In December
of 2001 French journalists came out claiming that
the hole in the Pentagon wall was too small for a crashing
Boeing 757 to fit through.
In late F ebuary
of 2002 the American Patriot Fax Network (APFN) hosted discussions of
whether the French evidence indicated a 9-11 frame-up. Mere
days after this the Pentagon issued five frames
from the Pentagon's west side security
camera video to prove a plane really was involved in the attack.
And shortly after
this (in early March) David Bosanko of
Bristol England, having been arguing against the
French "conspiray" claims on APFN, enlarged the security camera video
and ran the frames in "animated" sequence. This afforded a
better view that instantly convinced many people (including
me) that the plane shown was much too short to
be Flight 77 Boeing -- because if
it were a Boeing 757, its shiny aluminum fuselage, trimmed
with red and blue, would be visible extending far out to the
left of the yellow driveway pillar etc.
In addition,
to this there were many unusual events that raised the
suspicion of some-- the breakdown of air defenses, the failure of
intelligence, indications that this crisis and the war on terror were
anticipated by the military and by the state department. etc.
I've looked at
the evidence and done my best to get to the bottom of it all.
Here are my
conclusions:
1. Attack
plane in the video is too short given the size of the image
of the tail fin visible above the pillar.
2. The missile
plume in the video matches that of air-to-ground missile.
3. The
explosion shown in frame #1 is consistent with missile
warhead, not with an airliner crash.
4. Witnesses who
saw only one plane fall into two distinct groups, each seeing a
different
plane, on a different path, at different altitude, with different
sound, at different speeds.
5. A
third set of witnesses saw two planes approach the Pentagon
and one of these veer away.
6. The famous
piece of "evidence" found on the lawn is from the starboard side, not
the port side
-- but it was found on the south side of the lawn 200 feet from the
crash ON THE PORT
SIDE OF THE ATTACK PLANE AS IT APPROACHED, and the
aerodynamics of this light
bent and torn sheet of aluminum would make it impossible for it to have
flown this distance
7. Only
one engine broke through the C-ring; only one engine was
photographed. The one engine is on a line from the downed lamp
posts to the entry hole to the last exit hole -- indicating a
single
engine jet.
8.
All evidence provided by a persistent band of debunkers is portable
and appears in photos taken by FEMA days after the event.
9. Mike
Rivero's "conclusive" debris evidence, turns out to be from
the Pentagon offices, not from an aircraft. (as a closeup reveals
very "uncrashed" and un-airplane debris.
10. Joe
Viall's BBC picture of "Flight 77 diving into the Pentagon"
has too short a fuselage in front of the wings and wings that
are too swept back to have been a 757.
11.
Many heard a jet. Others heard a missile. (All
military men.)
Those near Flight 77 as it came over the cemetery, saw it and
heard it pass silently (no engine); whereas those near the killer
jet which came by the freeway and knocked down the lamp posts
heard its loud scream as it put on speed to reach the wall
as the airliner flew over it.
12.
Star witness Riskus saw the Boeing, but was tricked when
the killer jet, flying low with background visual noise -- hit the
building. The Boeing was instantly lost behind the explosion
and smoke.
13.
Reagan National Airport is only one mile away in the direction
Flight 77 was going when it flew over the crashing killer jet.
After passing over the crashing killer jet -- FLight 77 was able
to
blend into normal Reagan National air traffic almost immediately
(i.e. before the sound of the explosion could reach the White House
or Capitol Building).
14.
There were foreigners at both Dulles (where Flight 77 took off)
and Reagan National (where Flight 77 landed after the crash)
who each had an illegally gotten top security badge that enabled
them to gain access anywhere in those airports -- tower, security,
baggage, hangers, surveillence, loading docks, boarding, etc.
They were deported by Ashcroft a few months after the crash.
(Since they were not held it is reasonable to assume that they
were British subjects or Isreali citizens. A
British firm was
subcontracting many services at the airport at the time.
DIAGRAMATIC STATEMENT
OF THIS CONCLUSION:
EAST ABOVE
NORTH
ON LEFT SOUTH ON RIGHT
NW
WEST
BELOW
SW
CENTER OF PENTAGON
-------------X---C-ring engine exit--------------------------------
(Pentagon West Walls inside rings)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
wall
---------------------------------------------------------------------------wall
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
wall
------------------------------------X--crash entry-----------------
Pentagon West Wall (exteriror)
heliport
[ ]
tree x
x
x downed lamp posts
X Riskus
x point 100 feet from
Riskus
x x
southwest
of
crash northwest
of crash
ARLINGTON
NATIONAL CEMETERY
x
Arlington Cemetary Gardener
t
\
VERIFICATION
OF THE SPATIAL FEATURES OF THIS EXPLANATION:
1. Locating Riskus, lamp posts, and
the Pentagon on the Big Map
RISKUS
LOCATES THE PATH OF THE APPROACHING BOEING; THE LAMP POSTS AND THE
C-RING EXIT HOLE DETERMINE THE FINAL PATH OF A SECOND
PLANE, THE "KILLER JET."
Thesis:
Witness
Steve Riskus was headed north on the turnpike, south of the crash site,
when he saw Flight 77 pass by within 100 feet of him on its
way to the Pentagon. Riskus describes the plane was shiny
aluminium, with red and blue stripes and and engine under each
wing. Clearly Riskus saw Flight 77 as it approached the
Pentagon's west wall.
Riskus
had a camera in his care and immediately after the crash
stopped his car and began using it. The first picture taken by
Riskus, then, indicates the location were he saw the
plane and stopped his car. Says Riskus, "I took these
pictures less then 1 minutes after I watched the american airlines 757
airplane crash into the pentagon on
September 11."
The
shots are taken from the northbound lane south of the crash site across
from the heliport. Riskus took a series of pictures after leaving his
car and then one parting shot from his car on the highway north of the
accident as he headed home to put his digital photos on the
web. In this last picture, taken north of the crash, the is
camera aiming behind his car as it travels north-bound, as indicated by
the headlight of the car directly behind him that is visible with the
profusely smoking Pentagon to the left of the trailing cars.
While
south of the crash site Riskus was watching Flight 77
pass within 100 feet of him, more than a quarter of a mile ahead to the
north, lamp posts were being knocked down by another plane travelling
from the northwest toward the Pentagon. British investigator,
Ron Harvey, has painstakingly identified the location of each
of five highway lamp posts that were downed by the
advancing killer jet. Here is Mr. Harvey's diagram,
indicating in yellow the locations of the five toppled posts at the
cloverleaf highway interchange north of the crash.
Lamp posts 1, 2,3,4
and 5 were downed by the hurricane
approach of the
killer jet from the Northwest. (Note
the west wall of the
Pentagon, on the right.)
The
killer jet drove southeast to its target, various
photos reveal that the light poles fell perpendicular
to the path of attack, blown down by cyclonic turbulence of
hurricane force made by a jet pushing through the
thick lower atmosphere at 500+ mph, hit by wind force
concentrated in a vortex coming off the wings, rather than
being hit by the aircrafts fuselage or wings, denting and fallen
forward.
We can be certain, following the analysis of
Ron Harvey, that the plane that hit the lamp posts
was the killer jet, since a line plotted from the downed lamp
posts to the crash entry point on the outer wall can be
continued on that same straight northwest to southeast line to
that final hole where the bare engine of the plane exited the
inner "C-ring" of the Pentagon, the last of six walls the engine
penetrated. It was this killer jet that Steve Riskus did not
see as he watched the big Boeing 757 fly across his path only 100 feet
from him.
As you can see from the pictures
taken by Riskus (below), the approaching plane would have had
to have been seen against the
buildings, not against the sky. From where
Riskus was, the low and levelapproach of the killer
jet was camouflaged by the "busy" background, by the
confusion from visual "noise" of rows of buildings against
which the small fast moving object had to be viewed -- even
if the awsome sight of Flight 77 flying so close was not drawing his
attention.
Here is the first picture
taken by Riskus from his car sourthwest of the crash. He is
actually south of the Helicopter pad's mini-tower, visible through the
smoke above the reflected sunlight in the white car's windshield.
Not even a plane
hitting the crash point at a 90-degree angle (i.e., from the west
rather than from the northwest) would have passed within 100 feet of
Riskus. (Note: 100 feet is only two thirds the length of a Boeing 757!)
After Riskus walked to
this vantage point from his car toward the crash entry point
he is still southwest of the crash. (Notice that for this shot he
remains on the northbound- traffic side of the freeway, the southbound
cars in the foreground.) Subsequent photos taken from the concret lane
divider in the picture show the small hole made by crash and the soot
and flame around windows south of the crash.
What has
been claimed so far is summarized in the following diagram.
To locate
both the lamp posts and the approximate location
where Riskus snapped his first Pentagon photo, see
the following very detailed aerial map of the entire crime sceen. This
enlarged aerial map is an essential tool in verifying all of the
features of this unifying account of the Pentagon attack.
Riskus, southwest of the
accident -- about where that lone white truck is on the
rightmost lane -- he was three or four plane lengths from the crash
-- and maybe seven plane lengths from the clover-leaf where the killer jet
knocked down the polls. Whatever reasonable margin of error
one gives to these estimates of mine -- there is no feisable path by
which the killer jet could have hit those lamp posts, flown to within
100 feet of Riskus and then returned to the northwest to be able to
enter at the crash point at an angle that would enable it to rendevous
with the exit hole in the C-ring. No jet could do it,
and especially no Boeing 757 airliner could do it.
(One investigator, Sarah Roberts, made a heroic attempt to both have
Flight 77 over Alrington Cemetary and then fly to those lamp posts and
then to the crash point -- but this feat required the low
flying aircraft to have turned 10 degrees just while it was over the
cloverleaf interchange -- an impossibility that Roberts later
acknowledged and retracted.)
2.
WITNESS ACCOUNTS REPORTING ONLY ONE PLANE DIVIDE INTO
TWO MUTUALLY CONTRADICTING GROUPS -- No conspiracy would hire (or
trust) that many liars, so both groups must be telling the truth --
there must have been two planes.
Judge for yourself:
Witnesses
who claim to have seen only one plane break into two groups.
Those who describe
1) an
airliner, shiny, red and blue markings, with two
engines, in a dive, and flying "low" in terms of one or two
hundred feet, and silent (engines idle); and
2)
a plane that came in at tree-top level, at "20 feet" all the way,
hitting lamp posts in perfect low level
flight that must have been established and stabilized well before the
lamp posts were reached; engines roaring; pouring on
speed; smaller than a mid-sized airliner.
Here are
some who saw only Flight 77:
Anon: ... 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, as if it had been
following Columbia Pike - an Arlington road leading to Pentagon. The
aircraft was moving fast, at what I could only be estimate as between
250 to 300 knots. All in all, I probably only had the aircraft in my
field of view for approximately 3 seconds. The aircraft was at
a sharp downward angle of attack, on a direct course for the Pentagon.
It was "clean", in as much as, there were no flaps applied and no
apparent landing gear deployed. He was slightly left wing down as he
appeared in my line of sight, as if he'd just "jinked" to avoid
something. As he crossed Route 110 he appeared to level his wings,
making a slight right wing slow adjustment...
Comment:
The Annex is on the side of the hill shared with Arlington
Cemetery. The sharp downward angle and the positive
identification of a 757 establish that this witness was looking at
Flight 77.
Timmerman:
...being next
to National Airport, I hear jets all the time, but this jet engine was
way too loud. I looked out to the southwest, and it came right down
395, right over Colombia Pike, and as it went by the Sheraton Hotel,
the pilot added power to the engines. I heard it pull up a little bit
more, and then I lost it behind a building. And
then it came out, and I saw it hit right in front of -- it didn't
appear to crash into the building ...
Comment:
This witness was north of the crash. He heard a jet louder
than the normal air traffic at nearby Reagan National (which includes
routine Boeing 757 landings.) When he looked out his window,
however, he saw Flight 77 to the southwest, and most significantly, he
actually states that the plane he was watching "didn't appear to crash
into the building"!!!!
Here is a
CNN reporter questioning another witness:
CNN:
You got a close-up look at the damage, didn't you?
Wit: Yes,
I was right next to the building.
CNN: And what did you see?
Wit: I saw a big, gaping hole and I could see pieces of the plane inside.
CNN: Earlier, an eye-witness told us the plane didn't crash into the building.
Wit: Well, I don't know what it looked like from where he was, but I looked right inside the hole and I know it crashed into the building.
Comment: The man being interviewed by CNN above was
also a CNN reporter. No one else reports having seen in the hole pieces
of aircraft, and of course the absence of debris commensurate
with a mid-sized airliner crash is a topic that continues to be much
discussed. Yet here again we have mention of a man who says
the plane he observed did not hit the Pentagon.
O’Keefe: saw or heard it first
-- this silver plane; I immediately recognized it as an American
Airlines jet It came swooping in over the highway, over my left
shoulder, straight across where my car was heading.
Comment:
In a car it is hard to tell the direction of the sound of a
jet. The jet must have been loud to be heard in his
car. He heard the loud killer jet, but saw the
Boeing "swooping," i.e., leveling out from a dive. He does
not say whether he was in view of the actual crash event.
Sucherman: It was highly unusual.
The large plane was 20 feet off the ground and a mere 50 to 75 yards
from his windshield. Two seconds later and before he could see if the
landing gear was down or any of the horror- struck faces inside, the
plane slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon 100 yards away.
"My first thought was he's not going to make it across the river to National Airport. But whoever was flying the plane made no attempt to change direction. It was coming in at a high rate of speed, but not at a steep angle--almost like a heat-seeking missile was locked onto its target and staying dead on course."
"My first thought was he's not going to make it across the river to National Airport. But whoever was flying the plane made no attempt to change direction. It was coming in at a high rate of speed, but not at a steep angle--almost like a heat-seeking missile was locked onto its target and staying dead on course."
Comment: Here is
the classic killer jet observation. No mention of a dive, in
fact he goes out of his way to say it was not coming in a steep
angle. The killer jet was coming fast, unlike the coasting
757.
Anon2: "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.".
Comment:
Obviously this witness falls between the two categories. Not
seeing engines would put the plane in the killer jet
category. But a larger than Lear jet size is indicated as
well as American Airlines markings. Taking it literally, he
saw Flight 77 but just did not pay attention to the engines.
(Alternatively, the killer jet was bigger than an F-16
and outfitted in American Airlines "drag.")
Campo: It
was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane. I was cutting
the grass and it came in screaming over my head.
Comment: This is the
Arlington National Cemetary gardener. Like Riskus, his
testimony puts the real Flight 77 over the cemetary, from where it
would have been impossible for any plane to have rendezvoused with the
five lamp posts northeast of the cemetery and then bent its path around
sufficiently to reach the crash point at the proper angle to also exit
the c-ring hole.
Vaughn: There wasn't
anything in the air, except for one airplane, and it looked like it was
loitering over Georgetown, in a high, left-hand bank. That may have
been the plane. I have never seen one on that pattern.
Comment: General Vaugh was
not alone in what he saw. Many other witnesses saw Flight 77
putting on an attention- getting exhibition over D.C. as if to draw all
eyes to itself and away from the true appraoching killer.
Liebner: I
saw this large American Airlines passenger jet coming in fast and low.
My first thought was I've never seen one that high. Before it hit I realised what was happening.
My first thought was I've never seen one that high. Before it hit I realised what was happening.
Comment: Captain
Liebner does not tell us what he means by "low." Was it 100
feet or 20 feet? But the term "coming in" indicates a descent.
Here are more witness
accounts:
Kelly Knowles from an
Arlington apartment two miles away saw a two planes moving
toward the Pentagon, one veering away as the other crashed.
Tom Seibert, in
the Pentagon, listened to " what sounded like a missile"
followed by a "loud boom."
Keith
Wheelhouse and his sister, Pam Young were preparing to leave a funeral
at Arlington Naitonal Cemetary when they watched "the jet" approach and
hit the Pentagon. Both saw another plane flying near
the jet that crashed. When asked if the
other plane could have been an airliner performing a normal landing at
Reagan National Airport, Wheelhouse stated that he was not
confused by normal airport traffic.
Alfred
S. Regnery, on the freeway with the Pentagon not yet in view, heard a
jetliner "not more than 200 yards above the ground" passed overhead,
disappearing "behind black cloud of smoke" was pouring from a
"gaping hole."
Comment:
Another witness hearing the loud sound and seeing the jet
liner and assuming that sound source and object
sited are one and the same. But note that he saw an
airliner and that it was 200 yards above the ground, not 20 feet.
Terry
Scanlon interviewed a Hampton Roads woman who saw a plane following the
jet that hit the Pentagon.
Christine
Peterson, in her car in front of the heliport ( near Riskus) saw the
airliner. As it flew over she could read numbers on its
wing. "My mind could not comprehend what happened.
Where did the plane go? ... But there was no plane visible, only huge
billows of smoke and torrents of
fire."
Comment:
It would certainly be jumping to conclusions to say that this witness
saw that plane crash. Watching the Boeing she missed entirely
the killer jet that came from another direction.
James S.
Robbins, from his west-facing office window, one and a half
miles east of the
Pentagon,
saw "the 757" as it was "diving in at an unrecoverable angle."
"I did not immediately
comprehend what I was witnessing. There was a silvery flash,
an explosion, and a dark, mushroom shaped cloud rose over the building."
Comment:
The plane was diving. But it must have recovered from the
dive at the last second, because the pentagon was not hit by a plane at
a downward angle. The killer jet travelled from the entrance
hole to the C-ring exit hole without breaking above the floor of the
third floor!!! Robbins saw the Boeing that did not crash and
the explosion and smoke made by the killer plane that did.
Christopher
Munsey headed South on the Interstate saw "a silver,
twin-engine American Airlines jetliner gliding almost noiselessly over
the Navy Annex, fast, low and straight toward the Pentagon,
just hundreds of yards away." Munsey saw the red and blue
markings "as it appeared to hit the side of the Pentagon."
Comment:
A silver twin-engined plane had to have been Flight 77, seen "over the
Annex", i.e., over Arlington Cemetary hill, it had American
Airlines markings and it was "noiseless," but notice
the indefinitness: "it appeared to hit the side of the Pentagon" --
there are usually psychologically definite reason why people qualify
their speech, in this case, perhaps, pshycological reservations about
what he really did see.
Fred
Gaskins was driving near the Pentagon as he saw the plane pass
about 150 feet overhead. "It was flying very smoothly and calmly,
without any hint that anything was wrong."
Comment:
Near the Pentagon, but still 150 feet in the air. How could
it hit those poles? How could it come in for its
below-the-third-floor crash through three rings of the Pentagon?
Certainly
this sample of witness testimony is more supportive of the two-plane
thesis than the single Boeing thesis of the "official explanation."
But if
the witnesses testimony is inconclusive the actual video recording of
the attack is not. The killer jet was not a Boeing and it did
not dive. But that is not all.
II.
The Security Camera Proofs:
For an
enlargement of this photo go to:
Observe:
1) the size of tail fin image in frame #1 requires that for the plane to be a Boeing 757, the front end of its shiny silver fuselage would have to be visible in the broad sunlight extending out to the left of the stone driveway pillar in the picture.
Check:
a) The 757 is over seven times the length of its own tail
fin, i.e., it would take seven and a quarter tail fins to
cover the back of a Boeing 757, Stegasaurus style,
adding
fins from the tail fin in the
rear forward to the nose, however the
width of the image of the driveway pillar that conceals the entire
fuselage of the attacking plane is only five times as wide as
the tail fin that appears sticking up above and behind it, so
that regardless of angle of approach to the Pentagon wall or
of distance of the aircraft from the camera, the
plane simply cannot be aircraft of the length and
form of a Boeing 757;
b) A 757 is 155 feet long and the
Pentagon is only 71 feet high, but by direct inspection,
if you stood the aircraft behind the pillar on end against
the wall, say
half
way to the far end of the wall from the impact point, it would reach
no more than 70 percent of the wall's height, the
method is rough, but the margin of error in
your
estimate can be nowhere near the 218
percent difference that would be needed to turn that
attack jet into Flight 77.
2)
The presence of the unmistakable white horizonal missile plume being
launched by the plane to weaken the thick outer wall at the targeted
point of impact
so
that the killer jet can easily invade the Pentagon interior without
give-away fighter jet parts bouncing back on the
grass and giving away the frameup;
3)
In frame # 2 Frame
2 - Impact
the tell-tale white-hot intitial explosion
of the missile warhead is definitely neither a jet fuel kerosene fire,
nor the result of aluminum, plastic and flesh crashing into brick,
concrete and glass;
4) The blossom of
white-hot explosion of the missile warhead spreads laterally, more so
than the subsequent jet fuel flames that in frame #3 come from inside
the
Pentagon, suggesting that
the warhead was designed to trigger at the split second of impact
rather than after entry through the wall.
END OF PART ONE
