I'm thinking the guy who wrote this article was a phony. He doesn't seem very technical and doesn't use a lot of the terminology I'd expect
someone with his alledged background to use. He doesn't seem very familiar with crash investigation procedures either.
One example is when he keeps saying "big hole in the ground" instead of calling it a crater or impact crater.
He also complains that private investigators were not allowed near the Flight 93 crash site. Of course they weren't! Why would he think they would
be allowed? This was a crime scene for a hijacking and an attack on American soil. The public is not going to be allowed to go roaming around a
crime scene like that! That statement he made just blows my mind.
He also says:
On the contrary, it has been reported that the aircraft, registry number N591UA, is still in operation.
Anyone with his supposed technical background in accident investigations and reviewing reports of them would be more thorough than that. You don't
rely on opinions and conjecture when conducting an investigation. You stick to the facts. He doesn't do that here, he simply spreads a rumor. Way
to go, Mr. Professionally Trained Accident Investigator!
Finally, he makes it a point to state the plane that struck the Pentagon had a 125 foot wingspan and the hole in the Pentagon was only 65 feet
This aircraft, with a 125-foot wingspan, was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon, leaving an entry hole no more than 65 feet
Just how much exposure has this guy had to aircraft? And how much does he know about the Pentagon? If he's a retired Colonel with 30 years and I
was an E-5 with 6 years, he should know more about the Pentagon than I do. But apparently that's not the case.
First off, the wings of an aircraft are not superstrong, undestructable, unmoveable objects. I'm always slightly scared when I get on an airplane
and watch the wings bounce up and down when the plane taxis down the runway. The wings are not very rigid.
The side of the Pentagon that got hit was almost finished remodeling. It had been rebuilt to make it stronger, so it could resist car bombs and other
similar events. The original Pentagon was built quickly in the 40's and most of it was old and crumbling when the remodeling started. The area the
plane hit was the strongest part of the Pentagon. It had new steel reinforced concrete, new structures, and new bullet proof windows, among other
Now when this aircraft came in, the wings surely would not have stayed in place and drove through the pentagon. It's ludicris to think that. The
penetration of the fuselage and resulting explosion created the 65 foot hole.
I'm convinced this letter is another in the long history of faked 9/11 documents that offer proof of a Government conspiracy.