the term “Conspiracy Theory.” Yet, in the domestic and international arenas, America is famous for being a global conspiracy fact! As to the 9-11 events, it is evident that there were some great psychological theorists behind the scenes.
Viet Nam veterans shake their head in disbelief:
“Gulf of Tonkin Resolution” = “9-11″
Even the same corporate players are involved, for all intents & purposes; starting with essentially the same Texas players.
Thus, if one were to stage an event such as the Pentagon “strike,” what would the American public expect — and accept?
1. Violent impact.
9-11 came at a horrible cost, but it was essentially a horrible “Soap Opera!” All the same ingredients; with the addition of harsh and bitter reality.
But, there is a major problem with 9-11. The ‘government’ assertions all fall apart. The documented facts - NOT opinion and innuendo - tell the opposite story. “Perception Control” aside, what ‘official’ 9-11 claim actually holds up against rather elementary tests? There’s a compelling thought!
So, what did happen — to any reasonable probability of fact? The answer is quite ugly — to those who believe — or want to believe - in the current American leadership.
At best, it was a missile — allegedly captured by the Pentagon security video camera — in some fashion - that hit the Pentagon, at approximately a 90-degree angle. What type of missile & warhead are uncertain. A shoulder-fired device?” A “Recoiless” gun? IF there was a missile, it was most likely fired from a truck in the vicinity of the trees, directly away from the strike point. That thought honors the high contour of the terrain away from the target wall; and the location of the factual damage to the Pentagon. Its obvious size — if there is any reality in the purported DoD security video - says that it was NOT a 757.
Why a Missile?
However unlikely, the idea of a missile hitting the Pentagon must be treated as a “possibility.” By any account, there is a random pattern to the Pentagon damage, such as three holes in the “C” ring. The pattern suggests blast effects trying to navigate their way through the interior columns, experiencing a “pin-ball” randomness. In the ASCE report, a “raised section” of the interior floor is cited. That could only have come from an explosion. Fire - alone - would have, at best, collapsed the floor. The explosion, suggested by the raised floor section, might represent an independent explosion, accounting for the perfectly round “official” blast hole in the “C” ring; with the unaccountable scattered aircraft parts.
It is also possible for the extra two holes in the “C” Ring to be a function of the back-blast of internal “cutting charges,” as well. One must remember that the collapsed section contained some very stout cement columns. So far no one is saying, and the necessary evidence was quickly destroyed.
The smoke damage on the external wall of the Pentagon is obviously legitimate. However, the purported security videotape presentation of the supposed aircraft / missile strike strangely displays a time-date stamp, which is a day-and-a-half later than the actual event. Perhaps that was the ‘preparation’ time of the videotape, versus the purported ‘capture’ time and date. Yet, the imagery is, strangely, pandered as an official” Pentagon release. By any reasonable standard, that tape should have been ’sealed’ primary forensic evidence; not bait for morbid curiosity. That videotape detail is too sloppy for words to describe. Yet, the imagery was successfully pandered by the media, without any significant questions being asked. In the CNN presentation of the security camera video, the time-date stamp is ‘mysteriously’ NOT displayed.
For those not convinced, look to the photo above; the supposed fireball didn’t leave a damage trail - of any sort. There was no scorching or even sooting to suggest that the fireball was factual. One would at least expect to see the closest construction trailers blown over, from the concussion. The windows of the building are not broken out in a wholesale fashion, nor are the windows of the heliport tower cab broken - or even sooted. A blast of that magnitude should have created a shadow of the Tower / Fire Station building; none there.
Let us pause.
Beyond the cited imagery, why would any rational person believe it could be a missile? - Because Donald Rumsfeld let it slip out during an interview with Parade Magazine, on October 12th, 2001; catching himself in one of his famous Freudian slips. Remember his Freudian view of draftees?
Rumsfeld: “Here we’re talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center.”
Return to the pandered security camera image.
The sequenced “action” security camera image - now mysteriously difficult to find - shows a forward-traveling blast, which appears to be gaseous, more than conventionally explosive event; given the prominent lack of damage to the wall. Fire damages upward, not downward. The color of the flame is inconsistent with burning jet fuel - compare the fire images of the WTC - below.
As you view the various photos of the day, it’s clear that the “missile” clearly did little more than scorch the Pentagon wall - at best; assuming one believes the security tape imagery is factual. Conceivably, the “fiery blast” might have come from the purported missile; or possibly from something on the order of a propane tank on the ground. The damage to the Pentagon is clearly slight, relative to the magnitude of the purported fiery blast. The vast majority of the windows in the path of the blast are not broken. The explosion must have been very brief - if factual. In any event, it was clearly NOT 5,000 gallons of jet fuel, burning out of control. Again, remember that there is no supporting seismic data.
According to a photo of a fallen Pentagon clock, the “event” took place at 9:31; not the sampled ‘ seismic’ time frame, embracing the ‘official’ time of 9:38. What seismic data has been lost forever? What could it have revealed?
In the fireball picture, note that the flame is clearly in front of the wall.
However, note the lack of fire trucks in this picture. Assuming the picture is real, it is probably one of the earliest shots. Note also - again - that the thick black smoke comes from the construction equipment area, with the fence still standing. The construction area fence lies well within the alleged 52-degree aircraft path.
Notice something else - look at the windows; no significant fire from within the building! What fire there is, clearly is normal structural fire; not jet fuel. If the flame comes from a gas main, in an underground utility vault, how does one account for underground damage? Remember the pristine condition of the lawn.
The flame color and propagation is wrong; with the requisite tattle-tale column of thick black smoke being missing. Again, what black smoke is seen in the various photos comes from the construction equipment area — not from the supposed impact point.
And, what of the fire to the left and right of the jetting flame? What would otherwise fuel such a fire?
Notice also, in the picture above, the light pole lying to the side, behind the railing. Certainly, the fire is an early picture. There has been no opportunity for the pole to be moved out of the way - for any reason. Yet, it lies to the side - not propelled toward the building. Its location is even incorrect. No damage to the railing is shown, as though the pole could somehow have been ‘propelled’ into place; tripping over the railing, in the process. Notice that the light pole is lying on another piece.
Look at this next picture, below. The pole is still nicely stacked upon it’s broken section, with a third piece nearby. Notice the incongruity of the pile damage. There is no motion-related trauma to the lawn.
There is no “300-Knot” damage to the pole - or any of the “downed” poles. For that matter, there is no “300 Knot” damage in any image of the 9-11 Pentagon! NONE! If it’s to be believed - at all - the security camera video shows the missile flying at very low level; too low to simply “clip” the top of the pole.
Look at the picture below. The construction area fence isn’t torn down by what should have been the outer 30 feet of the left wing. Notice the brick pattern above the hole behind the car — this is the left extreme of the purported impact hole.
Notice also that the fire - what little there is - comes from the second-floor windows. What happened to all that fuel which is supposed to be spilled on the ground floor. There is no evidence of any prominent fire in the natural channel for something as volatile as jet fuel. The geometry of a B-757 places the wing spar approximately five feet above the hole - IF the engines are one inch above the obstacles! Between the surviving fence and the cable spools, the impact would otherwise have to be above the first floor! Remember that the ‘official’ report has the aircraft banking to the left; where’s the associated ‘low-to-the-ground’ damage to the fence and cars?
Note that the rebar of the columns behind the car is bent outward - away from the 300 Knot impact. Any post-impact blast powerful enough to shatter concrete would have blasted out all adjacent windows! A close examination of the remaining structure says that the purported impact hole is approximately 40 feet wide! Given the purported 125-foot wing span of a 757, the damage is radically too small. Scenario - IMPOSSIBLE!
The purported Pentagon security camera video images clearly show a blast occurring in front of the wall — that would require a sophisticated “proximity fuse;” if the blast was factual. That blast imagery sets the stage for another conclusion. If that had been a B-757, the “pristine skin,” photographed on the Pentagon lawn -
Witness the polished aluminum of the factual aircraft - versus the purported “pieces,” found at -
The trained eye will also note the aircraft is equipped with Rolls-Royce RB-211 engines.
Later pictures of the “struck” light-poles show them adjacent to their mountings — not radically bent and propelled forward by the velocity of a jet. Their mounting plates are not damaged from the mounting bolts being “pulled through” from an impact. The poles don’t show any predominant “strike” damage. The only “bent” pole was hit by a taxicab, far from the alleged 42-degree angled path. There is no damage to the side of the cab, nor to the top of the hood. In all likelihood, it “fell” from the back of a truck.
In the various photograph collections of 9-11, many pictures display the white office walls to the left of the collapsed section.
The walls are free of the smoke damage, soot & heat of the “intense” fire that supposedly took place within the building - at the hottest point! The furniture is in good condition — in its original place. Heat rises, especially any of the reported “thousands of degrees.” But, the upper offices are nearly untouched by any damage, whatsoever. IMPOSSIBLE!
The ‘ground level’ / ‘engine dragging’ scenario assumes either a ‘diving’ crash, or that the laws of aerodynamics were suspended on 9-11, as at the supposed speed and it’s associated “Ground Effect” would have put the aircraft at least ten feet higher than asserted.
Relative to the prominent ground-level damage, if the aircraft was to have flown into the building in level flight, as described, the nose of the aircraft would have plowed a trench, given the geometry required to penetrate “Ground Effect.” Otherwise the laws of physics and aerodynamics would be keeping the aircraft approximately 30 - 50 feet above the lawn.
Again, in the close-in imagery of the damaged Pentagon wall -
- note that the columns are broken uniquely to one side. Observing the structural continuity; they are broken at the base and displaced to the left - not inward. The face of the columns display nothing to suggest damage or effect of an inward impact force from a supposed 300 Knot wing. The rotation ‘break’ at the top of the columns is clearly to the side, as well.
A closer look, below:
Note the volume of “out-pouring” of debris from WITHIN the building. That isn’t “impact” damage.
Note the forward location of the generator unit; it will be moved during the night, for a propaganda photo-op.
The aircraft parts in the various Pentagon interior photographs are shown fully exposed, not buried under rubble. The parts are too small and too few; clearly “salted,” in the parlance of miners. The site was clearly staged. The photos within the building, displaying the salted aircraft parts all too clearly show the missing debris of “collapsed” floors. Note the unburned and un-sooted dominance of the green anti-corrosion coating, “zinc chromate,” on so many parts.
In another “official” account, the bulk of the aircraft is supposed to have melted. However, it must be remembered that the aircraft skin is a tough aluminum alloy, not the thermally “frail” stuff of a beer can.
Many photos display a scattering of aircraft ‘confetti.’ The material is found far too distant from the building, to have been a creation of a 300 Knot impact.
In a news video of the day, a “police call” line of people is shown, picking up aircraft pieces. Note their distance from the pentagon.
The pieces are not photographed in place, nor documented, for a true forensic investigation - they are just collected. Notice, particularly, how fat the collectors are, from the Pentagon.
Notice that the landing gear strut (below) is clearly rusted from weathering - not uniquely “oxidized” by flames. Granted, some fire damage is present.
The official “punch-out” exit hole in the “C” ring is much smaller than the other two holes in the “C” ring; and shows precious little fire damage, versus two larger holes displayed well to the left of the “punch-out” [as viewed from the center of the Pentagon]. What was factual in the greater damage arena - suggested by the ‘unmentioned’ other two holes?
Again, the pieces on the lawn (below) could not possibly have survived the impact without severe “crumpling,” and/or smoke damage (sooting), at least. What parts are shown are quite real. Are these remnants from the 1995 Cali, Colombia crash? American 587 in New York?
The alleged aircraft was supposed to be equipped with Rolls Royce RB-211 engines. What engine has such a “combustor section,” shown in the photo, immediately below? Is it an early version of the GE CF6 engine?
Pentagon Engine Section (above)
Some of the pictures above display weather-corrosion.
The “thousands of degrees” would not be limited to the outer ring-section of the Pentagon. The “fuel” would not lag the projection of the “parts.”
One theory says that the aircraft jus all burned up and melted. Looking to the image below, imagine the keel-beams, the flooring and the wing spars conveniently “melting.”
Those images pose another mystery. In later photos, the third floor offices to the left of the impact, behind the heliport control cab, are in full blaze. Imagine the adjacent exposed offices safe from fire, yet offices far down the hall & insulated from the roof by the fourth floor are in full blaze. Something is very seriously wrong, just in that imagery.
A cheap motel fire would have more of a response from fire-rescue, than the Pentagon apparently had.
Visualize the fireball imagery of the WTC strike; look at the pristine lawn. Something very important is missing in this picture!
Those who looked into the details of other patently phony cover-up operations, such as TWA-800, recognize that scammed investigations are old news in America. One can only ponder the factsof the pay-off. Such things do not happen easily.
Something is seriously wrong in America. Those who are unconvinced need to task themselves with the question, What ‘official’ 9-11 claims actually hold up under elementary scrutiny? The number is few, relative to the enormity of the matter! Thereafter, what is one, then, to make of the al Qaeda claims; the WMD claims? Who does the money trail lead to?
What is America destined to confess to their children and grandchildren? This isn’t a case of the German people claiming, We didn’t know!
|© 2003-2011 S.P.I.N.E. Login|