subglobal1 link | subglobal1 link | subglobal1 link | subglobal1 link | subglobal1 link | subglobal1 link | subglobal1 link
subglobal2 link | subglobal2 link | subglobal2 link | subglobal2 link | subglobal2 link | subglobal2 link | subglobal2 link
subglobal3 link | subglobal3 link | subglobal3 link | subglobal3 link | subglobal3 link | subglobal3 link | subglobal3 link
subglobal4 link | subglobal4 link | subglobal4 link | subglobal4 link | subglobal4 link | subglobal4 link | subglobal4 link
subglobal5 link | subglobal5 link | subglobal5 link | subglobal5 link | subglobal5 link | subglobal5 link | subglobal5 link
subglobal6 link | subglobal6 link | subglobal6 link | subglobal6 link | subglobal6 link | subglobal6 link | subglobal6 link
subglobal7 link | subglobal7 link | subglobal7 link | subglobal7 link | subglobal7 link | subglobal7 link | subglobal7 link
subglobal8 link | subglobal8 link | subglobal8 link | subglobal8 link | subglobal8 link | subglobal8 link | subglobal8 link

- StopFundingIsrael - - SoutheastAsiaNews - Palestine Cards - SFI You-tube - OzboyFiles - Original Article

How911wasDone.com

Home Page Intro - A Step by Step investigation - WTC2 Eyewitness Reports - The Pentagon eye witnesses

small logo


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pentagon Eyewitness

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Eye witness Identifies a Global Hawk

"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.

 

Audio report from Republic Broadcasting Network


Summaries via LibertyForum July 7, 2006

 

_________________________

 

 

Read from Looking Glass News

 

How Flight 77 Hitting The Pentagon Would Really Look?

 

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=6081

 

 

9-11: Animation showing military precision of flight paths

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=3907

 

Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=6622

 

9/11: The Myth and the Reality

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=6600

The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=5115

 

A Half-Dozen Questions About 9/11 They Don't Want You to Ask

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=5086

 

20 reasons to question the official story of 9/11

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=4780

 

9/10/01 : ON THE EVE OF DESTRUCTION

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=4723

 

5 Reasons to Question the Official 9/11 Story

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=5116

Scientific Evidence that Official 9/11 Story is a Lie

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=5071

Pentagon Video Observations

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=6091

 

All "911" News Articles

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/index.php?topic=3

 

 

 

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

Large Jetliner

Alan Wallace -- firefighter with safety crew at Pentagon's heliport
We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a 320 Airbus.
www.gosanangelo.com...
Albert Hemphill -- from inside the Naval Annex
Immediately, the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex
lists.travellercentral.com/pipermail/tml/2001-September/013153.html
James S. Robbins -- Robbins, a national-security analyst and 'nationalreviewonline' contributor, watched from his 6th story office window in Arlington
The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, ...
www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robbins040902.asp
Tim Timmerman --
... said it had been an American Airways 757.
www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,550486,00.html
Tim Timmerman -- from 16th floor apartment near National Airport
It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question.
www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.32.html
Mike Dobbs -- observed from upper level of outer ring of Pentagon
... looking out the window when he saw an American Airlines 737 twin-engine airliner strike the building.
www.abqtrib.com/archives/news01/091201_news_dcscene.shtml
Terry Morin -- watched from 5th wing of BMDO offices at the old Navy Annex
The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn't be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities.
www.coping.org/911/survivor/pentagon.htm
Jim Sutherland -- from his car
... saw ... a white 737 twin-engine plane with multicolored trim fly 50 feet over I-395 in a straight line, striking the side of the Pentagon.
www.cincypost.com/2001/sep/11/wash091101.html
Noel Sepulveda --
... saw a commercial airliner coming from the direction of Henderson Hall the Marine Corps headquarters.
www.jimroche.com/pentagon_hero.htm
Madelyn Zakhem --
... she heard what she thought was a jet fighter directly overhead. It wasn't. It was an airliner coming straight up Columbia Pike at tree-top level. It was huge! It was silver. It was low -- unbelievable! I could see the cockpit.
www.roadstothefuture.com/VA_Sept21.txt
Joel Sucherman --
Do you know how many engines? - I did not see the engines, I saw the body and the tail; it was a silver jet with the markings along the windows that spoke to me as an American Airlines jet, it was not a commercial, excuse me, a business jet, it was not a Lear jet, ... it was a bigger plane than that.
play.rbn.com/?url=usat/usat/g2demand/010911_joel.rm&proto=rtsp
Dave Winslow -- Winslow is an AP reporter
I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon.
www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,550486,00.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Small Jet

Steve Patterson -- watched from 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City
... it appeared to him that a commuter jet swooped over Arlington National Cemetery and headed for the Pentagon ...
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/daily/sep01/attack.html
Don Wright -- watched from the 12th floor, 1600 Wilson Boulevard, in Rosslyn
I watched this ...it looked like a commuter plane, two engined ... come down from the south real low ...
www.sun-sentinel.com...
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.
Even Fox 'news' talks about how an ex-navy man was the pilot, but they fail to tell you about the real story...


1) In October 2000, Government Simulates Exercises of a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon.
2) Charles Birlingame, Navy F4 pilot participates in this exercise.
3) Birlingame retires, gets a job flying commercial jet-liners.
4) Less than 12 months later, its' HIS flight allegedly crashes into the Pentagon!

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

If you look up PROJECT MASCAL on WickiPedia, you will find the same pictures, and a link to their source, the Dept. of Defense.  But guess what, the page has been removed form the Dept of Defense.
http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/

Contingency_Planning_Photos.html

(PAGE NOW REMOVED)

Condoleezza Rice said, 'No one ever imagined a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon'
...Whoops!?  ....Is she sure about that!?  She obviously missed the memo.

It seems someone in the government had not only thought about it, but created a mock exercise complete with little model buildings, planes, and even rescue vehicles on the scene.

So, yes, that is a blatant lie, gone unchecked by the news media & public.
You can look up the official flight data from any source.

One would assume the goal of the exercise was about the logistics of a plane strike, but oddly, you see models of little EMT trucks with flashing lights, as if the focus of the exercise, was how the scene would look in the aftermath.

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.

     
MORE ODDITIES BEYOND EQUATION:
On Sep 11, 2001 -THE DAY:
How ironic, at the same exact time as the WTC attacks, a simulated crises was happening at the National Reconnaissance office in Chantilly, VA.
An exercise, in which a corporate jet collides into the building, thus 'confusing' NORAD protocol  ...What a coincidence.

NORAD is in the middle of a number of documented military exercises:

'Vigilant Guardian'
 Described as an exercise of a threat that poses air defense protocol nationwide

'Northern Vigilance'
 Moved Jets to Canada and Alaska to fight of an imaginary attack Russian fleet

'NC Exercise'
 3 F-16's stationed at pentagon, flown 180 miles away to an impromptu exercise in NC

This left 14 fighter Jets prepared to protect a real defense issue, in the entire united states

Calls of a hijacked aircraft to NYC immediately asks for F-16's to be scrambled.
 
 


After FINALLY allowing the F-16's to scramble, Cheney is quoted as saying:
'Not to exceed 350 MPH' in flight"



 
 

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!
ALSO SEE TIMELINE TROUBLE

757 Airliner Size Comparison To Pentagon
     
   

If you saw the tape that the Pentagon claims shows the Boeing 757, you can see there is no 757!  It is laughable, if it wasn't so horrific.
They claim you can see the nose of the 757 in one of the frames, however, if you apply scientific laws of distance and size, it is obvious that this is no Boeing 757 ...In fact, it does have the dimensions of a small drone or missile.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This picture reveals the distance that the security camera was from the scene of impact. 

Not to mention, their were many cameras that would have caught a clear picture of a real 757 so close to the ground, highways, buildings, and Pentagon.

Their are disinformation sites that tell you what you are seeing.

Will the public believe what they are told, or their own senses of perception and reality?


 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     

This is from the pentagon video from a parking lot security camera. 

They claim you can see the the 757 in one of the frames, however, if you apply scientific laws of distance and size, it is obvious that this is no Boeing 757

Lets take a closer look at what this frame shows.
Below is a segment from same picture X's 600.


You can determine what is a solid object, and what is not.

You clearly see a line of dense (but not solid) white exhaust, trailing a solid narrow lineal object.

Why did the FBI Confiscate all tapes government and private?

Look at the Picture below, illustrating how a Boeing 757 would be more likely to appear if it were in the same place as the object in this frame.

This more what a Boeing 757 would look like if it were the actual object in the frame.

Remember ..The collision into the pentagon was exactly perpendicular, like a missile strike, not 'bombed into' like a kamikaze airplane strike.

Not to mention, the incredible skill necessary for a pilot to achieve such a narrow band of altitude ...Like a cruise missile, in the middle of Washington DC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 



 

 

 

If a 757 hit the Pentagon, you would SEE a HUGE jetliner in the video frames!

How we calculated the size.

A Boeing 757 is 44 tall. 
Airliner Dimensions

That is over half the height of the Entire Pentagon Building, which is only 77 Feet Tall.

With all the cameras taping the Pentagon, isn't it odd they cannot prove it, and release a paltry few frames, only after federal judgment makes them?

 

 

 
 

 


 

 

INCONSISTENT PENTAGON DAMAGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


LOOK CLOSELY, ...This is the picture the administration does not want you to see! 
Look at the red image, it is scaled to size, (ACTUALLY EVEN SMALLER) and shows where the impact patterns SHOULD be, yet, there is no damage except a single hole that goes through 3 sections of the pentagon. This wall collapsed or was brought down by explosives minutes after this picture, which clearly shows inconsistent damage for a Boeing 757.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Given that the outer wall of the Pentagon had not yet collapsed and the only hole is approximately 16 ft. in diameter,  how does a plane over 44 feet tall and 125 ft. wide fit into that hole as shown in the photographic evidence from the Pentagon? Furthermore, can physics explain why there is no damage to the Pentagon's upper floors where the tail section would have hit? Close-ups of this section are extremely revealing.

Why were America and the world never shown the video and photographs of the Pentagon, BEFORE the outer wall had collapsed showing only one 16 ft. hole. Many people do not realize that the outer wall did not collapse until almost 30 minutes after the initial impact.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PENETRATION TO OTHER SIDE OF PENTAGON 'C-RING'  -SUPPOSEDLY A JET FUSELAGE MADE THE HOLE, WITH A CARBON NOSE CONE, AND CAUSING NO LATERAL DAMAGE.

How does a Boeing 757, constructed from lightweight aluminum, penetrate over 9 ft. of steel reinforced concrete with piercing clean round holes, and leave no evidence of itself?  A 757 Did this?  ...if it wasn't so horrific, it would be laughable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

  You really believe this building ate a Boeing 757?

Now, 30 minutes after the missile pierced through 3 steel reinforced walls, leaving the hole shown in the picture above as it exited the last wall.  
Are we supposed to believe it got hot enough to melt a 757 airliner, including two 6-ton titanium steel alloy engines? Not to mention, the 757 supposedly disintegrated, yet, you can see un-burnt desks, and un-melted computer screens immediately next to the impact sections.


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can see, the pilot passed up a clear direct frontal assault on his target.

He then passed through the air space of Reagan International. During this maneuver they dropped 7000 feet and by all reports did it like an ace fighter pilot.

Amazingly, the pilot managed maneuver the 757, through obstacles, attaining a flight level of 20 feet , in distance of about 1/4 mile, in order to strike the only wall of the entire Pentagon to be reinforced to withstand such an attack.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


How could a 757 clear highway structures @

A and manage to strike point B without touching the ground?  Physically impossible!
“I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound. I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast – it sounded nothing like an airplane.”
Lon Rains - editor for Space News (Pentagon eyewitness)

Dozens of Video Cameras Missed something like this?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CNN Reporter at pentagon:
"there does not appear to be any evidence that a jet-liner crashed here"

Official claim the jet disintegrated due to the heat. 12-ton titanium alloy engines, wings, fuselage, all gone.

In the aftermath, it was reported by media sources that a giant 100 ft. crater was plowed into the front lawn of the Pentagon as the result of a powerful airliner crash? Why does photographic evidence overwhelmingly show that this was absolutely not the case? Why no crater? Why no skid marks? Why no burn marks? Why was the entire world deliberately mislead? Examine the photographic evidence for yourself. (click to enlarge)

 

 
 
Pentagon Crash has NO EVIDENCE of a jet-liner.

These 3 pictures are the only evidence whatsoever that an airliner crashed at the Pentagon


There seems to be a  few  'clean & placed' pieces of plane, small enough to carry off, the lawn, which was  undisturbed.


Not one seat cushion.

No engines

No Vertical Stabilizer

No wing sections

Nothing.... Nothing but pictures.  And of course, these 'pieces' have since, conveniently disappeared and cannot be analyzed.

 
   
 
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  This piece of wreckage looks real, not planted!
But unfortunately, it is not from a Boeing 757!

Official reaction to this photo / part, was to claim it is a HoneyWell rotor from the rear 'APU' engine in a Boeing 757's tail-section.

But, after studying these high-resolution photos, HoneyWell, the manufacturers of the supposed APU engines, said: "there is no way that is any part of a APU engine we manufacture"


 
Karl Schwartz, former GOP Stratagist, patmoz nanotechnologies
-inet security systems CEO
recognizes the part as a JT8D Turbo from from a US Air Force A-3 Skywarrior.


The only piece of wreckage that appears 'genuine' in the FEMA photo is the front shaft-bearing housing from a US Air Force A-3 Skywarrior, or something very similar.

Only 4 or 5 still existed on 911, and they were stored at Hughes Aircraft in Van Nuys, CA,
now better known as RAYTHEON, a big war profiteer.
RAYTHEON corp has been in this site, here is the proof.

If a 757 had hit the building it would be an easy matter to prove, but,
They have not.
They will not.
They can not  ...Because it didn't happen.

Lets look at this again frame by frame

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 

911 Pentagon video examination 1
by Dave VonKleist of ThePowerHour.com
Watch Video 1


 
  911 Pentagon video examination 2
by Dave VonKleist of ThePowerHour.com
Watch Video 2
  911 Pentagon video examination 3
by Dave VonKleist of ThePowerHour.com
Watch Video 3

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.

*Stanley Hall (Flight 77) was director of program management for Raytheon Electronics Warfare. One Raytheon colleague calls him "our dean of electronic warfare." [AP, 9/25/01]

*Peter Gay (Flight 11) was Raytheon's Vice President of Operations for Electronic Systems and had been on special assignment to a company office in El Segundo, Calif. [AP, 9/25/01]

Raytheon's El Segundo's Electronic Systems division is one of two divisions making the Global Hawk. [ISR Journal, 3/02]

*Kenneth Waldie (Flight 11) was a senior quality control engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems.

*David Kovalcin (Flight 11) was a senior mechanical engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems. [CNN, 9/01]

*Herbert Homer (Flight 175) was a corporate executive working with the Department of Defense. [CNN, 9/01, Northeastern University Voice, 12/11/01]

Raytheon employees with possible links to Global Hawk can be connected to three of the four flights. There may be more, since many of the passengers' jobs and personal information have remained anonymous.
A surprising number of passengers, especially on Flight 77, have military connections. For instance, William E. Caswell was a Navy scientist.

Could these Raytheon employees have been on board to activate Global Hawk technology, or make sure it worked?

The evidence that this aircraft was not a Boeing 757, includes among other things :

1. The width of the impact wound is nowhere near wide enough.
2. The Bush administration has refused to release the black boxes, the voice recorders or even pictures of any wreckage of flight 77.
3. The Bush administration has refused access, by independent investigators, to any wreckage it, or the FAA, may have.

Contrary to the pictures shown to the American public, after the fact, why does photographic evidence taken only a few moments after the Pentagon event show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon? Where is the plane? Where is the tail, the wings, the luggage, the seats, the landing gear; the engines? What happened to the passengers? 

No one reports Bodies ...They are just on paper, supposedly 177 or more bodies were identified, even though their are no eyewitness reports.  Not to mention the fire was so hot it supposedly incinerated 100 tons of Aluminum and titanium steal alloy.
-------
Pratt & Whitney / Roll Royce engines
12' x 9' Diameter Titanium steel alloy
6 tons each  Melting point of titanium: 1,688
Max burning Temp of Jet-Fuel: 1,120.

 

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)

 

Read this article on the 'Mystery Engine part'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE......

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


 

 

 

 

Please Bookmark the site and share it around. -Thanks -