9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

Zaphod58, in retrospect, does your remark,

Yeah there's a lot of heat, but not nearly as much as you think there is. It blends with the air and dissipates a lot faster than you realize. Not saying it's not hot, but it's not super hot like people think

by any chance, remind you, or others likeminded, of the 'heated' discussions about the WTC fires, 'getting hot enough to weaken or melt the core collumns' ? After I have been watching now the full video for the first time : video.google.com... from this ATS thread: www.abovetopsecret.com... it seemed the right moment to get involved in the debate again. I was extremely impressed by the remarks made by the originator of this video footage ( Camera/Narrator: Richard A Siegel ) at the 1:40 to 1:44 hr timestamps. One remarkable plea, which must hit you especially hard, and everybody else who ever served in the airforce : " Where were you (the USAF), when we, the american people, needed you most, in our darkest hours ? We paid for you, we supported you, we respected you, where were you ? " Another one : " Freedom never comes cheap, it has a price we must be willing to pay. " When this revelation, those original video images and accompanying audio will spread all over America, and abroad, the inevitable can no longer desperately tried to be stopped anymore, by the governments, cooperations and media moguls involved in the obvious cover up of treason at an unimaginable scale. I however still worry extremely about the reaction of the average americans, and the possible implications; however, let's hope this signature will still prevail all over the nation :

The military in this country can't win for losing. People screamed bloody murder about their budget after the cold war, so the USAF cut down on the alert fighters, which saved a lot of money and cut a lot of projects and made people happy. Then 9/11 happens, and they only have 21 fighters ready to scramble, and people scream about the USAF not being able to defend us.

to just simply load any available jetfighters with a full load of boardcannon shells ? Why on earth would you, as a basecommander or whatever rank, want to outfit any jetfighter with the full pack of weaponry, when you know they are engaging passenger airliners, unarmed, which are clearly intended to dive into your homeland's landmarks? I am talking about the Pentagon attack here, when everybody knew this was an unfolding attack on the US, with "highjacked" passengerplanes. You will order to shoot first a warning tracer round in front of the nose of the aircraft, standard policy, and if the plane doesn't respond, you take out ONE motor with life ammunition. Or any other nonvital part of the steering capabilities of that plane. That was exactly what JUST ONE airbase commander ordered, against his orders to stand down, he neglected in a patriotic rage, all his orders, and lo and behold, what happened next? His first 2 jetfighters got amazingly fast airborne, and THEN GOT SEND OUT TO THE ATLANTIC OCEAN by some treasonous flightcontrollers. I do not believe in fairytales. Those flightcontrollers should have stand on trial for treason. Never heard about that however. Parts of the topbrass of your USAF were involved in TREASON. And they got PROMOTED for it. How far must your country glide down the slope of treasonous deeds, to get you and others to see the obvious? And don't get that whole story out of the closet again about how long it takes to fully arm a jetfighter , any base commander with a sane mind would send his FIRST fighters out with just the cannons loaded in that situation, the rest COULD be send afterwards with the full metal jacket pack attached, but AGAIN : that would be seriously OVERKILL in that situation. The reaction time and magnitude of operations from the USAF considering the exact situation on 9-11 stinks to high heaven.

And of course you know better than them how long it would take, or why the fighters were sent over the Atlantic first, and everything else right? Because you know everything, because it was written in a BOOK. My god it's in a book, it MUST BE TRUE!! Books NEVER lie! Yes, let's send two armed fighters screaming through the middle of crowded traffic lanes, instead of out where it's clear and they can make a dash to NYC instead. Safety? Who gives a damn about safety! Let's make MORE planes crash from the mid air collisions! Obviously we should have loaded the guns, because simply firing two rounds in front of the nose of the plane would have scared the crap out of the hijackers, and instantly made them see the error of their ways and they would have landed at the nearest airport and surrendered.

Valhal brought up a good point in her radio interview. About this whole damn missile hitting the pentagon thing. I read about it on my fave 9/11 site about how the missile hitting the Pentagon could be a government disinfo campaign. To detract the serious and actually factual scrutiny of the real anomolies of 9/11. It is curious that this whole missile hitting the pentagon rumor mill started up around the time when some real quality research was going into 9/11. And now.........the majority of discussion is debating whether or not a plane hit the pentagon. Barely any discussion anymore about the really hard stuff. So I guess, if it is indeed a disinfo campaign, then perhaps the powers that be are winning. Why arent we debating really suspicous stuff like why the hell flight 77 was hijack confirmed for an hour before it hit, and nothing was sent after it until too late, instead of debating whether or not flight 77 actually hit the pentagon?

Why arent we debating really suspicous stuff like why the hell flight 77 was hijack confirmed for an hour before it hit, and nothing was sent after it until too late, instead of debating whether or not flight 77 actually hit the pentagon?

Wasn't that exactly what I addressed and still seek debating? Btw, I have no clue what Zaphod58 is talking about when he mentioned reading it in a book. I did not read or buy one single book about 9-11, I collect most of the relevant info online, or address the real interesting witnesses or researchers personally. And try to rely on various sources, ommitting the obvious non-scientific or factual ones. I'm perfectly aware we are discussing the Pentagon here, and not NY city, so why he thinks it was safer and more logical to send 2 jets astray onto the Atlantic, to avoid 'heavy' commercial traffic, in a clear acts of WAR situation, while a confirmed highjacked airliner is on route to the nations capital, following the worldwide televised event of two other confirmed highjacked airliners which just had ploughed into the Twin Towers, is far beyond my grasp. Jetfighters are perfectly equipped to avoid mid air collisions, it's the main reason why they are build, to survive any incoming enemy or friendly fire. And they HAD to be ordered away from that object entering Washingtons airspace, otherwise they would have seen that that airplane was flying remotely, with no reaction of the pilots. That commander had neglected stand down orders, so the real perpatraitors had to take that risk to order the jets on a silly course. There are no names to be found of those responsible for those traitorous course altering orders, or stand down orders, or other illogical timeconsuming orders, not in all the congressional hearing reports. Just the crazy fact that the high ranked generals who were at the end of the command chain took some minor responsibillity and in return were PROMOTED. That sole brave base commander took the only logical steps to address an imminent attack, and got sidetracked by someone higher in command or someone at airtraffic controll. Clearly an act of treason by the traitor who ordered them out to the Atlantic. That person must be easy to find in the logs. Never found anything on at least a disciplinairy measure against an USAF air controller or his superior(s).

By some software glitch, a double post, sorry, got not redirected to the tread, then found this double post. Please delete. [edit on 27/2/06 by LaBTop]

www.thepowerhour.com... It amazes me that this faulty analysis of the final flightpath of the Pentagon attack plane (or should we say flying object, to keep other interpretations open), is still up on that website. Especially since it has been and is still used extensively by far too many 9-11 researchers, who all seem to lack the most basic investigational skills. This former airliner pilot seems to have constructed his view on that event in the very early days after 9-11-2001. Since then we knew quite early on already, that the flying object hit the Pentagon wall somewhere between 45 and 52 degrees, and not 98 to 102 degrees as this mr Koeppel assumpted. The whole circling of that object (if it ever took place) is thus placed very WRONG. What you should do, is have a good look at the HORIZONTAL terrain texture of the last mile of the actual flightpath, and see if it were AT ALL possible for a rookie to level a huge 757 and park it at the floorslab between the ground- and second floor of the Pentagon west wall. One object we all know, would have no problem at all to hop over hilly terrain and avoid preprogrammed obstacles.

If one was going to use remote/automated control, why not still use the 757 but program that? The flight computer on board is capable of it easily I imagine, it even has autoland capability. One would have to alte rthe software to take out safeguards and such, but I'm sure that would be relatively easy. I imagine like most systems it would be modular? I'm have little knowledge of it to be honest. I believe the aircraft in question used the following system as standard: (Emphasis mine)

FCS-700 Autopilot Flight Director System DESCRIPTION The FCS-700 is a fully digital, fail operational autopilot flight director system. The system, part of the Boeing 757 and 767 flight control system, performs tasks associated with control wheel steering, flight director commands, speed selection, altitude selection, heading selection, autopilot, autoland, and system fault isolation. Utilizing the new FCC-703, system upgrades are much easier and less expensive due to the incorporation of dataload capability via either front connector or rear connector. The FCC-703 replaces the FCC-702, Collins part number 622-8787-106, and FCC-701, Collins part number 622-4591-512. The FCS-700 has been selected as the standard autopilot flight director system for the Boeing 767 and 757 aircraft. The FCS-700 autopilot flight director system consists of the following equipment types. Alternate statuses of these equipments may be required in specific aircraft installations. Consult the equipment descriptions in this section and your local Collins representative. FCC-703 822-1261-101 Flight Control Computer (Boeing PN S241T100-151). Performs the data computation necessary to control the automatic and manual pilot functions and the automatic and manual land functions. Incorporates a single chip verified FCP-2000 processor. This system also supports on-board or portable data loader capability for subsequent system upgrades. (Shipset contains 3 each.) www.rockwellcollins.com...

There was a program on about Flight 93, the one which is a mixture of acting and real interviews, where (if I remember rightly) the husband of Sandy Bradshaw says something along the lines of "And I told her if they took back control of the plane I could tell her how to program the computer to land the plane itself.". I've never found a record of him saying it on the Internet though, but I'm sure he actually says it in the documentary. If I remember right it's the Discovery Channels Flight that fought back. So the computer was theoretically perfectly capable, and why use a different aircraft when you can have the genuine article? No dispute then, in theory. I still think they are witholding conclusvie proof (eg video) not because they are afraid of the truth, but because the longer we spend arguing about there being or not being a 757 the better. [edit on 11-3-2006 by AgentSmith]

they don't allow you to land in a landmark. It's not some flightsim chip, it's realworld airliner hard- and software. What also needs addressing in this thread, is the particular strange firefighting techniques involved in the initial fires at the Pentagon. These fires were in fact nearly all under controll, when after the collapse and the subsequent first evacuation of all EXTERNAL rushed in rescue groups, different fires lit up at very strange locations, culminating in days of fires at the Pentagon, which were lazely fought and allowed to smolder on for days. The first firefighters caught on camera were also not acting at all as professionals who KNEW there was a huge commuter plane trown into the Pentagon, with all the subsequent specific fire fighting techniques to counter the splashed around burning jetfuel. I saw also an intrigueing firefighting aspect in a photo thrown around here for years now. Two nice WHITE curtains still hanging from their runners in the rails in the left. That photo was taken after all "jetfuel" fires were put out. To be found in that famous photo from Cat_herder with the green outlines of a wing inflicting damage at the bottom of 2 specific collumns on the right side of the "plane fuselage impact hole". That damage is btw imop caused by an inside explosion which shifted that floorslab about 40 cm up front, thus crushing the pieces of collumns which were constructed in front of the floorslab. You can see the left damage to the steel bars extend to the FRONT, not to the back. The right damage is not conclusive enough, regarding the initial direction of the acting force on that piece of collumn. So, a metal wing full with jetfuel slams into the Pentagon west wall, vaporizes according to the official crackpot theory, so including the jetfuel, otherwise these WHITE curtains would have at least been scorched, soothed, stained or fully burned away. No sparks to lite up your fires. Yup. Very convincing crackpot theory from those DC guys. They still hang there, clean and crisp, just cut a bit.....perhaps.

The only thing stopping it flying into the building would be the software which can be reprogrammed. The hardware stays the same regardless. If anyone is suggesting they can carry this out with a globalhawk and fool all the witnesses, then comparatively it would not be a difficult task for them to re-write the software and implement it. I'm failing to understand why you think this would be impossible for people with the resources to pull of something like what you are suggesting? Regarding these curtains, and I may be missing your point, surely the cause of the initial fireball and fires is irrelevant to this? Or are we saying that there was not even an explosion now? uh? [edit on 11-3-2006 by AgentSmith]

This last one shows a lot of scorching INSIDE, but not on the outside brickwork or reinforced concrete pillars etc.

Ive read CHs article, and it is total BS. There are so many reasons why this is so, which have been detailed @ signs-of-the-times.org/signs/Above_Top_Secret_article.htm Red flag after red flag is what I was thinking when reading his "article". You would think with all of our tax dollars that they are stealing to fund spooks like him they could do better than that, but apparently not. www.pentagonstrike.co.uk... [edit on 11-3-2006 by freedom_seeker] [edit on 11-3-2006 by Thomas Crowne]

Check my post above, note the first URL is not a link. This is because when i include the http:// it censors the link from the page. I tried this multiple times and it censored it every time. If I leave off the http:// it will go through. Apparently their "truth-filter" is not looking for links without a preceding http://

That dented area up to the right of the cable spools is the area Cat_herder used in the picture taken days after the collapse. You can see the room with the "white curtain" in it to the left of the dented area, on FIRE, before the collapse.

The white curtain might be some of the kevlar like material used as a membrane around window areas.

In the top picture there is another drape below it too. As some work had obviously been done when those images were taken they might have been put there since for some reason? As you point out it appears to be in the room that was clearly on fire, so I'm not sure what your point is?

My guess is those are pieces of the kevlar fabric that was added during the renovation. [edit on 11/3/06 by Skibum]

The renovation yes, what area had been just renovated? could somebody provide a plan drawing showing the newly renovated area please.

the right wing's jet-motor must have been on TOP of the wing, and inflicted that damage in the dented area, above his/her lined out imprint of a wing. There's nothing to see which looks like parts of a jet engine under that dented area, so where is that engine's casing, shafts, discs, etc. Something big and reasonable heavy at high speed knuckleheaded into that dented area, and got DEFLECTED. Where is it ? Not to talk about the folded-in right landing gear, laying embedded in the piece of damn strong right wing spar, between the right jet engine and the planes fuselage. That landing gear's leg strut is long and is AWFULL hard and thick. And should have taken out an obvious huge gaping hole in the Pentagon front wall. The distance covered by a plane's wing at the proposed speed between the diesel generator and the wall is so short and covered in such a small amount of time, that a jet engine scraping the front or back casing of that diesel generator could not have had time to shear off, make a whole 360° flip-over and land face-on on the brickwork above a by Cat_herder proposed wing imprint on the Pentagon wall collumns. Btw, I think that dent is situated in the roof of the drivers cabine of that diesel generator, which is probably fairly thin sheet metal compared to the rest of that vehicle. What exactly made that dent is open for discussion anyhow. Btw2, what happened to all that expensive Kevlar netting, embedded in the outer brickwalls between the windows and collumns? Did it function and protect 100%? So to see not totally at the speed of this object. The high impact velocity of incoming and penetrating shrapnel would have ripped loose quite some more brick area around shrapnel impact areas. Thus giving the impression imprint afterwards of a much broader object hitting while in fact only a much smaller piece got caught in the flexible kevlar safety nettings. EDIT: Ahh, some added posts inbetween! Kevlar is NOT white and NOT looking like a hung up towel. The kevlar netting used in the Pentagon walls was black colored according to NIST, and looked a bit like a lot of "xxxxxx's" on top of eachother. Definitely not white and dense-woven like the curtains or towels hung on rail-runners in that picture. END-EDIT [edit on 11/3/06 by LaBTop]