Were High Explosive Charges Used At The Pentagon?

posted by mike dangerously
SPreston it looks like a missle impact or a demoliton charge. If it were jet fuel wolud there not be darker smoke?

Personally, I believe there is no possibility that a missile was used. It would have been even more risky than an aircraft. That leaves high explosive charges outside and inside the Pentagon, or an aircraft. If you look closely, you will see that the center of the initial hot white fireball is out away from the wall. If it was a warhead, then it was not a penetrator because the entire blast is rising up above the roof. A penetrator warhead would have taken the explosive yield deep inside. I think we can completely rule out a missile. Actually this applies somewhat to an aircraft also. If the kinetic energy was applied at the official speed of 535 mph, then why is so much of the initial fireball rising up above the roof, and not penetrating internally? So what besides planted explosives would have caused the interior damage and deaths?



There were several construction trailers sitting there along with waste containers and the undamaged polyethelene cable spools. Most likely several military rapid wall breeching kits were used to damage the exterior wall, and a Hollywood special effects type explosion for maximum Shock & Awe value was also used for the initial fireball. This explosive was likely placed inside one of the construction trailers along with a lot of small pieces of shredded aircraft aluminum, which would have been blown all over the area.

That Reagan National fire truck on the right is spraying the generator trailer. The roof has not yet collapsed. The external fires are mostly out. There are no visible larger pieces of aircraft debris anywhere on the lawn.


It appears that the few larger pieces were planted later in the confusion of the fire fighting and rescue efforts. No larger pieces can be seen anywhere in the first few minutes after the explosion. A military rapid wall breeching kit was apparently also used on the C-Ring exit hole wall.





The later jet fuel appearance of the smoke could have come from the diesel tank on the generator trailer, but likely they had more fuel in the waste containers. The testimony of April Gallup is key, because she and her baby boy were inside the E-Ring 35 feet from Ground Zero and they were not burned with jet fuel and April testified she saw NO JET FUEL anywhere.

Guns and Butter broadcast with Dave von Kleist interviewing April Gallup. There was an explosion and she crawled out from E-Ring through the hole onto the Pentagon lawn. She saw no jet fuel and nobody burned with jet fuel. She and her baby boy were about 35-45 feet from the alleged impact hole and no jet fuel was splashed on them. What happened to the huge infernos and fuel-air explosions inside which allegedly incinerated all the aircraft parts and engines and wheel hubs and baggage and seats?

Guns and Butter April Gallup - audio live testimony

The kinetic energy of a 535 mph aircraft should have completely pulverized April Gallup and her baby boy, sitting 35 feet from the place of impact. But from the videos and stills, we see that the blast effects were directed upwards and not inwards, which is why April and Elisha survived the initial blast effects.



High explosives were also used inside the Pentagon later. This Daryl Donley photo was taken a few minutes after the initial explosion and apparently catches one of those internal explosions. That is pole #5 in the foreground, and the camera is directly looking down the alleged flight path. That is not the generator fuel tank blowing, because it is to the right of the fireball.

But then comes the money shot! “Back home, Donley called a friend at Gannett, (oops,) a company that owns newspapers across the country (yes, we know.) He told her his story and that he had taken photos. Gannett bought his photos (how much?) and made them available to 100 papers across the country. ‘I never saw them in print, so I have no idea who used them,’ he said.”

(Well actually Daryl, nobody used them. Apparently, Gannett bought and then sat on the biggest 9-11 visual scoop of the nascent century.)

stevenwarran.blogspot.com...

Hurm,I need a to see what exactly a wall breaching kit is if it's what I am guessing it is then you would need a large amount of C-4 and planted explosives in the Pentagon.

posted by mike dangerously
Hurm,I need a to see what exactly a wall breaching kit is if it's what I am guessing it is then you would need a large amount of C-4 and planted explosives in the Pentagon.

Was the C-Ring Exit Hole Created With a Military Rapid Wall Breaching Kit

The Rapid Wall Breaching Kit (RWBK) is a portable wall-breaching tool used for a variety of heavy breaching missions. The system is comprised of the following:

M18 Detonator Assembly (2)
M81 Initiator (2)
Re-bar Cutter
Propstick and support
Instruction Sheet
Charge Bag
Silhouette
Explosive Charge Assembly
M19 Initiation System
M9 Bunch Block

www.ebaerospaceanddefense.com...

Why do you suppose that the perps felt it necessary to penetrate so deeply into the structure of the Pentagon?

I agree that the Pentagon incident is obviously a piece of self sabotage by the building's owners, but my own belief is that there was a missile strike and possibly explosives planted in the building as well.

I'm sceptical of any analysis of the security camera video pictures for obvious reasons.

The only reason I can see for the plane to have flown north of Citgo is to clear a flight path for something coming in south of Citgo, (in line with the damage later seen to have occurred in the building).

I know this doesn't prove anything but we do have Rummy's slip of the tongue when he referred to a "missile (inaudible)" at the Pentagon. We also have the presence of the C-130 and the Doomsday plane in the area at the time of the incident, both potential participants in guiding the flight of a missile.

As has often been said in these forums, the devil is in the details.

Two peculiar things about the Pentagon event stand out for me:

1) The seemingly superfluous deep penetration of the building.

2) The highly anomalous flight north of the Citgo station (so easily noticed by the various CIT witnesses) for no otherwise apparent reason.

[edit on 13-12-2008 by ipsedixit]

posted by ipsedixit
I know this doesn't prove anything but we do have Rummy's slip of the tongue when he referred to a "missile (inaudible)" at the Pentagon. We also have the presence of the C-130 and the Doomsday plane in the area at the time of the incident, both potential participants in guiding the flight of a missile.

As has often been said in these forums, the devil is in the details.

Two peculiar things about the Pentagon event stand out for me:

1) The seemingly superfluous deep penetration of the building.

2) The highly anomalous flight north of the Citgo station (so easily noticed by the various CIT witnesses) for no otherwise apparent reason.

Like Dubya, Dummy Rumsfeld is not as dumb as he pretended to be. Most likely Rummy's slip of the tongue was a deliberate planned slip. There is no possible way a missile could have knocked down a light pole nor moved the generator trailer. Therefore the five light poles and generator were staged. You agree that the decoy aircraft flew Over the Naval Annex and North of the Citgo and apparently over the Pentagon roof. The parking lot security videos had to be altered because they might have shown the flyover.

A missile would have either had a high explosive warhead which would have exploded at the wall, or a bunker buster penetrator warhead to carry the high explosive through the reinforced wall and deep into the interior. A single missile could not do both.

Most of the explosive power inside the Pentagon did not penetrate above the 3rd story floor slab. Yet a huge explosion was reported above the Pentagon roof and even directly witnessed from the Reagan National control tower a mile away. The huge pillar of smoke was visible for miles and for a long time. Therefore the initial explosion was at the wall whether it was from planted explosives in the construction trailers or a missile. The piller of smoke was not coming from the interior of the Pentagon because the roof did not collapse until about 30 minutes later. Two missiles is too ridiculous to consider.

The interior destruction and deaths had to be caused by planted explosives because a missile could not have penetrated into the interior with a high explosive warhead. Therefore it would have been foolish and extremely risky to use a missile when most of the damage required pre-planted explosives anyway. KISS; planted explosives are much more reliable and the damage can be much more easily controlled. It would be simple to preplant the explosives during the long construction period.



The missile and the trail of smoke, which many disinfo agents claimed was a missile trail, were photoshopped into the parking lot security videos to add confusion to go with Rummy's slip of the tongue. But the leaker who released the 5 still frames screwed them over before they were finished with the video alterations. They were stuck with two stupid looking fake videos. That is why the Defense Dept refused to call them legit and that is why jthomas uses them to reflect his moral values.

reply to post by SPreston

I'm not sure I buy everything you said on the subject of the explosions, but mainly because I don't know anything about what can and cannot be done with missiles and their warheads, or with explosives.

I'm still puzzled though, by the flight north of Citgo. Why not fly south of Citgo?

The only reason for this that I can think of is to clear a flight path for something else south of Citgo.

Or why not plant the explosives on a line with the actual flight path of the decoy plane north of Citgo?

The only reason for this that I can think of is that the damage was going to be inflicted by something that would leave a trail pointing toward the downed light poles.

I'm not a dogmatic fanatic on the subject, but I'm convinced that until the anomalous flight path of the decoy aircraft is accounted for in a convincing manner, we don't have a solution to the complete game plan at the Pentagon.

As far as Rummy the Dummy goes. I don't think that "accidentally" leaking the "false" information that a missile hit the Pentagon gets him any traction at all in any direction. I think that was a genuine case of his good angel seizing control of his tongue.

posted by ipsedixit
I'm not sure I buy everything you said on the subject of the explosions, but mainly because I don't know anything about what can and cannot be done with missiles and their warheads, or with explosives.

I'm still puzzled though, by the flight north of Citgo. Why not fly south of Citgo?

The only reason for this that I can think of is to clear a flight path for something else south of Citgo.

Or why not plant the explosives on a line with the actual flight path of the decoy plane north of Citgo?

The only reason for this that I can think of is that the damage was going to be inflicted by something that would leave a trail pointing toward the downed light poles.

Why not simple pilot error? The pilot or remote pilot simply erred too far north and it was too late to correct the flight path as planned along the official flight path, and he turned to starboard over the Naval Annex. The two flight paths are only separated by about two-three hundred feet.

Comparison between two flight paths

reply to post by SPreston


What you say is possible. It could be that. Also on your side of the argument, synchronizing the missile hit with the airplane flyover would be quite a trick. Not saying it couldn't be done. I never underestimate Uncle Sam and his mad scientists, but it would be a real masterpiece of electronic coordination.

I guess I just have to say, that for me the jury is still out on details like this.

I wonder what was carried away from the site under the big blue tarp? That is another anomaly. What could have been so secret?

Originally posted by SPreston
A missile would have either had a high explosive warhead which would have exploded at the wall, or a bunker buster penetrator warhead to carry the high explosive through the reinforced wall and deep into the interior. A single missile could not do both.

Im not sure i totallly agree with this.

High-explosive incendiarys They work off the principle of a Heat round, but are filled with flammable liquids to cause secondary fires.

Im not saying ive seen one or aware they exist. But what im saying is, is it beyond the realms of possiblity to incorporate a High Explosive Incendiary with a bunker buster type warhead? Combination penetrator-explosive although in reverse.

As i said, just a thought and is it beyond the realms of possibilty?


[edit: fixed quote tags]

[edit on 14-12-2008 by 12m8keall2c]

You know what would be a really big help here?

Sounds crazy but hear me out. What if there were all kinds of cameras that could have captured this incident? What if at least one of those cameras had a framerate at least as high as the ones my gas stations here use - 30fps. I just wish we had that kind of technology around the pentagon that day, then we would have some real video to analyze.

posted by SPreston
A missile would have either had a high explosive warhead which would have exploded at the wall, or a bunker buster penetrator warhead to carry the high explosive through the reinforced wall and deep into the interior. A single missile could not do both.

posted by Georgehairybush1
Im not sure i totallly agree with this.

High-explosive incendiarys They work off the principle of a Heat round, but are filled with flammable liquids to cause secondary fires.

Im not saying ive seen one or aware they exist. But what im saying is, is it beyond the realms of possiblity to incorporate a High Explosive Incendiary with a bunker buster type warhead? Combination penetrator-explosive although in reverse.

As i said, just a thought and is it beyond the realms of possibilty?

Perhaps. But all of the available information shows that the initial explosion was at or before the Pentagon wall. I don't think a missile is capable of carrying a DU penetrator and two separate high explosive warheads; one to blow at the wall and the other to blow deep inside the Pentagon 1st floor area.

Even an aircraft hitting the wall or the construction trailers has a problem because the evidence shows that the majority of the explosive power was expended up above the Pentagon roof. The kinetic energy could explain the small hole in the wall; but how did April Gallup and son escape burning up from jet fuel and pulverization by the alleged 535 mph kinetic energy of a 90 ton aircraft, only 35 feet away? April saw no sign of jet fuel anywhere. She saw no sign of an aircraft either.

Besides the actual aircraft flew the northern flight path and could not possibly have created the demonstrated official flight path through the Pentagon 1st floor. I think missile and aircraft are both ruled out and we are left with pre-planted high explosives which would have been simple to plant inside a military building in a construction area by the 9-11 planners. The PRIMARY SUSPECT had control of security over the entire area. The PRIMARY SUSPECT has a long history of covert and illegal operations against its own citizens and against innocent persons in other nations. Evidence planting and lying and blocked investigations are a normal pattern in their repertoire.

Diagram of three potential entry damage patterns into Pentagon Wedge One 1st floor area along three potential flight paths

The OFFICIAL STORY faithful defenders are stuck with the official Flight 77 flight path damage pattern through the E, D, and C-Rings to the Exit Hole, where there was also no sign of jet fuel.





[edit on 12/14/08 by SPreston]

posted by angel of lightangelo
You know what would be a really big help here?

Sounds crazy but hear me out. What if there were all kinds of cameras that could have captured this incident? What if at least one of those cameras had a framerate at least as high as the ones my gas stations here use - 30fps. I just wish we had that kind of technology around the pentagon that day, then we would have some real video to analyze.

Indeed. I wonder why a multi-trillion $$$$ defense system would buy 500 dollar hammers and 600 dollar toilet seats and 75 dollar security video cameras?



I guess the FBI had good reason to be ready on the scene at the scripted explosion to confiscate all the videos and cameras in the surrounding Pentagon area. The Defense Department did their share by censoring all the roof and Naval Annex videos.




[edit on 12/14/08 by SPreston]

reply to post by SPreston


Thanks, I forgot all about the toilet seats and hammers scandal and that is a great point. So many on here keep pushing the idea that the cameras and storage space for footage were the lowest quality available. I do not understand why the place I buy my pork rhinds can afford a more advanced level of security than the pentagon. I also do not understand why anyone would even buy that.

posted by angel of lightangelo
Thanks, I forgot all about the toilet seats and hammers scandal and that is a great point. So many on here keep pushing the idea that the cameras and storage space for footage were the lowest quality available. I do not understand why the place I buy my pork rhinds can afford a more advanced level of security than the pentagon. I also do not understand why anyone would even buy that.

The faithful defenders of the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY always buy what they want to believe. They are all so pathetically obvious that I cannot see how they can look in a mirror each morning. There are not one or two or three contradictions to reality; but hundreds in the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY.

After reading the list of what is in a wall breaching kit I can see it being used in this instance,perhaps a black ops demolition team was used to hit the Pentagon this scenario makes the most sense to me: On the morning of 9-11 a rouge black ops teams attacked the Pentagon in order to ensure the neo-con agenda would have little opposition,what better way to fool the public and the world into buying into a thinly disguised attempt to grab the remaining oil in the world then to claim we were hit by terrorists? the Bush Admin had been looking for a way to build that trans-caucus oil pipeline.

[edit on 033131p://2126 by mike dangerously]

This thread got really quiet after all the talk of how asinine it was to believe that they do not have better cameras and recording equipment. Where are all the believers lately? I was really hoping someone could explain the same group of people spending more on a wrench than the security of the country.

posted by angel of lightangelo
This thread got really quiet after all the talk of how asinine it was to believe that they do not have better cameras and recording equipment. Where are all the believers lately? I was really hoping someone could explain the same group of people spending more on a wrench than the security of the country.

Not bloody likely.

I imagine many of them have been having extreme difficulty looking in the mirror in the morning, and especially into the faces of their innocent children in the evenings.

reply to post by SPreston


Well I know Throatyogurt would have been here with his obnoxious avatar. I am almost sad he is not still with us just to keep this thread alive.