9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

Originally posted by Zaphod58 All it means by the registration numbers being registered still is that for some reason United didn't bother to file the paperwork to deregister the N number for those two planes. It could have been overlooked, or simply forgotten with their Bankruptcy issues.

of course! when it comes top 91111, incompetency is the RULE of LAW. pretty much any 'incompetency'(all of which point to the same 'conspiracy theory'), can be deemed as 'just human error'. do you realise how astronomical the odds are against every spoonerism/freudian slip/incompetence-based turn of events, that has a common theme regarding 911, and that that theme matches the 'conspiracy theories' of thousands of TRUTH-OBSESSED, voraciously researching humans, being UNRELATED are? that's one one funky run-on sentence, but damn, sometimes words are so FAT, and strings of weird logic can be only be refuted with strings of weirdcounterillogic !

Originally posted by HowardRoark If I understand you correctly, you are saying that a commercial plane approaching the Pentagon will be shot down. Is this correct? How close can a commercial plane get before this “program” is triggered? 1/4 mile, 1/2 mile, 1 mile?

let me, howard. has the control tower told all commercial flights to stay out of a five-ten mile or so radius from the pentagon yet, in your scenario? i think there was plenty of time to shut down the airport right beside the pentagon, and it would only make sense in this situation. the 'usa' is a big helpless baby. there, i said it, and the 'terrorists' proved it. [edit on 14-1-2006 by billybob]

Originally posted by Zaphod58 All it means by the registration numbers being registered still is that for some reason United didn't bother to file the paperwork to deregister the N number for those two planes. It could have been overlooked, or simply forgotten with their Bankruptcy issues.

Oh yeah that's it. They forgot for four yrs. The most prolific and historical day in American History that involved two of their planes. And they and the actual owners forgot to 'file the paperwork'. Even after repeated calls to the FAA and United. Even after that, they only change it to "Cancelled" not "Destroyed". C'mon man. This is why Flight 175 was still valid...It was scheduled to land LAX @ 12:33 pm, after the 9/11 attacks occured. But it landed somewhere else. Read: What’s so mysterious about Flight 175? team8plus.org... UA vs. AA -the 9/11 Timeline 'screw-up' team8plus.org... Team8Plus: A specialized 9/11 research team To protect both research angles from each other (including confusions, disinfo or sabotage), we decided to focus on irregularities on flights, BTS, radar, passengers, aviation sources, FAA radio transcripts etc...

Yes, because you know confusion among the press and airlines on the day they had to land THOUSANDS of planes, in under three hours, and everyone was in shock is CERTAINLY evidence of a conspiracy. Explain how it is that the ground crew haven't come forward to say they never loaded those flights. You'd think that someone would remember them NOT loading bags or fuel, or food on those planes if they weren't really there. As far as the confusion among flights, of COURSE there was that day. Most of the press couldn't ID a plane with a perfect picture, and a recognition chart, so it doesn't surprise me that they'd misidentify the planes as something else. Also, don't forget there was also a Delta flight they thought had been hijacked, and a Korean flight, and several others. This was an unprecedented day, and there was a lot of confusion as they tried to do something that had never even been SIMULATED (the total shutodnwn of US airspace, and the landing of thousands of planes in three hours).

Originally posted by defcon5 There is no way that they would shoot down a commercial airliner over the city. It would cause more widespread damage then just letting it crash. If they had caught it out in the middle of nowhere like the one in PA, then shooting it down would be a viable option.

I don't know any specifics, but I can tell you even if there is no AA guns there, then the fact that there was a 3 squadrants of jets on the ground at a military base 3 miles away should say enough. Weather your dealing with AA guns or Jets that can shoot down other jets. The fact is they were TOLD to stand down... even after the fact they admitted to knowing there was more warning and more specific information about the 9/11 attack. And please don't give me that ignorance you so bluntly throw around Skibum. Here is one question you can't answer. Where is the rest of the video footage to the 9/11 attack. Let us here your magic answer to how you think all the answered are solved, and lets put the puzzle together your way.*SNIP* Mod Edit: Removed Baiting. Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link. [edit on 14/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]

What military base three miles away? Andrews? They didn't have armed fighters on alert. They have two squadrons of fighters, but none sitting armed and ready to launch since the mid to late 90s. And no, Air Force One does NOT get a fighter escort unless the request it, and then it comes from the nearest base to them. Bolling? They don't even have PLANES there. I've already said this many times, but here goes again. On 9/11 there were exactly SEVEN bases with armed fighters ready to launch. That's right around a grand total of TWENTY fighters with missiles, ready to launch to defend our skies. While there were many bases nearby that HAD fighters, there were NONE that were armed, and ready to launch. It's not just a matter of jumping in a fighter and taking off. It takes 45 minutes to an hour, UNLESS the fighter has been sitting on alert. And that DOESN'T count the time it would take to get the missiles out of storage, get them to the plane, get them loaded on the plane, get the plane refueld, etc. AFTER all that is done, you're looking at an ADDITIONAL 45-60 minutes.

On 9/11 there were only 14 fighter jets on alert in the contiguous 48 states. No computer network or alarm automatically alerted the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) of missing planes. "They [civilian Air Traffic Control, or ATC] had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Boston Center, one of 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional ATC facilities, called NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) three times: at 8:37 am EST to inform NEADS that Flight 11 was hijacked; at 9:21 am to inform the agency, mistakenly, that Flight 11 was headed for Washington (the plane had hit the North Tower 35 minutes earlier); and at 9:41 am to (erroneously) identify Delta Air Lines Flight 1989 from Boston as a possible hijacking. The New York ATC called NEADS at 9:03 am to report that United Flight 175 had been hijacked--the same time the plane slammed into the South Tower. Within minutes of that first call from Boston Center, NEADS scrambled two F-15s from Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Mass., and three F-16s from Langley Air National Guard Base in Hampton, Va. None of the fighters got anywhere near the pirated planes.

www.popularmechanics.com...

NORAD has always maintained alert bases—sites where fighters sit fueled, armed, and ready to take off on short notice. During the early years of the Cold War, North America was ringed by alert bases ready to intercept approaching Soviet bombers. To many planners, however, the end of the Cold War meant the end of the threat. US air defenses were allowed to atrophy. At the time the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, NORAD maintained 26 alert sites around the United States, said USAF Gen. Richard B. Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and a former NORAD commander. By Sept. 11, 2001, however, the number was down to seven.

www.afa.org... Also, contrary to popular opinion, a fighter carrying a full load of weapons, and fuel tanks, CAN NOT go supersonic. The F-15 can to TRNSonic, but not SUPERsonic. There is too much drag. And if you lose the fuel tanks, you get 45 minutes of flight time in full afterburner before you have to land or refuel. [edit on 1/14/2006 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by Zaphod58 Yes, because you know confusion among the press and airlines on the day they had to land THOUSANDS of planes, in under three hours, and everyone was in shock is CERTAINLY evidence of a conspiracy. Explain how it is that the ground crew haven't come forward to say they never loaded those flights. You'd think that someone would remember them NOT loading bags or fuel, or food on those planes if they weren't really there. As far as the confusion among flights, of COURSE there was that day. Most of the press couldn't ID a plane with a perfect picture, and a recognition chart, so it doesn't surprise me that they'd misidentify the planes as something else. Also, don't forget there was also a Delta flight they thought had been hijacked, and a Korean flight, and several others. This was an unprecedented day, and there was a lot of confusion as they tried to do something that had never even been SIMULATED (the total shutodnwn of US airspace, and the landing of thousands of planes in three hours).

Oh my friend. There was no confusion. You evidently didn't read the info or you have poor comprehension skills. Go back and read the 2 threads I provided. Here's some info on that Delta you mentioned: team8plus.org...

Originally posted by Xain I don't know any specifics, but I can tell you even if there is no AA guns there, then the fact that there was a 3 squadrants of jets on the ground at a military base 3 miles away should say enough. Weather your dealing with AA guns or Jets that can shoot down other jets. The fact is they were TOLD to stand down... even after the fact they admitted to knowing there was more warning and more specific information about the 9/11 attack.

It does not make a difference if they used air-to-air missiles from a fighter or surface-to-air missiles from a battery, you still do not shoot down a commercial airliner over a populated area. If they chose to do that, they would have a large amount of heavy debris falling in all kinds of uncontrolled locations doing damage. How would they be able to control whether this landing gear assembly fell on a school, or that flap fell on a hospital. It was better to let all the damage be in one area then to have parts falling out of the sky all over the place. Moreover, don’t try to come back with then why is there not all this heavy debris all around the Pentagon, because it’s a different situation and has already been explained.

Originally posted by Xain And please don't give me that ignorance you so bluntly throw around Skibum.

I don’t have to there is enough of it in your post to go around for awhile.

Originally posted by Xain Here is one question you can't answer. Where is the rest of the video footage to the 9/11 attack.

That has been answered here many times over.

Originally posted by Xain You're probably one of the ignorant fools who voted Bush back in office.

For your information, I did not, but you of course assumed otherwise, and assumption is what gets people into trouble.

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp What?....huh? I couldn't read what you wrote behind this pop-up

I don’t get it. Was this an attempt to put a picture of a book your selling out in public view again?

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp So he was *thinking* in regards to a 757 or a plane that size and guessed the engines "incorrectly" assuming the official story, and believing that part came from a 757 or whatever. And FYI, I know plenty about those engines. I've done more research than you've done.

Wow, you knew what he was thinking, man, I cannot wait to hear your posts in the paranormal thread then, they should be great... So, can you tell me what I am thinking right now?

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp Apparently for a year, you've been under the impression it came from an APU. And it doesn't. Sorry.

Actually, I didn’t believe that it came from the APU; I have admitted before that there are a few errors in the initial post, and a few things that needed to be added and clarified. I had already discussed it with other members before any of this went on. Still the fact that it was a disk from the engine not the APU makes little difference as it still came from a 757.

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp A: "The answer to your question is "NO" because its too big. *I think* what you are looking at is the first stage compressor disk to the main engine. *could be* a pratt & whitney PW2000 (It's not) or a general electric CF6-50 motor(Wrong plane). Hope that helps."

I’ll tell you what, later on, I will go to this site and ask if it could similarly be from the RR engine and see what they have to say about it. I am sure that they listed those two since that is what the person was most familiar with, being in the US. A CF6-50 motor on a 767 is extremely similar to a 757’s motors anyway. Better yet, since you claim to be so fair and balanced and have already corresponded with this person, why don’t you ask them and put up the response.

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp Note that he said "I think" and "could be". It is niether. The pic I show is the closest. If you find something closer I'll listen. But regardless, I believe the pentagon parts are planted.

You ever lifted aircraft parts? There would have had to have been four times as many people running around out there carrying around parts to have planted that stuff. Some of those pieces would take 4 or more guys and/or a fork lift to move. Just that one spar on a 727 (which is smaller) weighs over 2K lbs… Then lets look at the wheel assembly that is clearly seen in the photos. We used to use 727 and 737 break assemblies to ballast planes. In a box, with handles and skids two men could carry one a short distance, bitching all the way. Usually it would take two to push one out of the bin onto a loader then roll it away. Now considering that this one is out of the box and attached to a tire that weighted another two or three hundred pounds, which would make it that much more unwieldy, how many guys? So how did they set this all up nice and pretty for the photos while photographers with telephoto lens’s were taking pictures from the fence, yet not get caught? [edit on 1/14/2006 by defcon5]

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp What?....huh? I couldn't read what you wrote behind this pop-up

I don’t get it. Was this an attempt to put a picture of a book your selling out in public view again?

No it was to show how silly your comment was when looking at the veritable onslaught of commercials you've got popping up or hanging around at ATS.com. She is selling HER book on HER site. ATS.com is shlepping someone elses product(s) on their site. Big diff.

Originally posted byDefcon 5 Wow, you knew what he was thinking, man, I cannot wait to hear your posts in the paranormal thread then, they should be great... So, can you tell me what I am thinking right now?

Yes, when one is discussing the Pentagon and 757 APU's. That should be a pretty good indication he was *thinking* about a 757 part. What are you thinking right now? Hmmm what do I need to do today? Feed the fish, take out the trash, oh yeah and get to that AM meeting in Langley.

Actually, I didn’t believe that it came from the APU; I have admitted before that there are a few errors in the initial post, and a few things that needed to be added and clarified. I had already discussed it with other members before any of this went on. Still the fact that it was a disk from the engine not the APU makes little difference as it still came from a 757.

Well that's not the impression you gave a few a pages ago. Regardless, nobody here can prove it came from a 757 and even if they did. No one will believe it. Easy small parts to plant. Like Killtown said... Let's everybody assume that all that "757 plane debris" is really from a 757. Can someone please show me any of the "plane debris" at the Pentagon that COULD NOT have been planted there?

I’ll tell you what, later on, I will go to this site and ask if it could similarly be from the RR engine and see what they have to say about it. I am sure that they listed those two since that is what the person was most familiar with, being in the US. A CF6-50 motor on a 767 is extremely similar to a 757’s motors anyway. Better yet, since you claim to be so fair and balanced and have already corresponded with this person, why don’t you ask them and put up the response.

Ok you do that. I am not going to. I have already been there and once they figured out what the questions were really all about they killed the the thread and ignored my attempts to get more answers. So good luck ; )

You ever liffted aircraft parts? There would have had to have been four times as many people running around out there carrying around parts to have planted that stuff. Some of those pieces would take 4 or more guys and/or a fork lift to move. Just that one spar on a 727 (which is smaller) weighs over 2K lbs… Then lets look at the wheel assembly that is clearly seen in the photos. We used to use 727 and 737 break assemblies to ballast planes. In a box, with handles and skids two men could carry one a short distance, bitching all the way. Usually it would take two to push one out of the bin onto a loader then roll it away. Now considering that this one is out of the box and attached to a tire that weighted another two or three hundred pounds, which would make it that much more unwieldy, how many guys? So how did they set this all up nice and pretty for the photos while photographers with telephoto lens’s were taking pictures from the fence, yet not get caught?

Do you know how heay these parts are? No you don't. What "wheel assembly"?...there is a rim. That is it. 1 Rim. Do you know how many more we should have seen? More than 1. Did you know they evactuated everyone (firefighters/rescue workers/bystanders) from the Pentagon at about 10:13 for about 23 minutes? Because of reports of another incoming plane (possibly Flt 93) So that gave them plenty of time to plant the front lawn. You know there was a myterious van on the site from the time the plane hit and throughout the entire event. The pieces of debris appeared to be moved from place to place and even seem to be planted according to the photographic timeline. As far as components on the inside. We don't even know if those pics were taken at the Pentagon. And secondly all photograph credits have a name attached. ALL the ones of the parts at the Pentagon have no name attached. Russell Pickering is very detailed, he lists all the photographers, time, and date of the photo. He even had a section dedicated to all the photographers who took photos that day at the Pentagon. But for every debris pic of engine or mechanical debris taken from inside the Pentagon, the credit shows like this: Date: Unknown Time: Unknown Photographer: Anonymous He goes on to say... "When those photos were released I believe the previous article was the sole source of them on the internet(The Sarah Roberts one from Rense) Many people did not and still do not know who actually took them. I have since located the photographer's names and understand why they want anonymity. If I were there in any sort of official capacity I too might be hesitant to release my name in regards to certain photos. Let's just say for what it's worth I believe in the authenticity of these photos and respect the anonymity of the individuals who took them." (I don't, and we don't know if Russell wasn't being fooled.) As far as reasons why? Why would anybody help plant parts and help form a horrendous lie? If they believed it was for the greater good. They would. Tell some low ranking intelligence officer of this "top secret" project... "It is for the greater good and survival of this country. We are in dire need of the oil in the middle east. Have you heard of PEAK OIL soldier? No? Well it is of the utmost importance that we secure the world's oil fields or we are dead in the next 10 yrs. There will be some lives lost, but it will save 1000 times more lives. Remember, it's hush hush. National Security you know." That's one way to do it. Here's a brave witness who feels differently than you do... U.S. Army Specialist April Gallop, who worked at the Pentagon when the explosion occurred, was visited afterwards at a hospital by men in suits who never identified themselves to her, but told her: [color=darkred]"what to do, which was to take the [Victim Compensation Fund] money and shut up. They also kept insisting that a plane hit the building. They repeated this over and over. But I was there and I never saw a plane or even debris from a plane." ["Inside Job: Unmasking the 9/11 Conspiracies" Jim Marrs 2004 p. 26]. More on April Gallop www.usatoday.com... www.post-gazette.com... [edit on 14-1-2006 by Merc_the_Perp]

I've changed tires, rims and brakes before on KC-135s, which are, as defcon said about the others, smaller. To move a brake takes three to four guys. They can weigh 600 pounds without adding in the crate. The rims are a similar weight. Even if they kicked everyone out for a whole 23 minutes, it would take them either a lot longer than that, or so many people moving parts around that either someone would have noticed or someone would have talked by now. Even if the parts WERE planted, all the parts that were in the original post were significant parts that weigh a lot, and would require quite a few people to move around, or would have to be preplanted. [edit on 1/14/2006 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by Zaphod58 I've changed tires, rims and brakes before on KC-135s, which are, as defcon said about the others, smaller. To move a brake takes three to four guys. They can weigh 600 pounds without adding in the crate. The rims are a similar weight. Even if they kicked everyone out for a whole 23 minutes, it would take them either a lot longer than that, or so many people moving parts around that either someone would have noticed or someone would have talked by now. Even if the parts WERE planted, all the parts that were in the original post were significant parts that weigh a lot, and would require quite a few people to move around, or would have to be preplanted. [edit on 1/14/2006 by Zaphod58]

No I only said they moved the people away from the FRONT of the Pentagon for 23 minutes. That is enough time for an agent in a van with an open sliding door to throw the *SHINY, UNCHARRED PIECES* out on the lawn. Maybe they an false bottom opening. An deposited them that way. That's how I would do it. As far as the rim? You have to remember, that was inside the inner rings in the "drive". I would have to assume they call it the drive because cars, most likely maintenance truck, drove down them. So how hard is it for them to drive there and plant it using 4 agents. How about they blew out the C-Ring hole, with the bomb and then pushed out the rim. Where is the pic of this rim, is the position where is shows all the slots by itself, and not zoomed in on? Here is the main pic of that 600lb rim: When does it get turned up? Who was strong enough to flip it up to this position? Oh it must have been 4-5 guys who flipped it for the photo opportunity. Spare me.

So ok, something else other than 'visual' evidence at the Pentagon. The Flight 77 Hijackers at Dulles Airport. This video was released 3 years later. And in my opinion, was only there to support that there were even hijackers. PLEASE NOTE: NO Date or Time stamp on this video. Completely useless in a court of law. Here is one of the main anomalies... WHO IS THIS?!?!?! This is supposed to be the thinly built Hani Hanjour, with the high hairline and *shaved head*. But as you can clearly tell, that isn't Hani Hanjour. THIS is Hani Hanjour... And why was Hani Hanjour only named on September 14? And why did they originally name the pilot Mosear Caned? team8plus.org... Even wikipedia acknowledges that there is a problem in the identity of the person shown in the Dulles video...

There is a controversy over whether or not the security tapes indeed show him, since the man claimed to be him seems significantly heavier than Hanjour, has kept his beard (Which the hijackers all reportedly shaved off the night before), and has a different style of hair. en.wikipedia.org...

Seems like they couldn't find a good enough ringer for this post-production piece. Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link. [edit on 15/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord Ah, good... finally, we're getting back to who may have been flying the 757. There are far more interesting questions along those lines IMHO.

I like how you slipped that in there. we're getting back to who may have been flying the 757 Who said he was flying the 757? Who even said this video is legitimate? I know I didn't. You have NO proof there was even a 757 or that this video is even legitmate. You are taking one piece of info, which again completely blows the OS apart, and still trying to tie it to a pre-determined conclusion. Skeptic overlord....There is no proof of a 757. Prove there was. Prove it even took off from dulles. You wanna know who was flying this supposed flight? Flight 77 Pilot Was MASCAL Author !!! Captain Charles F. Burlingame III Click on thumbnail for larger picture The Washington Post reported on 16 September 2001 that the pilot of Flight 77 was former F-4 fighter pilot Charles Burlingame III, who in his last Navy job, developed anti-terror strategies for the Navy before retiring to fly for American Airlines. He drafted the Pentagon’s emergency response plan in case it was hit by a civilian airliner. Flight 77 allegedly struck the Pentagon. It is not clear which MASCAL Charles Burlingame III authored. Charles Burlingame was a Naval reservist for 17 years. He was age 51. The Army would initially not allow him to be buried at Arlington National Cemetary since he died before the age of sixty, which is the eligibility age for reservists not killed in combat. The cemetary is managed by the Army. After Congressional intervention and negative publicity, the Army reversed its position. For more information see: www.arlingtoncemetery.net...

[size=12]Pentagon Casualty Exercises – Planned for the 9/11 Hit? From the Washington Post

MASCAL 16 September 2001 Also that, on the morning of 9-11, Pentagon medic Matt Rosenberg was in the health clinic on Corridor 8 "grateful for an uninterrupted hour in which he could study a new medical emergency disaster plan based on the unlikely scenario of an airplane crashing into the Pentagon."

There were two Pentagon casualty exercises simulating plane crashes planned in the year prior to September 11, 2001. These are known as MASCAL (Mass Casualty) exercises that can be “paper” or physical exercises. The military plans and conducts a wide variety of MASCAL exercises covering a wide range of events: from fires and accidential explosions to NBC (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) attacks. MASCALs are medical response plans and exercises. Due to the Pentagon’s close proximity to Ronald Reagon National Airport in Washington, DC it is prudent to plan for a potential aircraft crash into the building. However, there are some very disturbing issues related to these two MASCALs. Note: Previously I made two posts concerning these exercises, but have combined them into one post with additional information. [size=12]MASCAL #1 The Pentagon had a medical exercise in May 2001 simulating a Boeing 757 crashing into the Pentagon. From U.S. Medicine – The Voice of Federal Medicine www.usmedicine.com...

“The Medics Go To War” May 2001 by the Staff of U.S. Medicine WASHINGTON-The tragedy which occurred here at the Pentagon at approximately 9:40 a.m. on Sept. 11 may well change both the organization and practice of medicine in all sectors-public and private-of the United States. While nothing could prepare the country for the events of Sept. 11, the Air Force medical staff had practiced for this type of situtation. Dr. Carlton* told U.S. MEDICINE that his team had run an exercise in May with a scenario in which a 757 crashes into the Pentagon. "We had worked out what would happen [and] what was needed," he said.

Dr. Carlton is Lt. Gen. Paul Carlton, the Air Force Surgeon General. Dr. Carlton is currently the Director of the Integrative Center for Homeland Security for the Texas A&M University System. Lt. Gen. Carlton was on-scene at the Pentagon supervising emergency medical response. From U.S. Medicine – The Voice of Federal Medicine www.usmedicine.com...

“Pentagon Medics Trained For Strike” May 2001 by Matt Mientka WASHINGTON-Though the Department of Defense had no capability in place to protect the Pentagon from an ersatz guided missile in the form of a hijacked 757 airliner, DoD medical personnel trained for exactly that scenario in May. In fact, the tri-Service DiLorenzo Health Care Clinic and the Air Force Flight Medicine Clinic here in the Pentagon trained jointly in May to fine-tune their emergency preparedness, afterward making simple equipment changes that would make a difference Sept. 11 when the hypothetical became reality.

What type of plane allegedly struck the Pentagon? A Boeing 757-223 [size=12] MASCAL #2 The Pentagon MASCAL (Mass Casualty) exercise of October 2000 was a command exercise simulating the crash of an airliner into the Pentagon. The type of airliner was not specified. This exercise is commonly known. The exercise forecasted 341 casualties (dead and injured). Pentagon Casualty Exercise Website: Faked Photo This is the current article with the new doctored photograph.

For 3-1/2 years the lead photograph of the article showed the middle photograph below. Note: This photo is still available on the photos page of the article.

In summer 2004 the lead photo in the article was doctored to show the airliner outside the Pentagon. The photoshopping attempt is pathetic.

Why did the Pentagon doctor the photo? Here is the link to the article and still existing photos page: www.mdw.army.mil... MASCAL Pentagon current photos with article: www.mdw.army.mil... Notice that the burning airliner is far from the Pentagon. MASCAL Pentagon original photos: www.mdw.army.mil... Notice the burning airliner is in the middle of the Pentagon. The snack bar and courtyard are called “Ground Zero”. The article text is the same. [size=12]Casualties: Planned vs. Actual The MASCAL exercise of October 2000 forecasted 341 casualties (dead and injured). No number was reported for the May 2001 medical exercise. Dead Pentagon: 125 Flight AA77 passengers: 59 Hijackers: 5 (?) Total Dead 189 Seriously Injured 106 Total Casualties 295 (excluding lightly injured) Note that the actual casualties, not including less than seriously injured, totaled 295 – the exercise forecasted 341 casualties. Data from the FBI report presented to the 9/11 Commission and the Arlington County (Virginia) After-Action Report. The number of lightly injured casualties is widely reported as less than the number of seriously injured. Soldier’s magazine reported a total of 140 injured, which would be a total of 329 casualties. In amazing coincidence the actual casualties of 329 individuals is almost exactly the same as the forecasted casualties of 341. Only a 3.5% difference. If passengers and hijackers are eliminated the casualty figure is reduced to 277 individuals, which is a 19% difference. [size=12]Should the Expected Casualties Been Higher? I contend that the October 2000 MASCAL planned figure of 341 casualties is much too low for these reasons: • The “757” hit the Pentagon in the recently renovated section Wedge One which had been hardened against explosive attacks, specifically truck bombs. The upgrade has been widely cited as a key factor in reducing casualties. (www.architectureweek.com...) Note that approximately 20% of the damage was to the non-renovated section directly adjacent to the hit zone (Pentagon Building Performance Report). In October 2000, renovation was just beginning. Therfore, the MASCAL could not plan for a plane crash into the upgraded section – since it did not exist. • Wedge One was not fully occupied. According to Pentagon renovation manager Lee Evey, about 80 percent of the Wedge One workers had returned to their offices. That sector of the building, therefore, potentially housed about 3,500 workers that day. If Wedge One were fully occupied it would have housed about 4,375 workers. Casualties would have been 25% higher. Complete renovation of the Pentagon was expected to require five years. During the renovation, the other parts of the Pentagon had higher occupancy levels due to the construction. The MASCAL could not plan for partial occupation – on the contrary, would need to plan for higher than standard occupancy rates. • The “757” struck paralell to the ground through the heavy exterior walls. The vast majority of plan crashes occur an angle – through the much lighter roof. • A Boeing 757 is not the largest type of airliner flying into Washington National. The MASCAL should have anticipated the "worst case” scenario of a much larger aircraft. letsroll911.org...

Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link. Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link. [edit on 15/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]

[size=10]Evacuation of Reagan Airport at 9:30, BEFORE THE PENTAGON WAS SUPPOSEDLY HIT BY FLIGHT 77!!!! Thanks team8plus/woody B.

team8plus.org... It seems that people were thrown out of Reagan Airport a few minutes before the Pentagon crash, at about 9:30, but it doesn't look like a controlled evacuation. Take a look at these statements from people on Reagan airport: --Lindsey Kriete, 24, of Wellesley was scheduled to leave Reagan National on a 10 a.m. flight to Boston. About 9:30 a.m., all hell broke loose, Kriete said, as airport personnel began running through the terminal, telling passengers to leave quickly. By the time Kriete had rounded up her belongings and tried to calm people who were crying, all the taxis were gone and the subway had shut down. /8zv3o --The phone rang. It was my sister, on her cell phone from Reagan National Airport in D.C. She was within minutes of boarding a plane to Atlanta when U.S. airspace was shut down—and she was talking very fast: "They're telling us to forget our bags and get out of the terminal!" she said. And then, as she got outside, she began to lose her composure. "I hear something that sounds like explosions . . . I'm afraid!" It later became clear that the sounds she was hearing were actually coming from the Pentagon, which is near Reagan National. www.uga.edu... With these two statements, it's possible to determine the time of the begin of the "evacuation" quite exactly; Lindsey Kriete says "about 9:30", had not boarded her 10 am flight yet, and the second witness hears the Pentagon explosions while hurrying outside. This points to a time shortly before the crash, between 9:25 and 9:35. It might well be that Kriete is on the point with her 9:30. But what was the airport evacuated for? Was it "Flight 77" approaching Washington? Did they expect the plane crashing into the terminal? There are far more interesting targets for terrorists in Washington. But the White House was NOT evacuated, the Pentagon was NOT evacuated, Rumsfeld still doing his phone calls. So why was the airport evacuated? And why this hurry? Here's a third source, by the way: --Resident Gene Dohrman knows firsthand the reasons behind the proverbial barbed wire that has been wrapped around the nation's airports. On Sept.11, 2001, his flight was taxiing on Reagan National Airport. As the plane returned to the gate, passengers were told that the airport was being evacuated. A Dohrman and other passengers hurried from the gate area through the terminal, they watched the day's surreal news unfold on television monitors. Soon, the entire airport, only a couple of miles from the Pentagon, was empty. /a7lgu

The significance of this is overwhelming. How come people were exacuated out of the airport if no one knew the Pentagon was going to be attacked. Why were they only ones? And why? Was this to land the mystery plane? [edit on 15-1-2006 by Merc_the_Perp] [edit on 15-1-2006 by Merc_the_Perp] Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link. Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link. [edit on 15/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]

Do you SCREAM at home like you have been here? You have come here with VERY WRONG assumptions about certain people on this board that are making you look well, just plain SILLY. Anyone who actually knows of what they speak would never make the ignorant assumption that S.O. is convinced about ANYTHING relative to what hit the Pentagon much less who was driving, flying or walking it. You may want to do a little more reading and lot less SCREAMING. Springer...

Originally posted by Springer Do you SCREAM at home like you have been here? You have come here with VERY WRONG assumptions about certain people on this board that are making you look well, just plain SILLY. Anyone who actually knows of what they speak would never make the ignorant assumption that S.O. is convinced about ANYTHING relative to what hit the Pentagon much less who was driving, flying or walking it.

You may want to do a little more reading and lot less SCREAMING.

Springer...

Actually I didn't scream, sir. I copied and pasted that from another site. But apparently you guys have some crappy editing features. I tried to fix the large fonts but it didn't work. Maybe you can have a look at that, chief. As far as assumptions, he still thinks some kind of islamic terrorist flew Flt 77. And I simply told him he has no proof of that and to prove it. He can't and he admitted a few minutes ago. Or maybe he was trying to run away with..."Oh they say Hani Hanjour couldn't have flown Flight 77, well you're right. Look everybody, it's not Hani Hanjour." So I think I made my point.

This thread is so long so forgive if I missed it but has anyone got info about the Soviet's radar following a UAV that was part of the 9/11 exercises and was launched from an offshore ship just like the Amalgam Virgo rehearsal in June but this time hit the Pentagon? I heard that Bush was on the phone to Putin wheeling and dealing to keep their shit secret in exchange for not releasing the radar tracking of the Pentagon UAV. Also, there were several reports of a US military chopper from CNN. I heard one on an evidence clip a friend sent me from the 911eyewitness.com website. Also In Plane Site had Jamie McKintyre stating that he thought there was a helicopter crash at the Pentagon. Regardless, how can anyone accept that the most highly guarded building in the world could get hit by anything that didn't contain a 'friendly' military beacon. The 'plane' should have been shot down when it violated the White House airspace and not even had a chance to pull at 270 degree GPS spiral. The fact that Rumsfeld says he was out of the loop until the impact is another joke if the Secret Service had alerted the President at 9 o'clock. I thought the Pentagon had Soviet ICBM defences? Anyone know where the missile defence batteries are located around the Pentagon?