Questions about the 9/11 Pentagon attack

I have heard conspiracy theorists deny, or at least doubt, that American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon on 9/11, but I have never heard a reasonable or adequate alternative explanation that fills in the gaps that the official story otherwise accommodates for.

I have a couple of questions on the matter and ask that anyone who answers provide clear and concise answers and not refer me to some long, drawn out explanation that averts these important questions.

If Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon on 9/11...

1.) What hit the Pentagon, where did it come from, and who sent it?

2.) What happened to Flight 77 and the people on it?


I have an open mind on the matter, but no patience for evasion of a direct answer. If you cannot provide one then please, for the sake of resolution, do not muddy up the conversation by extending your commentary beyond these questions - let your silence testify to your not knowing.

Originally posted by walman

2.) What happened to Flight 77 and the people on it?

Maybe they are working on a top secret space ship project on some faraway island.

A partial list of the occupations of the flight 77 passangers.

a senior scientist with the US Navy, retired Army.

A third-generation physicist whose work at the Navy was so classified that his family knew very little about what he did each day. They don't even know exactly why he was headed to Los Angeles on the doomed American Airlines Flight

a Boeing engineer in Integrated Defense Systems; he served in the US Air Force for four years, and for the National Security Agency for 14 years.

a director of program management at Raytheon, US Army (ret.) who helped develop and build anti-radar technology for electronic warfare. Raytheon's website notes that they are leaders in every phase of the Precision Strike kill chain; are the world's leading organization at Missile Defense; provides state-of-the-art technology to detect, protect and respond to terrorism and provide Homeland Defense; and that their technology forms the eyes, ears and brains of Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance systems, from the Predator to the Global Hawk.

a retired naval aviator who worked for Veridian Corp., a defense contractor, who was working with military aircraft and weapons systems

A Navy test pilot who worked on the development of the F18. "He had done a number of black programs -- which means top-secret," said his son. "We were given no details."

an electrical engineer with defense contractor BAE Systems.

largest technical support supplier to the US Navy. BAE Systems is an industry leader in flight control systems, which are present on nearly every US military aircraft. BAE electronic warfare systems such as their jamming system are vital to the US Navy operations.

2 Boeing propulsion engineers: a lead Propulsion Engineer and a Project Manager with Boeing Satellite Systems,

a lead engineer for Boeing Satellite Systems.

a software architect with Lockheed Martin Corp., US Army (ret.).

A manager in the systems and software architecture department.

a Vice President for software development, EMSolutions and retired Lieutenant Commander, Navy. He spent 20 years in the US Navy, where he developed high capacity signal processors, multi-processor application software and innovative signal processing algorithms. EMSolutions maintains a facility security clearance, and has contracts with Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) and BAE Systems.

a technical group manager at Xon Tech, a defense-related research and development firm. He previously worked as an engineer at the Naval Research Lab. Also a technical manager of Xon Tech

a retired Navy Rear Admiral, former Navy pilot, and retired American Airlines pilot.

a senior executive at the Defense Department.

A budget analyst/director of the programming and fiscal economics division who worked at the Pentagon.
a former Navy electronics technician worked as a Department of Defense contractor with Vrendenburg Co. in Washington

managing partner and co-founder of Stratin Consulting. and retired Marine Corps Lieutenant and Vietnam War veteran

a lawyer who had worked with the Navy Judge Advocate General's Corps.

and of course, there was Barbara Olson, attorney, CNN Commentator and wife of the United States Solicitor General.

911review.org...

The unusual passanger list of flight 77.

killtown.911review.org...

I believe a cruise missile hit the pentagon, painted up to look like an AA jetliner. Flight 77 disappeared from the radar over West Virginia. As it got closer to DC, the air traffic controllers thought it was a military jet due to the maneuvers it was doing, something no 757 could do.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
I believe a cruise missile hit the pentagon, painted up to look like an AA jetliner. Flight 77 disappeared from the radar over West Virginia. As it got closer to DC, the air traffic controllers thought it was a military jet due to the maneuvers it was doing, something no 757 could do.

This isn't true. Air Traffic Controllers at Dulles thought AA 77 was a military jet because of its manoeuvres which were not compatible with an airliner giving their passengers a comfortable ride. Nobody said anything about a Boeing 757 being incapable of those manoeuvres.

Originally posted by walman

If Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon on 9/11...

1.) What hit the Pentagon, where did it come from, and who sent it?

On the basis of the known evidence we do not know for sure what hit the Pentagon. This is because the chain of evidence connecting the plane that left Dulles with the one that hit the Pentagon is broken. As with all the planes that day Flight 77's transponder was switched off and its identifying signals ceased. A few minutes later an anonymous radar signal was picked up that was believed to be AA 77 returning to Washington but we do not know this for sure.

It would be very easy to fill in the critical gap. It is reported that a substantial piece of the engine was found. Many of its parts will be stamped with the tail number of the plane it belonged to. If this routine forensic investigation has been done the findings have not been made public.

2.) What happened to Flight 77 and the people on it?

There are a few theories around but they're all conjecture. Take you pick. My advice would be to take one thing at a time. I would have thought the first priority is formally to identify the plane.

reply to post by In nothing we trust

The unusual passanger list of flight 77.

Unusuall for a flight leaving say, London, but not Washington DC. This sounds like the pathetic argument that too many of the witnesses on the highway that day had government, press or political ties. In Washington, DC. Wow.

reply to post by Asktheanimals

Firefighters Carlton Burkhammer and Brian Moravitz "spotted an intact seat from the plane's cockpit with a chunk of the floor still attached."

Since when do cruise missiles come equipped with seats?

Most be a new model.......

reply to post by winston_jones

It would be very easy to fill in the critical gap. It is reported that a substantial piece of the engine was found. Many of its parts will be stamped with the tail number of the plane it belonged to. If this routine forensic investigation has been done the findings have not been made public.

"The part in question is the power supply for the emergency lights. ...I assure you it was Flight 77, AA 757 5BP."

Any more nonsense...?

Originally posted by walman
I have heard conspiracy theorists deny, or at least doubt, that American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon on 9/11, but I have never heard a reasonable or adequate alternative explanation that fills in the gaps that the official story otherwise accommodates for.

I have a couple of questions on the matter and ask that anyone who answers provide clear and concise answers and not refer me to some long, drawn out explanation that averts these important questions.

If Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon on 9/11...

1.) What hit the Pentagon, where did it come from, and who sent it?

2.) What happened to Flight 77 and the people on it?


I have an open mind on the matter, but no patience for evasion of a direct answer. If you cannot provide one then please, for the sake of resolution, do not muddy up the conversation by extending your commentary beyond these questions - let your silence testify to your not knowing.

to answer your questions:

1.) I do not know what hit the Pentagon... but I do know it could not of been a Boeing.

2.) read Operation Northwoods and keep an open mind to what is suggested in that document.

The problem for the conspiracy theorists is that the Pentagon isn't out in the middle of the desert or on the bottom of the ocean. It's in the middle of an industrial park with office buildings, residences, highways, a river with marinas, etc, so there were HORDES of eyewitnesses who were there when the Pentagon was attacked, from journalists to motorists to even an immigrant watering the lawns. They all say it was a plane that hit the Pentagon, and many of them even identified that it was an American Airlines craft. That's not even including the fact aircraft wreckage was found inside the Pentagon like engines, landing gear and the black box.

Its one thing to suspect a gov't coverup, but this whole "cruise missile hit the Pentagon" bit is not only pointless, it's almost outright delusion. It's like insisting that JFK was really stabbed and the Zapruder film was staged and everyone in Dallas was a secret disinformation tricking us into believing he was shot. At what point does a conspiracy theory have too much conspiracy theory in it?

reply to post by winston_jones



Not sure (but I have a good guess) where you are getting this "information"....but it is loaded with inaccuracies.

On the basis of the known evidence we do not know for sure what hit the Pentagon.

False. There is NO doubt (except in the crackpot fringes that comprise the majority of the so-called "truth movement") that American 77 was intentionally crashed at the Pentagon. NO doubt.

This is because the chain of evidence connecting the plane that left Dulles with the one that hit the Pentagon is broken.

Oh, THAT'S a new one!! "chain of evidence"?? Hogwash, and complete nonsense. The full, uninterrupted record of all the movements of the airplane are known, as they were clearly captured by the Digital Flight Data Recorder, which was recovered at the crash scene, and yielded viable information.

As with all the planes that day Flight 77's transponder was switched off and its identifying signals ceased.

Yet another sign that "bad" so-called "facts" continue to be spread, whether due to innocent ignorance, or for some other reason.

THREE of the four transponders were selected to "STBY" (Standby. There actually is no "OFF" position, but this comparable, in that it doesn't transmit any info, when in STBY). However, in the case of United 175, the transponder was left in the original mode (as set by the REAL pilots), so it continued to transmit a beacon code, as well as altitude ("Mode C") information. The hijacker flying changed the four-digit code (twice), thinking that was sufficient. It DOES have the effect of losing the computerized data tags associated with the discrete transponder code originally issued, however as it continued to "squawk" a code, it stood out much better than the other three, which could STILL be seen on radar, simply by searching for the "skin paint", the physical return....known as "Primary radar return". American 77 was located from its primary return. Later, it was VISUALLY IDENTIFIED, while still in flight int eh D.C. area, by an Minnesota Air National Guard C-130 crew, who had just departed form Andrews AFB, enroute to Minneapolis, MN that morning.

These facts are on record, if people would please bother to look them up.

A few minutes later an anonymous radar signal was picked up that was believed to be AA 77 returning to Washington but we do not know this for sure.

Yes, as mentioned above, it was SEEN visually. By at least two pilots. AND, the personnel in the Tower at the Washington National Airport. They are, in that location, roughly a mile or so away from the Pentagon. Look at Google Map, to check for yourselves. Think about the fact that ATC personnel have binoculars, as regular equipment to augment their duties, in the Air Traffic Control Tower. I daresay, an airplane can be spotted, with binoculars, even if five (or more) miles away. They knew where to look, because the Tower "Cab" also has radar screens, tied in with the local TRACON system's radar facility.

It is reported that a substantial piece of the engine was found.

Yes. Many pieces, as a matter of fact. AND, many many many other parts and components, ALL specific to a Boeing 757.

Many of its parts will be stamped with the tail number of the plane it belonged to.

Here, yet another fallacy....since you're referring, firstly, to the engine parts in this comment....it is glaringly incorrect. NO, the "tail number" of the airplane is NOT stamped on its engines' various parts. Not sure who told you that.....I'd take anything else "they" told you with the grain (or shaker) of salt that it deserves.

If this routine forensic investigation has been done the findings have not been made public.

FALSE!!!

www.ntsb.gov...

And, (including data on United93); www.ntsb.gov...

I would have thought the first priority is formally to identify the plane.

Already done. And, the information in this one post is by no means the extent of it, there is much, much more.

Originally posted by weedwhacker

The full, uninterrupted record of all the movements of the airplane are known, as they were clearly captured by the Digital Flight Data Recorder, which was recovered at the crash scene, and yielded viable information..

It is true that a FDR was found, though it only confuses matters further. It's the one that shows that the cabin door was never opened during the flight.

Incidentally, though the NTSB was given access to the FDR you fail to mention that, for the first time since its inception in 1967, the Air Accident Investigation Division of the NTSB took no further part in investigating any of the plane crashes of 9/11. It is the NTSB you should be quoting with regards to the provenance of aircraft parts found in the rubble, but cannot because it was not involved.

There actually is no "OFF" position

The transponder has an on/off switch

in the case of United 175, the transponder was left in the original mode (as set by the REAL pilots), so it continued to transmit a beacon code, as well as altitude ("Mode C") information...These facts are on record, if people would please bother to look them up..

Source?

it was SEEN visually. By at least two pilots. AND, the personnel in the Tower at the Washington National Airport.

Do I really need to point out that the visual recognition of a 757 in AA livery is not adequate in this instance? We're after a specific plane here, not a generic type.

the "tail number" of the airplane is NOT stamped on its engines' various parts .

Correct. To be precise it's a code that enables it to be traced to the tail-number. As a standard safety procedure key parts are coded and documented at installation. It's a system to make doubly sure that parts are maintained and replaced after the appropriate number of flying hours and ensures also that in the event of an accident the full flying and maintenance history of individual parts can be retrieved.

Originally posted by winston_jones
Incidentally, though the NTSB was given access to the FDR you fail to mention that, for the first time since its inception in 1967, the Air Accident Investigation Division of the NTSB took no further part in investigating any of the plane crashes of 9/11.

Emphasis mine.

Isn't this kinda self defeating? The attacks of 911 were not accidents.

Do I really need to point out that the visual recognition of a 757 in AA livery is not adequate in this instance? We're after a specific plane here, not a generic type.

It's not adequate? Why? What possible reason would there be to substitute an AA 757 for another 757? That means you then have to dispose of the passengers, somehow get their remains into the Pentagon, replace the FDR in the plane that crashed, etc, etc.

It would be a whole lot of extra work for absolutely no reward surely? Especially as two passenger planes were already crashed into the towers.

Anyone who looks at the pentagon facade immediately after impact and concludes that it was an airliner is either being paid by the perpetrators or is an idiot. Where's the plane? Look at the lawn. Look at the wire spools. Look at the building! What in the hell is wrong with you people? Is the truth so terrible that you can't accept it?
Weedwacker, get a life. Why do you persist?

reply to post by winston_jones


I see someone is getting all their "information" from 9/11 'conspiracy' websites, who don't have, in most instances, the faintest clue.

It is true that a FDR was found, though it only confuses matters further. It's the one that shows that the cabin door was never opened during the flight.

Yet another of the red herrings, and inconceivably idiotic falsehoods that still gets spread around. (AND, I know the initial source of this nonsense, it's from that group that profess to be "pilots". Well, some are, but apparently anything they "think" they find as a "smoking gun" that later turns out to be false? Nah, don't post any corrections, just let the same wrong info fester....).

The 'open'closed' status of the Flight Deck Door is NOT...I repeat, NOT a required parameter to be recorded by the FDR. It is an optional function, at the choosing of the specific airplane operator.

(As proof, I could point you to the accident report of Egypt Air 990, for example. And many others I have read....when, in CVR transcripts, there is often mention of certain sounds picked up by the CAM, or "Cockpit Area Microphone". In many instances, there is a note such as "Sound of cockpit door operation" or, "Sound of cockpit door opening", etc. NOT a reference to the FDR information that would verify such status...BECAUSE, not airplanes have that feature!!)

Furthermore, the FDR records for anywhere between 20-30 hours total (depends on manufacturer, and date built, etc). It is patently ludicrous to believe that at NO TIME, in any previous flights, was the door never opened. That entire claim is baseless.

Incidentally, though the NTSB was given access to the FDR you fail to mention that, for the first time since its inception in 1967, the Air Accident Investigation Division of the NTSB took no further part in investigating any of the plane crashes of 9/11.

Because, the NTSB is tasked with accident investigation for purposes of assigning cause...reasons. The cause of these crashes is well known. NTSB assisted, therefore, with the re-creation and such, to help picture what went on, onboard...and during the scenarios, to the best of the available information.

The transponder has an on/off switch

Oh?? You state that with such certainty. Between the two of us here, which one do you think is the airline pilot? (Hint...it's me). You might be referring to the type of control heads used on transponders in General Aviation type airplanes...but NOT on a Boeing jet.

Let's look at two airliner examples:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/84e3a2201d4f.jpg[/atsimg]

The instrument panel color (the light tan) identifies this as a Boeing, and is typical of the 757/767/777. The exact specifics of each control head vary, per the company who makes it, and what the airline chooses to buy.

Also, in most cases, the incorporation of TCAS (**)controls are part of the transponder control head.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(**) For those interested, one description fo TCAS, from Wiki, just so as to not clog the thread with (yet more) technical drivel....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The rotary switch on right controls funcitons. Settings are, clockwise: "STBY", then "ALT OFF" (this means, it is "ON", but not reporting altitude --- Mode C), "XPNDR" (now, Mode C is transmitted too), "TA ONLY" (that is "Traffic Advisory" -- part of the TCAS), and "TA/RA" (full TCAS mode). The integrated "TEST" button on top of the rotary knob tests the TCAS --- makes it run through its various alert modes.

Here, for comparison, a control head from a B-737. Same features, just slightly different-looking knobs arrangements:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/88537134de51.jpg[/atsimg]

Main difference, after "STBY", it's labeled "ALT RPTG OFF". Means same thing, as above position "XPNDR".

As usual, you can see a switch, because there are two complete transponders typically installed, only one can be used at a time. ALSO, you may select which altimeter (or more correctly, ADC), (Captain's or First Officer's) provides the altitude reporting. They all have an IDENT button, and of course, it's not labeled well, but "TEST" button on top of the teardrop-shaped function selector knob. Just like the other one.

"STBY" stops the device from transmitting, but doesn't remove power. A circuit breaker could be pulled, if desired...but it's not usually necessary, normally.

Source?

Here, the question was about UAL 175's xponder....I will refer to this video of the recollections of actual ATC personnel involved. It focuses more on AAL 11 and UAL 175, not the Pentagon and AAL 77, but submit it since asked:

Google Video Link

Do I really need to point out that the visual recognition of a 757 in AA livery is not adequate in this instance? We're after a specific plane here, not a generic type.

You contradicted yourself. Visually recognizing a 757....is not a "generic" type. See?
Simple: Only ONE AAL B-757 was missing. A B-757, in AAL's paint scheme was seen, and was also not identified as ANY OTHER airplane. To suggest that is "not adequate" is quite a stretch of denial.....

Correct. To be precise it's a code that enables it to be traced to the tail-number.

Well, you are really trying to talk about a "Serial Number". However, it's far more complicated, on an airliner, given the way components are constantly being changed out for overhaul, swapped for maintenance reasons, replaced for maintenance reasons, etc. Those records are kept (should be meticulously, or else fines are imposed by FAA. Most cases, all US airlines comply well. Some have minor paperwork fiascoes, but overall, the tracking is there, and accurate. There was no doubt at all, ever raised, as to the authenticity of these components....EXCEPT by people in the "truth movement" who have an unrealistic impression of how things work....

As a standard safety procedure key parts are coded and documented at installation. It's a system to make doubly sure that parts are maintained and replaced after the appropriate number of flying hours and ensures also that in the event of an accident the full flying and maintenance history of individual parts can be retrieved.

Yes, well said. And, when any identifiable, by S/N parts were compared, there were correct matches. Problem is, some laypeople seem to think that EVERY little, niggling part is somehow "stamped" with an identifiable (unique) number. In many cases, it is the assembly, in the case of a complex component like an engine, for instance, that is --- once assembled --- tracked as a unit. Until, or unless, during its service life, various individual components are removed/replaced, in the course of normal procedures, or for repairs.

Thing is, in cases of individual parts that are NOT time-limited, or limited by number of cycles in service, "widget A" is identical to another "widget A"....they are identified by PART #. Not individually by unique S/Ns. It depends on the part. And its function. Like.....many examples. Light bulbs, for instance. Just to get you thinking....

reply to post by dillweed


Because obviously you've seen lots of planes crash into the Pentagon and therefore know exactly what it should look like.

Originally posted by weedwhacker

False. There is NO doubt (except in the crackpot fringes that comprise the majority of the so-called "truth movement") that American 77 was intentionally crashed at the Pentagon. NO doubt.

Except for, you know, the government refusing to release any video of said plane hitting the Pentagon.

That's what makes me doubt the notion that it was American 77 that hit the Pentagon; if officials had released any of the other footage, then we could start putting this to rest.

And don't tell me that I'm "wrong" or that that's "false." There's no way that the only camera the Pentagon had on it was a crummy gas station security cam. If we're expected to believe this--and it is true--then our country is in more trouble than we though.

Well I dont know if I will get in trouble for posting this link but..
Cathearder someone from ATS did an article on the pentagon.. and then someone else did an article disputing that article..

I will place both here so you can see the difference..

This is Cathearder's post here..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

and this is the rebuttel..

Evidence That a Frozen Fish Didn't Impact the Pentagon on 9/11. and Neither Did a Boeing 757

And the ATS version..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You can judge for yourself on what you believe, dont let us say otherwise.. I cant comment to much on this subject because i dont know alot about it.. Other than there is no definate proof of a plane hitting that building.

Originally posted by dillweed
Anyone who looks at the pentagon facade immediately after impact and concludes that it was an airliner is either being paid by the perpetrators or is an idiot. Where's the plane? Look at the lawn. Look at the wire spools. Look at the building! What in the hell is wrong with you people? Is the truth so terrible that you can't accept it?
Weedwacker, get a life. Why do you persist?

This arrogance isn't so much as to express disbelief at the obstinance of others, but more of a reassurance to yourself as to why others aren't swallowing this drivel as easily as you yourself have. The Pentagon was surrounded by office buildings, dwellings, highways, even a marina, and there were hordes of witnesses from journalists, motorists, and even an immigrant from El Salvador tending the lawn who specifically saw that it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon. These are the facts relayed by the eyewitnesses who were there and this cannot be debated even by those damned fool conspiracy web sites you're going to for all your information.

Regardless of what oddities you imagine there are, they necessarily were caused by this passenger jet. No amount of your "what is wrong with you people" game playing is going to magically make it into a cruise missile, UFO, or anything else for that matter regardless of how zealously you wish it is so. "Is the truth so terrible that you can't accept it?" is damned right.

These photos should tell you everything.... The damage doesnt even match...
Look how wide the damage is with WTC1 compared to the Pentagon...