The Pentagon Attack Frame-Up

Exposing the fraud of the government's story

As part of its mission to uncovering the truth behind 9/11/01 -- an event that is easily the most sophisticated psy-op in history -- 9-11Research has focused on aspects of the attack in which physical evidence contradicts the official account. Evidence of the Pentagon attack is frequently cited as disproving the official story.

This Talk was first presented by Jeff Strahl on October 17th, 2003, at CellSpace in San Francisco, California. It was authored by Jeff Strahl and Jim Hoffman.

The conclusion of this talk, Whatever Struck the Pentagon Was Not a Boeing 757, implies that no 757 was involved in the attack. 9-11Research does not endorse this implication, but only that no intact 757 impacted the Pentagon's facade. We find the most likely hypothesis one that involves a 757-like plane exploding immediately before impact, which we credit to French researcher Eric Bart. We find that, whereas the evidence that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were destroyed by controlled demolition is overwhelming -- a case layed out in The World Trade Center Demolition -- the evidence regarding exactly what occurred in the Pentagon attack is ambiguous and difficult to draw clear conclusions from. We do, however, find the official story of the Pentagon attack untenable for a number of reasons:

The fact that the portion of the Pentagon attacked was nearly empty due to ongoing renovations, and that and the aircraft undertook an extreme maneuver to strike this portion are strong evidence that the attack was an inside job.
The complexity and precision of the approach maneuver are nearly impossible to reconcile with the official account that the plane was piloted by Hani Hanjour, an incompetent pilot of even single engine prop-planes.
The eyewitness accounts suggest that the jetliner exploded before impacting the building.
The rapid clean-up of evidence of the attack, and the indications of forgery in the five video frames released by the Pentagon suggest insiders have conspired to conceal the nature of the attack.More

911 Research




[edit on 14-9-2004 by Sauron]

Originally posted by Sauron
Exposing the fraud of the government's story
The conclusion of this talk, Whatever Struck the Pentagon Was Not a Boeing 757, implies that no 757 was involved in the attack. 9-11Research does not endorse this implication, but only that no intact 757 impacted the Pentagon's facade. We find the most likely hypothesis one that involves a 757-like plane exploding immediately before impact, which we credit to French researcher Eric Bart.

I invite these charlitans to come read my post on ATS and see what the truth of Flight 77 really is. Anyone can make up stories, falsify the pentagon suviellance video (which the french knobs DID), and take photos entirely out of context (which they also did). The 757 didn't blow up before it hit, the 757 didn't "blow up" from anything other than the impact and ignition of the large quantity of jet fuel it was still carrying.

I openly invite them to debate this subject on any forum they choose - even live on CNN if they have the stones for it. Hell, I'll even wear a giant "Deny Ignorance - AboveTopSecret.com" shirt for grins.

The complexity and precision of the approach maneuver are nearly impossible to reconcile with the official account that the plane was piloted by Hani Hanjour, an incompetent pilot of even single engine prop-planes.

A 330 degree turn, with a decent of almost 5,000 feet, almost 4 (four) minutes before flying in a nearly straight line is not "an extreme maneuver" it's a slow, wide, banking, turn while decending to 2,000 feet.

And anyone with a grade 7 highschool education, and the ability to read any 757 flight training manual, any online source, any Boeing 757 reference manual, can see that it takes about 5 minutes to learn, and 30 seconds to input GPS coordinates into the flight computer. You then rely on the autopilot to get you to where you are going (just like a "real" commercial airline pilot does). Once the Pentagon was in visual range the terrorist took over manual control.

There is not one single "amazing" move in the entire flight. And the assertion that he would have bounced or slammed off the ground is fraught with ignorance. I strongly recommend that these french "experts" look up the term "ground effect" (source2) and see what it means. An aircraft travelling at 500MPH will have a very hard time trying to actually touch the ground due to the immensely compressed airpressure under the wings of the craft and above the ground surface. The pilot would have to fight it verystrongly to touch down. That's a scientific fact that has existed in any flight textbook since 1940. With that basic knowledge (which they could have found on any one of dozens of online sites if they knew how to get to google.com) they would be able to grasp why it didn't plow across the lawn. This plane was also flying faster than the onboard safety system would allow for auto deployment of the landing gear. THAT is why the gear did not deploy.

The gear will NOT deploy at airspeeds faster than 270KTS - the maximum operating speed with landing gear down is 320KTS (if gear is down prior to achieving this speed).

The eyewitness accounts suggest that the jetliner exploded before impacting the building.
The rapid clean-up of evidence of the attack, and the indications of forgery in the five video frames released by the Pentagon suggest insiders have conspired to conceal the nature of the attack.More
911 Research

If the folks at 911research had taken the time to do any actual research they would have uncovered the original video frames aired first on CNN. Instead they choose to rely on the altered frames from the french website.

The forgery was perpetrated BY the french "investigators" who created the false story FOR PROFIT. They falsified evidence to SELL BOOKS. Period.

[edit on 14-9-2004 by CatHerder]

well said CatHerder!!

it seems like ever other day someone else posts a story claiming that the pentagon wasn't hit by a plane

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!

Not again....

how many threads are going to be created about this ?

IT WAS A PLANE PEOPLE WATCHED IT HIT THE BUILDING !!!