Meet the AGM 86- A Ground Contouring Surface to Surface "Smart" Missle.
ESPECIALLY Good for testing Pentagon strengthened defences.
Eye witness Steve Danner says he saw an object resembling a Global Hawk, something very similar in shape and dimension to this missle.
Remote Control Craft Identified by Eye Witness
"Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, reports:
Samuel Danner (electrical engineer for AmTrak), was involved in the clean-up at the Pentagon crash site and inspected the debris at the site. He said, "It was not a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon. The plane looked like a hump-back whale." He thinks a Global Hawk hit the Pentagon. (There were only seven made as of 9/11/01 and two were missing at the time.)
Danner is a former pilot. He said the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was very quiet with one engine near the back. He also saw a second plane overhead and wonders if it was controlling the plane that hit the Pentagon. He walked the lawn and picked up small pieces of debris with others. He did not see any bodies from the aircraft.
Danner is very ill now with lymphoma, which may be the result of DU exposure at the Pentagon on 9/11. He wants to talk now (after seeing "Loose Change") because "it's been bugging me."
The Global Hawk fired a DU missile that penetrated the thick concrete wall of the Pentagon. DU was detected at the time and workers on the sYep, this 53-yr old Sam Danner, a pilot since the age of 16, was a first-hand observer of the crash. He pulled his car over to the south of the pentagon on the right side of 395 when he saw the approach of the plane that hit the pentagon.
He also observed a bunch of guys outside the pentagon standing there looking through binoculars.
He got a good view of the plane's approach, for a duration of at least three seconds. He says that the plane was not a 757, no way. "It was like a humpback whale" he says. Size of a gulfstream 300, about 100 ft wingspan, one engine on the backside with a "V" tail and no windows he could see. And it was very quiet. Going about 400mph. Overhead, at an estimated 15,000 feet he saw another plane.
As an EMT, he ran over to help at the pentagon, but found no bodies, no wreckage from a boeing aircraft on the scene. He smelled cordite and he saw a 3-foot single engine on the ground there. He picked up graphite pieces similar to the composite wings on a global hawk.
This engine matches the description of the single engine of a globalhawk. The globalhawk is a UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) but could not have caused the damage if it wasn't containing a bunker-busting missle deployed on impact. The plane observed overhead might have been the plane controlling the remotely-controlled mission.
If a 757 had crashed into the pentagon, then there would have been aluminum all over the grass and two 9-foot diameter engines.
Summaries via LibertyForum July 7, 2006
Read from Looking Glass News
Severe Visibility is the story of another eye witness Major Stanley Kruter, an accountant working at the Pentagon on September 11th, 2001.
|ABOVERIGHT: An artists animated impression from Infowars of what the camera SHOULD have shown.|
The AGM-86a has ground contour technology that would have left the Penta-lawn unscathed, is the right height by comparison to the damage and emits a white cloudy trail in the picture top left.
Literature of the no-757-crash theorists is full of suggestions that eyewitness saw something other than a 757 fly into the Pentagon, such as a commuter jet or cruise missile. In fact only a few eyewitness recalled seeing a plane smaller than a jetliner, and none reported seeing a missile. In contrast there is an abundance of accounts describing a large twin-engine jetliner like a 757.
9-11 Research extracted from Eric Bart's Pentagon eyewitness compilation those accounts that described the appearance of the airplane. It found 11 witnesses describing a large jetliner compared to only two describing a small jet.
It's easy to imagine that the two witnesses who described a small-plane mistook a 757-like jetliner for one because:
- The two small-plane witnesses were both considerable distances from the plane.
- The plane was going very fast -- over 400 mph -- which is about twice as fast as jetliners normally fly at low altitudes on takeoffs and landings. One of the cues that people use to judge the size of an aircraft in flight is its apparent speed: a small plane traveling at 200 mph will traverse the length of its fuselage much more quickly than a large plane. Thus a large plane flying uncharacteristically fast can easily be mistaken for a much smaller plane.
|e x c e r p t|
|title: Eyewitness Accounts Describe Jetliner Approaching Pentagon|
|authors: 9-11 Research|
|site: 911research.wtc7.net page: 911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/jetliner.html|
Most no-757-crash literature ignores the body of eyewitness evidence indicating the presence of a twin-engine jetliner, and in many cases cherry-picks certain eyewitness accounts that seem to support the presence of a small plane. A common tactic is to present one part of Mike Walter's account:
|I mean it was like a cruise missile with wings. It went right there and slammed right into the Pentagon.|
while leaving out the earlier part of his account:
|I looked out my window and I saw this plane, this jet, an American Airlines jet, coming. And I thought, 'This doesn't add up, it's really low.'|
In the context of his full account, it is clear that Walter was using "cruise missile with wings" to describe the way the plane was being flown, not the kind of plane he saw.
EX-NAVY PILOT FLIES FLIGHT 77
The pilot of flight 77 which supposedly hit the Pentagon, was an ex-navy F4 pilot who, less than one year prior, participated in an exercise in the Pentagon, in which it gets attacked by a commercial airliner. The project is documented by the government. This is not a drill.
In October 2000, before the 9/11 attacks, the government simulated a Boeing 757 attacking the Pentagon. It appears as if they are interested in how the airliner will look in the aftermath. As though they are considering what 'scenes' to stage, for maximum pictorial effect.
Above are Actual Photos from government project MASCAL
(PAGE NOW REMOVED)
Condoleezza Rice said, 'No one ever imagined a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon'
So, yes, that is a blatant lie, gone unchecked by the news media & public.
FOX 'News' talks about 'how ironic' it is that an ex-navy fighter pilot was at the helm of flight 77! However, they fail to tell you about project MASCAL.
Don't you find that odd? Wouldn't the EXTREME IRONY alone be newsworthy? Yet, this is probably the first you have heard about this.
The similarities and odds of MASCAL, as related to the events of 911 are beyond equation, yet they don't even mention it on FOX, CNN, MSNBC or any network news.
The major news media's are already under 'Martial Law' based on the patriot act, it has superseded our Bill of Rights, and our Constitution.
MISSILE DAMAGE TO PENTAGON
Where are the bodies? Supposedly 100 Tons of steel and titanium alloy completely disintegrated, yet, government forensics teams claim to have identified 180+ bodies. This is just on 'paper'. No witnesses saw any bodies, no witnesses saw damage consistent with a 757 slamming onto the lawn and Pentagon. And Massive Pilot Irony Gone Unreported!
If a 757 had hit the building it would be an easy matter to prove, but,
Lets look at this again frame by frame
As details of the passengers on the four hijacked flights emerge, some are shown to have curious connections to the defense company Raytheon, and possibly its Global Hawk pilot-less aircraft program.
Raytheon's El Segundo's Electronic Systems division is one of two divisions making the Global Hawk. [ISR Journal, 3/02]
What hit the Pentagon?
and whatever happened to Flight 77?
I could, and have been accused of circulating disinformation with regards to 911, however my only aim is to promote thoughtful discussion on the subject. If you are of the opinion that websites such as this serve no purpose other than to cloud the waters of what 'officially' happened then please do not read on.
Update 28.4.04: The 'Wing' inside the Pentagon appears to be a crushed air duct - Once every theory has been thoroughly explored and 'debunked' then all that should remain ought to be be the truth
A brief description of MMLS taken from the Hanscom website (see link below)
"The Mobile Microwave Landing System (MMLS), designated AN/TRN-45, is a portable, ground-based microwave transmitter that provides a mobile, precision approach and landing capability for MLS equipped aircraft operating under adverse conditions, including inclement weather and hostile environments. The MMLS equipment is modular and lightweight, yet rugged enough to withstand operations in forward battle areas. It can be assembled and put into operation under field conditions within 75 minutes by a team of three people. The MMLS will transmit MLS data to aircraft equipped with an MLS receiver, for conversion and display on the aircraft's cockpit display units. The aircrews may use the MLS information to perform precision approaches and landings on the specific site (runway) at which the MMLS is located. The MMLS's portability is of special importance in providing a quick MLS capability for aircraft involved in wartime and other austere operational environments."
Examples of MMLS and mobile UAV ground Stations
The much talked about "generator" or is it MMLS?
Is it just coincidence that the approach path of what hit the Pentagon is exactly 90 degrees to the angle of Runway 15?
A Plausible Theory?
September 11th 2001:9.37am Global Hawk follows temporary MMLS signal set at 90 degrees to Reagan National ILS(so as not to cause interference) and approaches South West face of Pentagon. 150 metres from impact 2 air to ground missiles are launched which penetrate deep within the walls of the pentagon. Global Hawk is swallowed by the newly created impact hole. Meanwhile Flight 77 overflies the Pentagon and lands on Runway 15 Reagan National Airport.
Flight 77 flies low over Pentagon and lands on Runway 15 Reagan National Airport, at same time Global Hawk flies into South West face of Pentagon(from bottom right of picture above) Or... perhaps Flight 77 never went anywhere Reagan National Airport, all we know for sure is that witness statements indicate that there were at least two different planes in the vicinity at the time of the crash, this is based on the massively conflicting descriptions of the two types of aircraft involved. This theory is all very well, however many people have rightly asked the question about the fate of Flight 77 and it's strange cargo of passengers. Plausible explanations can be found here.
Global Hawk Antenna can clearly be seen in debris next to the car, Landing gear is very similar to Global Hawk Gear and clearly too small to be that of a Boeing 757. Do not be confused by the colour, Global Hawks are painted in a variety of White, Grey and combinations of Grey & White paint schemes. Perhaps livery was added to Global Hawk which hit the Pentagon
At 350 kts it would be easy to confuse a missile laden Global Hawk with a passenger aircraft
Not a Global Hawk Wing, but a pipe duct (see below)
Engine debris outside Pentagon,
The photographs show a part of a turbofan jet engine and were taken by
Jocelyn Augustino, a photographer for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), at the Pentagon crash site on September 13, 2001. The round piece appears to be less than 3 feet in diameter and is propped up against what appears to be part of the engine housing and thick pieces of insulating material. Is it from a Global Hawk Allison Tturbofan engine ?
"If the government version that an American Airlines 757-200 hit the Pentagon is accurate, then the object in the photo would have to be from a Rolls Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine. " (added April 24)
Pentagon Plane debris, Note- composite material used is same as that used in Global Hawk Technology - (see below)
Global Hawk under construction
The Pentagon should in theory be one of the most heavily guarded and secure buildings in the world, so why have we only seen a few 'chosen' frames from a security camera which reveals very little about what hit the Pentagon?
Where is the footage from this camera? which should have recorded the impact at very close range.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -