The SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ANALYSIS of the events of 9/11.

The Officially endorsed PENTAGON report from 2007 :
www.dtic.mil...

320 Pages, and only 2 mentions of the "gas station" and zero for "CITGO".
Pages 172 and 180, Chief John Jester from the Defense Protective Service (DPS) :

In his office about 600 feet from the crash site Jester thought the shaking and loud noise was caused by a heavy load of furniture on a pallet rolling over an uneven expansion joint. He heard someone yell, "We've been hit!" His first thought was "No, not here. It can't happen here:' He looked out the window, saw

page 152 Securing the Pentagon

smoke, ran down the stairs to the Communications Center, and shouted, "Get a camera up there!" Some of the center's eight monitor screens mounted on a wall remained blank because the crash had destroyed the camera nearest the impact site and cut connectivity to others. .(11)
One monitor came on automatically, showing debris and doors blown off their hinges in Corridor 5. Officer Jesse DeVaughn brought up an image from a camera at the Navy Annex that had zoomed in on the roiling red flames and smoke. Nesbitt thought he was looking at the nearby gas station on South Joyce Street, so when he called to notify the Arlington County Fire Department of reports that a plane had hit the Pentagon, he also reported a fire at the gas station.
Nesbitt then refocused the Annex camera to clearly show a normal gas station scene and the blaze at the Pentagon.(12)

No mention of the Colonel (or Major) who was reportedly also running to that Communications Center and re-winded and then reviewed the tapes to see what had happened.
Which is of course the more sane thing to do for anybody inside that video Center, after impact of something they did not know for sure what it was, since that Center was not in direct line of sight of the impacted region (Wedge 1).

The newspaper I read that in, in 2001, did report that the tapes were re-winded.
But it did not report if they had asked that interviewed curious officer, if he had seen a plane attack.
By that time of the interview, everyone of course knew from radio and TV, that a plane had caused that damage. So perhaps the reporter did not feel the need to ask any further.
It would have been interesting to see a video taped attack path of Flight 77, over the Pentagon's lawn.

Then we could have been sure at last, that the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) interview with the two Pentagon police officers at the CITGO gas station a few years later was a case of mistaken memories. As so many Trusters keep saying, despite all the evidence against it.

Both officers swore they had seen Flight 77 fly very low, to the North of that CITGO gas station...and I still believe their recollection of what they saw passing by, to the North of them, is true in their mind. After you have watched those interviews, you can't doubt them.

The only problem could be, that they were ordered to inject a pertinent wrong story, for whatever strange reason.
The Official analysis puts the plane attack path however, definitely to the South of that same CITGO gas station. Page 28 of 320 :

Flight 77 struck the west side of the Pentagon at the 1st Floor level just inside Wedge 1 near the 4th Corridor and proceeded diagonally at an approximate 42* angle toward the 5th Corridor in the mostly vacant and unrenovated Wedge 2. After the nose of the plane hit the Pentagon a huge fireball burst upward and rose 200 feet above the roof. Multiple explosions occurred as the plane smashed through the building. The front part of the relatively weak fuselage disintegrated, but the mid-section and tail-end continued moving for another fraction of a second, progressively destroying segments of the building further inward. The chain of destruction resulted in parts of the plane ending up inside the Pentagon in reverse of the order they had entered it, with the tail-end of the airliner penetrating the greatest distance into the building. Remarkably, these circumstances meant that the bodies of the passengers in the rear of the aircraft traveled deeper into the ground floor of the building than did those in the front. The largest concentration of body parts was found at the deepest area of penetration-the C Ring. (23)

It is quite unbelievable that the Pentagon did not record the incoming plane via any of the surveillance cameras hanging from the roof rim on the west wall, on TAPE.

Page 285/320 : note 11. Interv Jester, 19 Oct 01, 3-4 (quotes); interv Nesbitt, 19Jun 06, 2-3. Some of the cameras at the Pentagon were inoperable because of construction work. See interv Austin and Pennington, 9 Nov 06, 11, 20.

And since they never came up with one clearly filmed flight path, it seems that they do not have such video(s), which do(es) not show the official South of CITGO gas station flight path and then over the lawn cutting 5 lamp poles with its wing tips, nor the flight path coming from North of the CITGO gas station and ending just beside the concrete heliport landing pad.
As I have analyzed the latter scenario from several other interviewed witnesses on 9/11.
Many of them say they were halted in a traffic jam, and halted in front of the concrete heliport landing pad in the center lane, thus in center-front of the Pentagon's West wall, when the plane came straight over their HEADS and CARS. (Mrs Penny Elgas, Mrs Peterson, Vin Ravayanan etc. ). Near the two low trees which stood there in front of the heliport, along Washington Boulevard (Interstate 395) at that time.
And then we also have the 12 or so eyewitnesses interviewed by the CIT team, who all indicated a North of CITGO flight path.
Which makes a 42 degree attack path to the west wall totally ridiculous.
But what then, about the 5 cut lamp poles exactly in the 42 degree path, and the dent in the roof of the generator trailer, seemingly made by one of the plane's sharp, right wing's airflow winglets under its wing.?

Did anybody else (phone- ) interviewed both Pentagon police officers AFTER the team of two from CIT team talked and filmed them, on location at that CITGO gas station.?
I know William Lagasse was quite busy posting his story in on-line forums before CIT found him through that. The other officer not, to my knowledge.
Did William Lagasse or his colleague ever retracted or altered their CIT filmed recollection of 9/11.? I never heard them do so, so that still is one hell of a different story from the official one.
And still a huge mystery.

a reply to: LaBTop

Both officers swore they had seen Flight 77 fly very low, to the North of that CITGO gas station...and I still believe their recollection of what they saw passing by, to the North of them, is true in their mind. After you have watched those interviews, you can't doubt them.

Does any of their reports tell you exactly where their feet were planted when they saw the plane?
The discrepancies could all be from visual perspective.

Lets say you are exactly south of Citgo.
Then you see a plane exactly north of you.
The plane's position could be between you and Citgo. South of Citgo.
The plane's position could be the other side of Citgo. North of Citgo.
It's all perspective.

That's why investigators use physical evidence.
Not pseudo science.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: LaBTop

Both officers swore they had seen Flight 77 fly very low, to the North of that CITGO gas station...and I still believe their recollection of what they saw passing by, to the North of them, is true in their mind. After you have watched those interviews, you can't doubt them.

Does any of their reports tell you exactly where their feet were planted when they saw the plane?
The discrepancies could all be from visual perspective.

Lets say you are exactly south of Citgo.
Then you see a plane exactly north of you.
The plane's position could be between you and Citgo. South of Citgo.
The plane's position could be the other side of Citgo. North of Citgo.
It's all perspective.

That's why investigators use physical evidence.
Not pseudo science.

The first reaction on how to deal with the "physical evidence" at the Pentagon was... Get it gone NOW!

The story... There's something very strange about the way the Pentagon lawn was speedily covered with sand and gravel after the attack. What were they trying to cover up?

Our take... The November 2001 edition of Civil Engineering Magazine explains all: Ed Pickens, the senior construction scheduler:

"On that first day we discussed with the FBI where to place the dumpsters needed to cart away debris. We discovered, however, that the dumpsters had to be brand new because the debris was evidence and could not be contaminated in any way. So we had to deliver numerous new dumpsters to the site immediately. And then I informed the FBI that we were going to have to build a road for the trucks carrying the debris because the ground around the heliport—the area closest to the blast—was too soft. The FBI authorized construction of the road, and I called a contractor, who got the gravel, and we got things moving" www.pubs.asce.org...

Ed Pickens should be charged with obstruction of justice.

a reply to: samkent

If you believe that, than you really are running into a HUGE problem.

William Lagasse is to be seen in the famous FOIA freed CITGO gas station video, showing him parking his police car with its front side towards the South Joyce Street entrance to the station, beside the first gas pump on its NORTH side. He steps out, walks to a SUV parked beside the glass windows of the stations shop and counter, and talks a while to the two men inside the SUV.
Then returns to his police car, starts filling it up with petrol, and is standing in between his car and the pump, holding the hose, while he looks to the pumps counter, so he looks NORTH. Then we see a bright "flash" appearing over the bottom surface of the station's north side ceiling. A reflection of the sun placed medium-low south, from the shiny aluminum hull of a passenger plane passing very low, north of that gas station, to the shiny top of a parked car just north of the ceiling, and then onto that ceiling.
We see Lagasse react by diving into his car, radioing in that a plane hit the Pentagon West wall, and speeding out of the entrance and turning to the right to drive to the Pentagon. As he recalls also much later, in that CIT interview.

His colleague is interviewed also on the CITGO grounds, on the north side of the parking opposite of the CITGO entrance, on the other side of South Joyce Street, where he was standing beside his parked patrol car on 9/11, and he used his stretched arm to the NORTH, in the CIT video, to show us where he saw the plane fly low.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
DO read that whole page its posts.

Just one of the 4 pages long ATS Search results using these terms :
LaBTop Citgo Lagasse CIT

(Click on the blue LaBTop choice.! Not the first shown Laptop search results.)




In many of those results you will find the link to that FOIA freed CITGO gas station security video, and see for your self where Lagasse stood when he saw a plane passing in front of his eyes, to the NORTH of that CITGO gas station.
Also called Navy Exchange (NEX) gas station in those days.

Read also page 24 of 320 of that official Pentagon report of the above post of mine, which is its original page 13 and 14, and do read the notes on page 13 too. Nice drawings of the flight path, and last part of it.
Btw, the plane could not fly just over the NAVY ANNEX building and in the same time over the radio mast.(page 14).

a reply to: LaBTop

radioing in that a plane hit the Pentagon West wall,

So he didn't see a missile.
And he didn't see a plane pull up and fly over the pentagon.

So why do those conspiracy believers keep touting missile and fly over?
Conspiracy over.

The conspiracy just started with these eyewitnesses!

A plane North of CITGO must have flown much slower, and in about a bank of 25 degrees, to be able to come diving down from a spot just over the center of the 8th wing's roof of the Navy Annex building, passing just north of the CITGO gas station, following that bank all the way to the impact spot on the west wall.

And could have never clipped 5 light poles much further south, and denting the roof of the generator trailer with one of its right wing its sharp airflow regulating winglets under that wing.
Which NoC flight path also immediately exposes the recovered Flight Data Recorder its data as falsified.

That seems an awful lot of coincidences.
But US administrations have us left behind with a very long history of proven false flag events, which were also intrinsically complicated structured, to make the world let believe them at first sight.
Only after long research the truth came out for most of these cases, except the Kennedy murders, that's still a cold case of "national" security....

a reply to: LaBTop

The conspiracy just started with these eyewitnesses!

So if everybody agrees that it was a real plane and we all agree where it impacted who cares if this one dude got the flight path wrong?
It's normal for witnesses to get the details wrong.
You are nitpicking the minutia to bolster your conspiracy belief.

So if you believe the flight path could not have been inline with the light poles, please explain the damage to the poles.

who cares if this one dude got the flight path wrong?

Correction, 22 persons, not one, "dudë".

And to top it off, that one witness of those 22, sergeant Lagasse, can be clearly seen in the CITGO security video, filling up the gas tank of his Pentagon-police patrol cruiser, in the North part of the CITGO gas station, looking North when the flash appears on the station ceiling, and 1 - 2 secs later the impact follows. Which can be deducted from the behavior of all the visitors inside plus the counter guy, running to the eastern door to go watch the impact fire at the west wall of the Pentagon.
For that video, search ATS and thou will find.

See also www.thepentacon.com... to view the compressed interview with eyewitnesses/Pentagon police officers SGT William Lagasse and SGT Chadwick Brooks.
And visit www.citizeninvestigationteam.com... . Make up your own mind.

almighty bob once said it so :

CIT have a number of independent and impartial eyewitness accounts which have yet to be shown to be false (and debunking by sticking your fingers in your ears and braying like a mule doesn't come close) indicating that the official story is a load of baloney, also indicating that there is no way that the flight could have come in on the official flightpath, therefore also indicating that there was nothing heading at a trajectory that would hit these light-poles, therefore leading to the very reasonable conclusion that the 'light-pole damage' was staged.

So if you believe the flight path could not have been in-line with the light poles, please explain the damage to the poles.

CIT has their explanation up at these two links :
How could the light poles and taxi cab scene have been staged in broad daylight?

Since the plane did not hit the light poles do you think that they were somehow knocked down in real-time as the plane passed by? Maybe with explosives, or by the vortex of the plane or a missile or something?
No, we have never advocated this notion. We have always maintained that the downed light poles were staged in advance.

I also did contemplate how such an operation would have been staged. It is of course soft "evidence", but curious alltogether.
Search ATS with these terms :
LaBTop flatbed trailer Pentagon (not: LaPTop flatbed trailer Pentagon )

Just click again on the LaBTop etc blue link, and you get my seven returned page-posts.

1. The downed light poles at the Pentagon were staged in advance ...
This photo shows a yellow flatbed trailer of considerable length, ... Hi LaBTop, I think you are over estimating the size there, looks more like 8 to ...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read the whole page for the light poles discussion.
Flatbed trailer : www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

2. The Generator-trailer its cabin roof-gouge is made by a NoC flying ...
reply to post by LaBTop. He, he, he... You don't ... reply to post by LaBTop. The trailer is no longer parallel to the pentagon after the impact.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

3. The downed light poles at the Pentagon were staged in advance ...
posted by LaBTop. I believe you did not notice that I am describing only the visible back-half of the yellow flatbed trailer which is visible in this ...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I found 3 of these VDOT trailers, one parked behind a dirt mount aside Route 27, and two along lanes leading to Route 27, in immediate aftermath photos of the Pentagon attack.
Not one was seen, in photos taken by satellites in the days before, in the same spots. That's curious. And there are so many other curious things reported on 9/11 that do not fit into the official stories. Like the NoC story.
SPreston posted a detail of my photo of that flatbed trailer near the bridge in Route 27, and another orange painted VDOT trailer-truck being used to pull on, one of the 8 meter cut lamp poles bottom remains a few weeks later :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

4. Official Story Shill Crushed By Truther/Researcher in Radio Debate ...
edit on 27/11/11 by LaBTop because: (no reason given) ... The northern side looking over at the Pentagon however was not blocked ..... This is the photo by Ligon (PfT + CIT member), with that VDOT flatbed trailer in it (Object ...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
(The plane did not hit on the bottom floor, it hit the concrete floor between the first (bottom) and second floor, 3 m high. And it had to fly MUCH slower than the FDR data offer, to be able to pass NoC and impact. And light poles were 30 feet high, 9.14 meters. Minus the 3 meters high impact point, that's a difference of only 6 meters to overcome over a length of 110 meters (110 yards). No hard pull-up as PfT people suggest, just a shallow descend, at a very shallow angle to the ground. ). See my full rebuttal :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

5. WTC7 phoneboot explosion sound pinned to corner Murray Str-W ...
reply to post by LaBTop ... Originally posted by LaBTop ..... Who are the real people in power, fully owning the Pentagon and all Politicians, .... of one of the Twin Towers, big flatbed trailers parked on that street and coming out ...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

6. At last, The "Watergate" Of 9/11 : , page 13
edit on 20/11/11 by LaBTop because: Link to YouTube garbled up. ... if you note... .the Pentagon Memorial is pictured in that current photo.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

7. Official Story Shill Crushed By Truther/Researcher in Radio Debate ...
These guys have no credibility, they attack every 9/11 Pentagon witness ..... for yourself other than trolling the thread with cheap shots. LaBTop.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The PfT fly-over theory impossibility :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The Terry Morin discussion, another anomaly from 9/11, plus follow-ups :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
My opinion on the NoC flight path :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Use the ATS Search with these terms :
LaBTop CITGO video Lagasse
and you get 5 pages with 10 posts each, a total of 44 page posts as a result. The first one :

Body-language in CITGO video - North path indication?, page 1
Camera 3 at the Dual Pump Side W in the above shown Citgo video screen, gives an overall North-West view. A good .... Lagasse is seen in-between his police car and the pump housing. Velasquez ... reply to post by LaBTop.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's only one page..read it all, and find the links to that FOIA freed video.
Btw, all Farmer website pictures are gone, he erased his whole site. A sad move.

Huge map with the speeds in MPH during the Flight 77's spiraling down to the Pentagon :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Knot speeds are a lot lower, from 260 up to just over 300 Knots at the lowest end of the spiral.
And not the 300 up to 500 Knots as flown in the PfT video, where Captain Aimer let a young man with nearly no flight experience fly that spiraling down in a real 757 flight simulator.
Of course the guy ended up in a Dutch roll, at those airspeeds, in that same diameter spiral down.

At the real speeds it's not difficult at all. When assisted by an autopilot that's switched on.
But without one, as the FDR shows us? Is it still possible?

Read all posts on page 49 and further.
How many of you will really do that? in 2015. One? Two.?

I still stand firmly behind what I wrote here :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

1. I firmly believe a plane impacted the Pentagon, but not at the official angle of 60.25° true north. It must have been more towards an 80° to 90° angle.

2. I also believe that it is not too far fetched that a monstrous military apparatus aided by numerous agencies which were threatened with enormous cuts in their trillions of dollars heavy annual budgets for several years already, will indirectly hit back on those who they deem responsible for the endangering of their inherent murderous military species its existence.

3. I believe a powerful faction of that huge military hit back on the politicians who decided to cut their "allowances", and consequently, their might and power and influence. And how do you do that? By freaking their backbone, the US voters, into an all out bloodthirsty revenge and war hunger.
Bomb their biggest symbols. Use patsies to execute it. Northwood style.

4. We will always be divided in three parts, the Truthers, the Trusters and the Undecided.
And it is a constant struggle by both two T-parties, to win the souls of the undecided.

I'm not here to win souls, the historical truth is of my main importance.

a reply to: LaBTop

I found 3 of these VDOT trailers, one parked behind a dirt mount aside Route 27, and two along lanes leading to Route 27, in immediate aftermath photos of the Pentagon attack.
Not one was seen, in photos taken by satellites in the days before, in the same spots. That's curious.

Don't you think you are going a bit too Rambo on these details?
They saw a plane hit the Pentagon.
Not a truck bomb.
Not a missile.
They saw a plane.
All these little details you bring up are background noise.
And since you are getting your proof from the internet you might as well throw in a unicorn too.

3. The downed light poles at the Pentagon were staged in advance ...
posted by LaBTop.

Now who's gonna stage a conspiracy involving people downing light poles to prove a fictitious flight path?
Our government can't get water to people after a hurricane.
Our government can't rescue hostages with trained military troops.
Yet you think they got people to climb light poles to sever them at the correct height, in incognito?

But it's good to see you have moved on from the seismic theme.

Yet you think they got people to climb light poles to sever them at the correct height, in incognito?

No, they would option to first remove those poles on an earlier date by a confiscated VDOT truck, and replace them with new ones. Then severe their tops in their secret shop with a fast circular moving blunt instrument that has the form of a wingtip.
Then bring them back the early morning of 9/11, when it is still dark, to their designated spots, lay them in position to be found on 9/11 after 09:38 a.m., and remove the new ones and take those back to their shop.
Thus, there are now 5 already precut lamp poles laying in the grass, and no poles on those 5 spots. Who would ever notice that in those few hours before Flight 77 impacted.
And the first cut lamp post, presumably catapulted through the taxi driver's car's front window, has been quickly carried from his hidden location behind that bridge rim, to its photographed place beside that taxi and white car. By those calmly operating Feds in the known photos from after that incident.
That's how I would do that.

We still are left with the nagging question : Why go to that length, if just letting the plane doing its intended job would be far less risky? However, a plane is not a bullet and can't be aimed 100% sure.
As indicated by all these 22 North of CITGO flight path witnesses...

It can only mean that the 9/11 planners did not want to take one grain of risk, and wanted to be sure that the intended mayhem path inside that Wedge 1 and deeper down, could be "undoubtedly evidenced" by those 5 poles combined with that "exit hole". Which by the way clearly was an entry hole made by detcord inside a water backed thin plastic mold.
An entry-blast thingy. Forgot the military slang.

Found those FOIA datasets back :
FAA RADES NORAD FOIA Data
Pentagon_Images_And_Video(current folder)
Pentagon_Citgo_Video(current folder)

CITGO.wmv file
That last link is the CITGO.wmv video file, you need a bit-torrent application, see
911datasets.org...

Only the .wmv (Windows Media) file did provide enough sharpness to recognize Sergeant Lagasse movements and positions.
The YouTube version is pure clownishness in its vagueness.

originally posted by: LaBTop
No, they would option to first remove those poles on an earlier date by a confiscated VDOT truck, and replace them with new ones. Then severe their tops in their secret shop with a fast circular moving blunt instrument that has the form of a wingtip.
Then bring them back the early morning of 9/11, when it is still dark, to their designated spots, lay them in position to be found on 9/11 after 09:38 a.m., and remove the new ones and take those back to their shop.
Thus, there are now 5 already precut lamp poles laying in the grass, and no poles on those 5 spots. Who would ever notice that in those few hours before Flight 77 impacted.
And the first cut lamp post, presumably catapulted through the taxi driver's car's front window, has been quickly carried from his hidden location behind that bridge rim, to its photographed place beside that taxi and white car.

Good grief, your conspiracy theories get sillier everyday!

Which by the way clearly was an entry hole made by detcord inside a water backed thin plastic mold.

So not only do we have silent explosives bringing down the WTC, but now we have magical detcord with a few kilo's of explosives blowing a 757 sized hole hole in a reinforced building!

The C-Ring wall was not re-enforced, silly enough. It was made from bricks.

And pay attention next time, I talked about an entry hole that was the proposed plane parts C-Ring EXIT hole, not the D-Ring plane ENTRY hole.
And I posted extensively about that subject, with photos of the apparatus.
It's just a thin flat structure with thicker rims, which rim is filled with a detcord and water. They put a stick against it which holds it firmly against the, to be breached wall. Then detonate it. Nice round hole as a result, with the same ring of broken bricks surrounding it as in the photos of that famous C-Ring "exit" hole.

A military Wall Breaching Unit.

ProudBird :

reply to post by snowcrash911

Not really "fluttering"

See the plane 'fluttering'

The blue line on the graphic, as charted, represents the vertical 'g'-forces. Any pilot knows (well, except those at the "other" site....LOL) that you can exert momentary g-forces just by application of the controls....the elevators, in the manner of vertical 'g's......a lousy and abrupt pilot, on the controls, can make the "ride" very uncomfortable.....which is what is indicated in that DFDR tracing graph.

Professionals try to make it "smooth"......compared to a hack like Hani Hanjour.....he just wanted to hit his "target".....didn't care about "finesse" in the process...nor "passenger comfort"....

[edit] the "pulling" of almost two 'g's on the graph just shows he leveled, aggressively, a descent...OR was also aggressive on the controls, in the vertical axis. The time frame, on the bottom, shows the brief fractions of seconds, and the vertical g's underwent......[end/edit]
--snip--
edit on Tue 3 January 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)

ProudBird is an experienced, longtime passenger planes pilot, and a former 757 pilot.

For me, it looks as if those last seconds fast vertical G corrections were done to smooth out the ground-effect results. And level the plane off, parallel to the 110 yards wide Pentagon lawn.
Which could only have been done in those 2 last seconds, when aided by super-fast software corrections with those elevators. In other words, an autopilot system.
But the DFDR showed that all the on-board standard autopilot systems were already 10 minutes before impact, switched off.

They want us to belief that Hani Hanjour flew that 757 manually...
I seems that there was an additional automated system at work...if we may believe those DFDR its last two seconds. Which compensated at that huge 800 km/hr - 470 knots DFDR recorded end-speed for the still present -however slighter than normally at landing speed- upwards pushing ground-effect on the plane.
The faster a plane flies near the ground, the lesser the upwards reacting ground-effects on its wing surfaces.
Nonetheless, those effects are still present, but not as strong as at much slower landing speeds, where ground effect is a serious effect to compensate for. At those slower speeds, the pilot has however much more time to do just that and use his stick//steering column and pedals to push the plane downwards, against the upwards resulting ground effects.

At that 8oo km/hr speed however, a human pilot could not react fast enough on the slow arriving signals in his cockpit from measuring instruments in the belly and in the wings, to level that 757 off so fast, parallel to that lawn.
That must have been done by an other, planted automated system.

Reheat thinks otherwise :

With apologies to ProudBird, I think that is fluttering of the tail surface, as well. That is too rapid to be be Pilot Induced Oscillations (PIO). There was an earlier period where he did get into a PIO, but not this. He simply could not move the controls rapidly enough to produce that. Fluttering due to the excessive speed is my call....

What an unbelievable coincidence then, that it was fluttering that kept the 757 perfectly parallel to the lawn in those last two seconds. And ground effect did not catapult it upwards, which one should expect in a chaotic occurrence as fluttering of the wing and tail surfaces (ailerons, elevators) would be.
The horizontal longitudinal speed vector force is of course much greater/stronger than the relatively small vertical forces resulting from excessive moving of an aileron or elevator.
That's why its so obvious, that quite strong and wide elevator movements were exercised in those last two seconds, to change the dive into a parallel flight, and that's not a logical result from any minimal fluttering movements of those tail surfaces.

Pentagon & Boeing 757 Ground Effect :
www.aerospaceweb.org...
Thus you can study for yourself how a fast low flying plane reacts on that diminishing, but still present ground effect.
It jumps up, pilot pushes it down, it jumps up ad infinitum, or until impacting the ground, a building or overshooting something aimed at. Which latter possibility I do not condone at all, that plane flew straight into the second floor slab.