9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

yes, and here's one where its all missing.

I am not sure what to think about the whole thread . but as for this quote . the reckage is clearly visible on this photo on thewhite patch middle right. now compare with the photos posted earlier again .

i ment middle left

en.wikipedia.org... :

... Uranium metal has very high density (19.1 g/cm³), which is 65% more dense than lead, but slightly less dense than gold. When finely divided, it can react with cold water; in air, uranium metal becomes coated with uranium oxide. Applications : As uranium metal is very dense and heavy, Depleted uranium (almost pure 238U with less than 0.2% 235U) is used by some militaries as shielding to protect tanks, and also in parts of bullets, kinetic energy penetrators and missiles. ... Depleted uranium is used in helicopters and airplanes as counterweights on certain wing parts.

It's already researched in this thread, that not any 757 -ever- was outfitted with DU counterweights on certain wing parts ! This reactive metal (DU) is also pyrophoric, which means it will burn spontaneously when reaching a certain temperature or accelerated beyond a certain speed, it will then react with the oxigen in the air it speeds through. It is even more reactive when it is finely devided powder, soluted in water. Because it reacts with cold water AND with air. And if such a mixture grinds through a building wall, it will surely ignite, and melt. So no excessive initial speed needed for ignition, the mere friction will do. And then we still have loads of jet fuel... en.wikipedia.org... :

As a product otherwise requiring long term storage as low level radioactive waste, depleted uranium can be obtained cheaply. It is useful for its extremely high density, which is only slightly less than that of tungsten. As well as a lower initial cost, depleted uranium is easier to roll, machine and cast than tungsten. However, it has extremely poor corrosion properties, can burn, and spalls easily, and since it is toxic and radioactive the facilities for processing it need to monitor and filter dust and airborne particles.

I can write an extensive thesis about the immens inhumane use of depleted uranium, and I will do that shortly, for now, these two links and their info is enough to know for use in this thread. Ofcourse the planners of 9/11 used DU in the planes they outfitted with remote controls and DU kinetic energy penetrators. They were not stupid. They used everything in their arsenal which they could get away with afterwards and explain away, especially since they know very well that their bosses own all the media channels in the western world, and most of the big ones in the rest of the world. And now we come to the greatest MYSTERY of this thread. The obvious totally wrong form of that famous exit hole ! That's not an exit hole, that's an entry hole. Blown out by an explosive cord roughly patched quickly on that wall of C-ring, and then ignited, so a "rescue" troup could very fast enter the premisses of ONI behind this wall, after the plane hit the front wall, and finish off the work they had expected to be done by the plane. They knew that there was a big room for mistakes in this plane attack, and they didn't want anything to be left behind. They fire bombed ONI's and the Army's accounting mainframes, and who knows how many still alive victims. There are many earwitness accounts of secondary explosions at the Pentagon AFTER the plane had hit. Proof ? Use your brain at last after 120 pages ! Look at the "exit angles" on the broken out rims of the brickwork between 1 and 2 on this first picture below : these are entry angles from an explosive detonation cord used from OUTSIDE to blow a hole in that wall. If that was an exit hole, those pieces 3,4 and 5 at the left could not be there! If that was an exit hole, it would be of something exiting at 180-53 = 127 degrees angle from inside, so from something coming through the building from about the direction of that famous parking boot camera, so from the RIGHT instead of from the left under 53 degrees. www.zbuk.net... And then look at the picture below, I gave earlier on, all the inner frame styles of those first floor windows are still intact, so nothing substantial made it to those glass windows, only airpressure and fine debris has reached that glass of those windows. I also have a photo of the windows on the OTHER side of that exit hole at that access road, and a LOT were blown out, now isn't that strange? Since those windows we see at the picture below, have still a lot of glass in it, so it was not enough airpressure arriving after plane impact, to blow all the glass out, and blow out windows on the OTHER side of that wall..... Btw, that bit of debris was trown out by hand by "rescue workers" far after the actual attack, nothing was there initially..... They had time enough to addapt the crime scene to the official story, during those 3 "emergency" evacuation periods on 9/11 and 12/11. keyholepublishing.com... And I told you already that only the upper 2/3 of that plane, the lightests parts, entered the first floor at the outside E-ring. Only the heaviest, 1/3 of the plane hit the wall at the outside E-ring, and still the floordeck between ground and first floor was intact, to observe at the first pictures taken after impact. Now try to draw a straight line in the picture below, through the building's ground floor to that exit hole, from the point of impact under the planes cockpit, (where the front landing gear layed folded horizontally in its under-belly), and NOT touching any collumns, even when you swap all these squares acting as collumns for dots. And then it becomes obvious, that it's a miracle if that landing gear did not hit any collumns. And observe, that none of the line of grey collumns in that C-ring outer wall ANYWHERE have been damaged at all. Then we have the 2 landing gears in the wings, left and right, also very heavy and made from very strong massive metal. They did not make it to those grey C-ring outer wall collumns either. It looks, when we accept the fact that that exit hole was in fact an entry hole, that the whole impact angle of the plane was WRONG, and that it hit under more like a 30 to 45 degrees angle, when we discard the significance of those last 5 yellow colored collumns. Then suddenly we also know that all these lampposts at the front were blasted away, and not touched by an aircrafts wings. damage.1accesshost.com... PS : Lance, that drawing of the final flightpath of flight 77 has still a big uncertainty, that's the diameter of the circle, we will have to wade through more eyewitness accounts, to obtain solid viewpoint spots, so we can lay that circle inbetween them. If that circle turns out to be so tight as drawn by you, then there was no pilot IN that plane doing the steering, but a remote one in that C-130. Guess what? I'm sure of it. Left to you the readers, to fill in the gaps I already found, since it is time you start using the brainpower given to you at birth, but severely damaged by endless years of television addiction. Do not wait untill you get fed your daily fairytale pictures. Go and get the real ones YOURSELF.

Where is the HEAP of bricks which should be laying around and in front of those 2 "exit" hole pictures ? ? ? The few you see in the smaller picture, lay solely to the LEFT, and the plane debris should have come from the left under a 53 degree angle, depositing eventual bricks to the RIGHT then. [edit on 24/11/05 by LaBTop]

"They had time enough to addapt the crime scene to the official story, during those 3 "emergency" evacuation periods on 9/11 and 12/11. " That must be 9/11 and 9/12, ofcourse.

Originally posted by LaBTop The obvious totally wrong form of that famous exit hole ! That's not an exit hole, that's an entry hole. Blown out by an explosive cord roughly patched quickly on that wall of C-ring, and then ignited, so a "rescue" troup could very fast enter the premisses of ONI behind this wall, after the plane hit the front wall, and finish off the work they had expected to be done by the plane. They knew that there was a big room for mistakes in this plane attack, and they didn't want anything to be left behind. They fire bombed ONI's and the Army's accounting mainframes, and who knows how many still alive victims. There are many earwitness accounts of secondary explosions at the Pentagon AFTER the plane had hit. Proof ? Use your brain at last after 120 pages ! Look at the "exit angles" on the broken out rims of the brickwork between 1 and 2 on this first picture below : these are entry angles from an explosive detonation cord used from OUTSIDE to blow a hole in that wall. If that was an exit hole, those pieces 3,4 and 5 at the left could not be there! If that was an exit hole, it would be of something exiting at 180-53 = 127 degrees angle from inside, so from something coming through the building from about the direction of that famous parking boot camera, so from the RIGHT instead of from the left under 53 degrees.

I am not going to address the rest of your post, mainly because I simply skimmed it and don’t have the time right now. But this part is such obvious BS that I almost fell out of my chair laughing. That hole is obviously punched out from the inside. Your picture shows that it was. Holes get bigger on the side that they blow out of, not the other way around. That is besides the fact that there is debris on the outside and explosives would push stuff inward. It is possible that the fire department enlarged this hole using conventional rescue equipment to reach the fire with hoses, and I have heard mention that this might have been done. It was not explosive cord as you say, but rather using normal tools, hooking through the wall and pulling backward. For crying out loud where do you get this stuff about an entry team going in a finishing off stuff in the ONI offices? If the powers that be had enough control on the military to send in such a team, don’t you think that they would have had enough control on the Office of Naval Intelligence to simply have them deep 6 whatever evidence they wanted destroyed? Better yet, why not just send in a team in the middle of the night to disappear whatever evidence you think was in these offices? This strike team stuff is speculation of the highest order and there is NO EVIDENCE to support any of it in the least. Why not just speculate that little green men from Mars used a special magnetic field to cause this wall to blow outward so that they could steal back plans from Navy Intelligence to build a UFO based on reverse engineered parts? Occums Razor, dude, the simplest explanation usually is the right one… There would never be a plot that is as convoluted as you all are speculating that the government pulled off on this day, between here and the WTC threads. Simple reason this would never work is the fact that tons of things would have gone wrong, or someone in the military would have had a burst of conscience and failed to do their part or leaked it. Simplest answer the damage was in fact done solely with aircraft. Lets see according to you guys you would need the following:

1. Prewire the WTC with hidden explosives, and a team to do that. (Besides hoping that someone does not accidentally set them off in advance. Like someone accidently setting a microwave on fire making popcorn, or smoking in a closet, crap that goes on in any large office building.)
2. Plant debris of an aircraft in the Pentagon, yet keep it out of sight of the guys in ONI and the construction workers, janitors, visitors, etc.; plus a team to do this. (they must have had a special debris invisibility field to use, and they forgot to shut it off after the plane hit, hence the lack of a debris field)
3. Team to hijack and reroute the three aircraft.
4. Team to prep and launch two replacement aircraft.
5. Team to disappear the passengers and crew from the original planes.
6. Team on the C-130 to remotely control at least two aircraft (depending on which version you believe)
7. Team on ground to fire a missile at the Pentagon.
8. A team to go into the Pentagon and remove whatever you think they removed.
9. Oh almost forgot; team to fire missile from the Wolworth Building.
10. And oh yeah, guy to drop a bomb down the side of one of the WTC buildings.

I think that about covers them all… It seems like an awful lot of folks would have been in on this, and an awful lot of places for things to go wrong. Just out of curiosity, do you think so lowly of our military personnel that if they where ordered to do something like this that they would simply shut up, follow orders and do it; especially since they are not required to follow an unethical order? I know that if I had been one of them, even if I felt that my life would be in danger if I did not go through with it, that whatever equipment I had with me would have magically failed to function and I would’ve been unable to complete my mission. Also just out of curiosity is your book or website advertising sales declining since thread showed up? I noticed that you only post to 911 threads...

Originally posted by LaBTop Where is the HEAP of bricks which should be laying around and in front of those 2 "exit" hole pictures ? ? ? The few you see in the smaller picture, lay solely to the LEFT, and the plane debris should have come from the left under a 53 degree angle, depositing eventual bricks to the RIGHT then. [edit on 24/11/05 by LaBTop]

If you cannot see the bricks in that picture, time to replace your monitor. (Hint they are the white and reddish square things lying all around in the first picture) [edit on 11/25/2005 by defcon5]

I am not going to address the rest of your post, mainly because I simply skimmed it and don’t have the time right now. But this part is such obvious BS that I also almost fell out of my chair laughing. You did not observe in the left of that hole, those darkgrey pieces 3,4,5 of drywall with the fitting rails still attached? You did not made an assumption how many bricks are needed to fill up that holes 2 different walls? Any idea how many bricks we're talking about? You did not observe, that eventual bricks should lay to the right, not to the left? You did not observe, that those bricks should end up laying UNDER the debris? And you obviously did not understand and read what I posted before, I think that a big airplane hit the Pentagon, which was remotely steered by someone sitting in that C-130 radar jamming plane which flew behind that impacting plane. I also have a strong feeling that DU or Tungsten was used, either as belly load in that plane, or in a small but supersonic missile launched by that plane, or by the C-130, or by that Army heli seen just before impact. Further on, the Administration you think you voted for, is definitely not the real one with the real power. Several of your presidents have found that out the hard way. The real power is waged by a select group of bankers, military men and women, and military-industrialists, steered by a top echelon of superwealthy families, from all over the globe. You also seem not aware of the FACT that the Pentagon moguls managed to let 7.3 TRILLION dollar disappear in thin air, announced by Rumsfeld the day before, and now totally ignored by everyone? The ones trying to address it, are fired btw. And they declared recently that they could not recalculate where all that damn money had gone, since the personnel needed to do the calculations, was killed on 9/11. The cockiness of these guys is astonishing. Please notice, the earliest picture of that hole I have, is the small picture. Could you count for me the bricks to the right and in front of the fireman please? I come to at most 120, solely to the LEFT. And that's not the side where debris and bricks would have been spread by airplane parts smattering through that wall.

And now we come to the greatest MYSTERY of this thread. The obvious totally wrong form of that famous exit hole ! That's not an exit hole, that's an entry hole. Blown out by an explosive cord roughly patched quickly on that wall of C-ring, and then ignited, so a "rescue" troup could very fast enter the premisses of ONI behind this wall, after the plane hit the front wall, and finish off the work they had expected to be done by the plane.... ... Proof ? Use your brain at last after 120 pages ! Look at the "exit angles" on the broken out rims of the brickwork between 1 and 2 on this first picture below : these are entry angles from an explosive detonation cord used from OUTSIDE to blow a hole in that wall. If that was an exit hole, those pieces 3,4 and 5 at the left could not be there! If that was an exit hole, it would be of something exiting at 180-53 = 127 degrees angle from inside, so from something coming through the building from about the direction of that famous parking boot camera, so from the RIGHT instead of from the left under 53 degrees. ...

the 'entrance hole' theory makes sense, although i doubt that anybody would be willing to go into a burning and shattered building, let alone be able to amount to much once inside (assuming that damage extended to a point just behind that last wall) to shoot a few survivors who would certainly move out of the 'hot zone' all by themselves, - right into the arms of security and medical personell - it's more likely designed to leave us guessing for years concerning the details. much like the flattened lamp poles, which don't make any sense at all, as they're obviously fake (ie. not hit by aircraft, pointing in various directions) for no apparent purpose. plant so many distractions, that even rational people will be blinded by the sheer amount of BS. i'm not willing to believe that any of the photos we have are showing an unaltered crime scene, so what we're probably seeing is a series of pics which show a gradual increase of placed 'evidence' PS: the only shaky impact-related explanation i came up with was deflection of a penetrator during the last meters of travel by a strong, orthogonally situated wall, 'reversing' the angle of exit and deforming the 'projectile'... of course, assuming that these pieces of wall hanging from the left side are too loosely connected to give any real clue wrt orientation of that hole.. please note that attributing the hole to explosives places much less emphasis on such a penetrator [edit on 26-11-2005 by Long Lance]

I too do not understand why anyone would go to so much trouble. Hell if the government did have something to do with it then surely they would have simply helped fund the terrorist attack as described. Surely the attack (as described) would be devestating enough and actually quite easy to organise instead of all this extravagant crap. I'm sure if they did want to do anything like this they would have no difficulty in finding some 'volunteers' for the job and simply fly the planes into the targets as described. Can't you see all this stuff with remote controls, missiles, explosives, planted evidence etc is all un-necessary? It makes it sound like some sort of mystery game. Slightly off topic to the Pentagon, but seeing the mention of WTC 'explosives' - why would they go to all that trouble? Would flying the aircraft in not be enough? And even if not, why do it that way and not simply wire the WTCs with explosives after the plane crashes and when the buildings were 'off' and empty and there would be virtually no chance of getting caught.. Then, a couple days later, a tragic 'accident' caused by the weakened structure would result in the buildings collapse, also with the added bonus of no or few cameras around to record the event for later scrutiny. Back to the Pentagon though, can anyone give any good, logical and realistic reasons why anyone would go to the trouble of doing anything other than 'simply' flying an airliner into the building? Or are you suggesting that flying an airliner into the Pentagon doesn't make dramatic enough TV? [edit on 26-11-2005 by AgentSmith]

Originally posted by AgentSmith ... Slightly off topic to the Pentagon, but seeing the mention of WTC 'explosives' - why would they go to all that trouble? Would flying the aircraft in not be enough? And even if not, why do it that way and not simply wire the WTCs with explosives after the plane crashes and when the buildings were 'off' and empty and there would be virtually no chance of getting caught.. Then, a couple days later, a tragic 'accident' caused by the weakened structure would result in the buildings collapse, also with the added bonus of no or few cameras around to record the event for later scrutiny. ...

doubtful, surviving aircraft collision damage was a design requirement, on top of that we don't know what the real target was and that somebody requested a secure line, probably after having stumbled across something very disturbing, taking your time would result in the plot blowing up in your face, wouldn't it? as for the pentagon, i can think of many reasons why an airliner alone wouldn't be enough, including a relatively large margin of error (too many variables to control) and the desire to destroy another area outside the plane's path (see scorched roof far away from the impact location). consider that using the airliner might have been an add-on, more for the purpose of PR rather than for real effect. PS: the mystery game is a secret agency's job, isn't it? [edit on 26-11-2005 by Long Lance]

Originally posted by AgentSmith Slightly off topic to the Pentagon, but seeing the mention of WTC 'explosives' - why would they go to all that trouble? Would flying the aircraft in not be enough?

No; there is absolutely no evidence in the least that flying a jet into a building will, or even can possibly result in this: You could cite NIST's report for evidence, I suppose, if it weren't for two things: A) NIST never explains how global collapse ensued, but simply says that global collapse was "inevitable" because of the failure of one floor, leaving the rest to our imaginations. B) NIST does not include proper procedures for duplication of its work, nor has it released blueprints of the buildings, etc. This effectively prevents anyone from double-checking NIST. It isn't scientific in the least. You're virtually taking the word of this agency without it offering you any real proof whatsoever, as clever and convincing as its explanation may be. Regardless of whether or not you think explosives were used, there is absolutely no evidence that jet impact and fire can cause the above devastation. AgentSmith, out of curiousity, have you ever put much thought behind the problem of what would appear to be insufficient potential energy within the caps to destroy so utterly all of the floors below? Well, have you heard of free energy? You probably have, being a frequenter of ATS. The idea behind free energy machines, and why so many argue they cannot exist, is that their energy output is greater than their input. They take a relatively small amount of energy, and produce an effect that would require a larger amount. Observe this image, courtesy of the WCIP Foundation: This was WTC1. See the size of the cap in relation to the rest of the building? There's an obvious problem here. That cap is much smaller than the rest of the building, and yet we are to believe it crushed all over the floors below? Here's something else to consider: the core columns thickened towards the base, as the bottom floors had to support more weight than the top. The cap was much lighter than lower floors. And here's something else to consider: that cap would not survive very long into collapse before being utterly destroyed and ejected outwards. So then what continued to drive the crushing of the building? No more cap to drive the collapse! And here's something else to consider: the collapse never really slowed. At least, it never slowed to any degree we could plainly observe. So, if you are to believe the official explanation, not only did that cap have enough energy to crush the much heavier and much more numerous bottom floors, but there was enough energy that the collapse didn't even slow as it got towards the base. But there's another problem: if there was enough energy to crush the bottom floors so effortlessly to the ground, why wasn't it faster at start? Why didn't it start faster and slow down as the collapse began to lose momentum? It was steady, with the floors coming out as if to some pulse or allotted amount of time. Don't you find any of that odd?

And even if not, why do it that way and not simply wire the WTCs with explosives after the plane crashes and when the buildings were 'off' and empty and there would be virtually no chance of getting caught.. Then, a couple days later, a tragic 'accident' caused by the weakened structure would result in the buildings collapse, also with the added bonus of no or few cameras around to record the event for later scrutiny.

First off, if the collapses were separated much from the impacts, the psychological effect would be drawn out and not as pronounced as if it had "all happened so fast," as one might say. The horror of it all would be diminished. Further, NIST and FEMA would've had a tougher time with explanations than they did. The planes alone would of course not have brought the towers down. The office fires that ensued after the jet fuel was consumed, theoretically, continued heating the steel to temperatures greater than even the burning jet fuel could, and thereby caused sufficient weakening for collapse. In reality, though, there is plenty of evidence that prior to the collapses, and after the jet fuel was consumed, the fires were actually dying. The evidence I'm referring to is in the discoloration (darkening) of the smoke from uncombusted hydrocarbons. In fires of this nature, dark smoke means soot, and soot means uncombusted hydrocarbons. And uncombusted hydrocarbons means the fire isn't doing the job it could be. If I had to guess why WTC2 was brought down before WTC1, it would be because WTC2's fires were in bad shape and wouldn't be as convincing if they had waited much longer. [edit on 26-11-2005 by bsbray11]

Also if the buildings were not completely destroyed Sliverstein would have not got his cut of the deal, i.e. the insurance pay-off... He had to be pasified, to have allowed the event to have happend IMO... Destroying the buildings was a win-win situation for those involved.

Regarding that mysterious C-130.

Disaster Viewed From Arlington Daily Press; Newport News; Sep 14, 2001; TERRY SCANLON Daily Press; (Abstract): [Pam Young's] brother, [Keith Wheelhouse], of Virginia Beach, spotted the planes first. THE SECOND PLANE looked similar to a C-130 transport plane, [Keith Wheelhouse] said. He believes it flew DIRECTLY ABOVE THE AMERICAN AIRLINES JET, AS IF TO PREVENT TWO PLANES FROM APPEARING ON RADAR - WHILE AT THE SAME TIME - GUIDING THE JET TOWARD THE PENTAGON. Wheelhouse's account of a second plane is unlike everything else that has been reported about the attack. Some initial reports on television said a second airliner might be headed for the Pentagon, but authorities later dismissed that. A Norfolk-based FBI agent interviewed Wheelhouse Wednesday evening. A possible explanation for the second plane could be a plane landing at nearby Ronald Reagan National Airport. The Pentagon is between the cemetery and the airport. But Wheelhouse insists he was not confused by other air traffic. Daily Press, September 14, 2001 billstclair.com...

Hampton Roads Woman Says She Too, Saw Plane Following Jet That Hit Pentagon Daily Press; Newport News; Sep 15, 2001; TERRY SCANLON Daily Press; [Abstract]: Kelly Knowles, a First Colonial High School alumnus who now lives in an apartment a few miles from the Pentagon, said some sort of plane followed the doomed American Airlines jet toward the Pentagon, then veered away after the explosion. Her account of the attack is similar to that of a Surry woman and her Virginia Beach brother, who were at Arlington National Cemetery at the time. [...] "Thank God somebody else saw that. THERE WAS MOST DEFINATELY A SECOND PLANE," Knowles said. "It's so frustrating because NOBODY KNOWS about the second plane, or IF THEY DO THEY'RE HIDING IT for some reason." [...] At the same time, [Keith Wheelhouse] and his sister, Pam Young, who lives in Surry, were preparing to leave a funeral at Arlington National Cemetery, which is less than a mile from the Pentagon, when they watched the jet approach and slam into the Pentagon. Both of them, as well as at least one other person at the funeral, insist that THERE WAS ANOTHER PLANE flying near the hijacked jet. Daily Press, September 15, 2001 billstclair.com...

Northern Virginia resident John O'Keefe was one of the many commuters who witnessed the attack on the Pentagon. [...] "The first thing I did was pull over onto the shoulder, and when I got out of the car I saw another plane flying over my head, and it scared ...me, because I knew there had been two planes that hit the World Trade Center. And I started jogging up the ramp to get as far away as possible. "Then the plane -- it looked like a C-130 cargo plane -- started turning away from the Pentagon, it did a complete turnaround. --New York Lawyer, September 12, 2001 USAToday.com Editor Joel Sucherman saw it all: an American Airlines jetliner fly left to right across his field of vision as he commuted to work Tuesday morning. [...] Off to the west, Sucherman saw another plane climb steeply and make a sharp turn. "I thought, 'Is this thing coming around to make a second attack? If there is another explosion, we're toast.'" --e-Week, September 13, 2001 [Scott P. Cook's] office is located on the fifth floor of the Portals building, at 1280 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington DC. It's the southernmost building at the end of 14th Street, right at the Tidal Basin and Maine Avenue.[...] As we watched the black plume gather strength, less than a minute after the explosion, we saw an odd sight that no one else has yet commented on. Directly in back of the plume, which would place it almost due west from our office, a four-engine propeller plane, which Ray later said resembled a C-130, started a steep decent [sic] towards the Pentagon. --Cloth Monkey [last updated November 1, 2001]

Albert Hemphill: Within moments there was a very loud bang, which seemed to come from the direction of Henderson Hall. At least, all the heads turned towards Henderson. It is possible that this was a secondary explosion from the Pentagon or possibly an F-16 going supersonic. [...] The only large fixed wing aircraft to appear was a gray C-130, which appeared to be a Navy ELECTRONIC WARFARE aircraft, he seemed to survey the area and depart in on a westerly heading. - Our Net Family [undated] www.ournetfamily.com... (Note LT : This link is removed now...)

Soon after the crash (Within 30 seconds of the crash) I witnessed a military cargo plane (Possibly a C-130) fly over the crash site and circle the mushroom cloud. My brother inlaw also witnessed the same plane following the jet while he was on the HOV lanes in Springfield. He said that he saw a jetliner flying low over the tree tops near Seminary RD in Springfield, VA. and soon afterwards a military plane was seen flying right behind it. I think this was also a reason for the false threat of another plane about to crash which caused rescuers to have to evacuate for a short time after the initial crash. I have done my research onthis and according to time magazine it took 24 minutes before Norad was supposedly notified about this particuliar jet and fighters were scrambling to intercept at that time. Isn't it odd how there is Not a single mention of this aircraft in ANY of the articles written about this crash? Also if you had not noticed... There is not a single picture or live footage of the actual jet prior to its crash at the Pentagon. Nor is there any of the one that crashed in Pennsylvania. But if Anyone who rides the metro-rail knows, there are plenty of Video cameras all around National airport at the parking Garages and the high level security buildings found all around Crystal city. (3 of which I have personally found pointed directly towards crystal city which would have given a great line of site shot of that jet prior to the crash as well as any other plane which might have been following it. I personally believe that the government new full well that this was about to happen and they are hiding something a lot bigger than they are willing to let out. I was interviewed at Washingtonpost.com and gave them my full story, but THEY DID NOT PRINT IT AS I HAVE TOLD YOU. _______________________ On a Metro train to National Airport, Allen Cleveland looked out the window to see a jet heading down toward the Pentagon. "I thought, 'There's no landing strip on that side of the subway tracks,' " he said. Before he could process that thought, he saw "a huge mushroom cloud. The lady next to me was in absolute hysterics." Washingtonpost.com, September 12, 2001 www.washingtonpost.com...

C-130 Crew Saw Pentagon Strike, Official Confirms Daily Press; Newport News; Oct 17, 2001; TERRY SCANLON and DAVID LERMAN Daily Press; [Abstract]: [Keith Wheelhouse] and at least two other witnesses to the Pentagon attack were troubled that Pentagon spokesmen had until now said they were unaware of a C-130 being in the area at the time. In the days immediately following the Sept. 11 hijackings, the Pentagon had no knowledge of the C-130's encounter, because all reports were classified by the Air National Guard, [!] [Lt. Col. Kenneth McClellan] said. --- Daily Press, October 17, 2001 At 9.36 the national airport [Dulles] instructs a military C130 (Golfer 06) that has just departed Andrews air force base to intercept the flight and identify it. At 9.38 AA77 crashes into the south-west side of the Pentagon. --- The Guardian, Wednesday October 17, 2001

At 9:25, [Jane] Garvey [FAA], in an historic and admirable step, and almost certainly after getting an okay from the White House, initiated A NATIONAL GROUND STOP, which forbids takeoffs and requires planes in the air to get down as soon as reasonable. THE ORDER...APLIED TO virtually every single kind of machine that can takeoff - civilian, MILITARY, [and] LAW ENFORCEMENT. Time, September 14, 2001 www.time.com...

NOTES : 1. - At least one of the witnesses identified the C-130 as an electronic warfare navy one (since it was grey, thus navy?) 2. - That C-130 had 2 minutes after they gave the order to intercept, before flight 77 impacted. And it had just departed Andrews air force base....How many flight minutes for a climbing from the tarmac, C-130, to reach the vicinity of the Pentagon, anybody has a clue ? ? ? So they were able to launch a C-130 radar and radio jamming plane from nearby Andrews airbase, but NONE of the many fighterjets stationed there in the more than an hour BEFORE ! Nobody smells something stinky ? 3. - Why is that plane, the C-130, allowed to airborne, within a timeframe of 11 minutes after the National Ground Stop was ordered and initiated? 4. - Why did that Army helicopter fly around the Pentagon, just before impact, as seen by several witnesses, so, 13 minutes after all planes and heli's were ordered grounded? 5. - WTC connected : why do I count numerous heli's flying around the towers at both collapses, 1st at 09:59, 2nd at 10:28, while at 09:25 every single kind of machine that can takeoff was ordered grounded, and btw, that idiot deputy commissioner in New York far before that ordered NO roof rescues to be undertaken at the towers. That guy should be in prison for 4 years already. The NIST report comes up with an explanation for that behavior: one helipilot reported that his motor lost some power, he thought from sucked in smoke. Now, if I ever heard a bulls-manure explanation, then it's that one. The filmer of the footage of that explosions-sounds video from the 9/11 eyewitness site , reports to have a video where you can see a man cattrolled down to the roof of the towers from a helicopter, and throw a package on the roof, then gets hauled back in, and lo-and behold, 6 seconds later the whole tower collapses.... You can also clearly see at least 3 bright white flashes on and above that roof, just before the collapse begins, and then you see that heli speeding away to the left, coming OUT OF THE SMOKE above the rooftop. So who was that coward heli pilot who is cited in the NIST 1-8 report, which was the "cause" of that criminal deputy commisioner to halt ALL roof rescue efforts? They could have saved hundreds of people, damnit ! You can't check on him, since all the audio tapes are locked away by NIST. Any idea why? I do. I am sure that tape message is falsified. There was no such cowardly heli pilot. These guys are damn brave. They would never send such a message. Before the collapses, many pilots were demanding to go down on the roofs !

The Navy doesn't have any EW C-130s, and ALL USAF transports are painted grey, no matter what the mission, with the exception of the VIP transports. Navy C-130s are painted white. It's almost impossible to tell a Compass Call from a regular Herc from the ground without having binoculars or a telescope unless he is REALLY low. As far as the ground stop order goes, it wouldn't be "Stop flying, keep everying on the ground." and everything suddenly stops. It would take time to get the word out to everyone, and confirm it. Taking off 11 minutes later is no surprise. USN C-130 USAF C-130 external image Compass Call The only visible difference between a C-130, and EC-130 is the antenna that hangs under the tail, and from any sort of distance that is VERY hard if not impossible to see. I have been identifying planes in flight for many years, and have very good eyesight, and I can't tell an EC-130 from a C-130 until they're on short final, or even on the ground. Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link. [edit on 26/11/2005 by Mirthful Me] [edit on 11/26/2005 by Zaphod58]

I had posted an article here in one of the Pentagon threads somewhere that was a bit more in depth, but anyway LaBTop you had mentioned Depleted uranium.

Radiation more than 8 times higher than normal

On Sept. 11, I called a medical doctor who lives 7 miles from the Pentagon and warned her that DU could have burned in the hijacked jets that crashed (up to 3000 pounds were used in 747's). She turned on her gamma meter - radiation levels were 8 times higher than normal inside her house. She informed the Nuclear Information ResourceService in Washington DC[Phone: 202-328-0002], and the EPA, FBI, HazMat and other emergency response agencies went to the Pentagon to investigate. A pile of rubble from the crash was radioactive, but the EPA rep said "oh... it's probably depleted uranium... it's not a health hazard unless you breathe it". Firefighters, Pentagon personnel, and communities nearby DID BREATHE IT. There was no follow up investigation, and what about the World Trade Center in NY? Radiation almost never gets into the media. It is a taboo subject. www.xs4all.nl...

[edit on 26/11/2005 by Sauron]

Thought you Pentagon folks might be interested in this. Below is a link to a lengthy interview with Nila Sagadevan regarding the Pentagon strike. Sagadevan is both an aeronautical engineer and a pilot with over 6000 hours commercial flight time. He has some interesting things to say about the flight maneuvers and navigation carried out by Hani "Crack Pilot" Hanjour, the damage to the Pentagon, and many other things. mp3.rbnlive.com... Worth a listen. [edit on 2005-11-26 by wecomeinpeace]

Those helicopters you saw were either news, radio, or NYPD choppers circling around the buildings to see if the buildings had either partially or completely collapsed. This was done due to the fact that it was the only way to confirm if the towers were down. Plus, those guys were up there broadcasting warnings to both police and firemen in the buildings to GET OUT! Unfortunately, a majority of the firemen that did not heed the warnings were killed.

The EC-130 has also two extra thick PODS sticking to the left and right side of the tail section, Zaphod58. If you are over 40, then now is the time to see an optician. (smile) And that's probably how this man recognized that C-130 as a EC-130 Compass Call radar and radio jamming aircraft. Sauron, I already addressed DU and the radiation levels extensively in, I believe, this thread. If not this one, then you have to look in the other 4 ones I posted in. I have even mentioned the name and age, 77 yrs, of that female doctor. And posted a BIG photo of rescue workers in full hazmat gear, washing their boots and overalls with soap solutions and water, in front of the collapsed Pentagon. Thought that everyone understood the weight of that kind of picture. The Pentagon was FULL aware that radiation was involved, see that picture. Gimmefootball400, when the DVD of the guys from 9/11 eyewitness will be "freed" and posted on the net, you will see what exactly I mean with that specific heli and what hung under it. Keep an eye on this wonderfull website : Netctr.com - Media: Documentaries of Importance : www.netctr.com... Fast downloads of nearly all important 9/11 documentary videos ! I don't understand why people in the USA want to make money on such important information, that's why I salute mr Jimmy Walters from reopen9/11.org for his altruistic efforts to bring the truth to the masses in the USA. He paid for everything with his private money. His rewards for it were harassments by the police and the FBI, and such grave personal threads, that he moved to Europe, where he lives now. Your country breeds too many Nazi's. Get rid of them!

Yes they do. Have you ever looked at a C-130 several thousand feet in the air? You see the outline of a C-130, you don't see two pods sticking off the side of it because they're too small. Unless he had come way down, which I have never seen any evidence of, you aren't going to be able to see two pods that stick 12 feet or so off the side of the airplane. I've seen them fly over here dozens of times on their way to Asia, and it's impossible to tell a Compass Call from a Herc until they are almost on the ground.

the call name of the plane was "Golfer 06", must be quite simple to get the specifics of that plane on that day. And, it is stated by a witness, that the plane circled the smoke collumn and then took off. That means he was quite LOW.