Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
June 21, 2007 at 06:12:39

New Study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 Hit the Pentagon

by James Fetzer     Page 1 of 2 page(s)

http://www.robkall.com

Tell A Friend

A study of the black box data provided by the government to Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11. "We have had four lines of proof that no Boeing 757 hit the building," said James Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. "This new study by Pilots drives another nail into a coffin of lies told the American people by The 9/11 Commission".

The new society, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained its 2002 report on American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757 that, according to the official account, hit the ground floor of the Pentagon after it skimmed over the lawn at 500 mph plus, taking out a series of lamp posts in the process. The pilots not only obtained the flight data but created a computer animation to demonstrate what it told them.

According to the report issued by Pilots for 9/11 Truth (http://pilotsfor911truth.org/), there are major differences between the official account and the flight data:

a. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events.

b. All altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles.

c. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense "5 Frames" video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn.

d. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time.

e. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon.

As Robert Balsamo, co-founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, observes, "The information in the NSTB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001." The study was signed by fifteen professional pilots with extensive military and commercial carrier experience. They have made their animation, "Pandora's Box: Chapter 2," available to the public at http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Pandora's+Black+Box%3A+Chapter+2 .

According to James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (http://911scholars.org), this result fits into the broader picture of what happened at the Pentagon that day. "We have developed four lines of argument that prove--conclusively, in my judgment--that no Boeing 757 hit the building. The most important evidence to the contrary has been the numerous eyewitness reports of a large commercial carrier coming toward the building. If the NTSB data is correct, then the Pilot's study shows that a large aircraft headed toward the building but did not impact with it. It swerved off and flew above the Pentagon."

Fetzer, who retired last June after 35 years of teaching courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, expressed pleasure over the Pilot's results, which, he said, has neatly resolved the most pressing issue that remained about the Pentagon. He added, "We have previously developed several lines of argument, each of which proves that no Boeing 757 hit the building," including these four:

(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible.

(2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when one was shown on "The Factor". At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible. There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757.

(3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory--flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level--physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.

(4) Flying low enough to impact with the ground floor would have meant that the enormous engines were plowing the ground and creating massive furrows; but there are no massive furrows. The smooth, unblemished surface of the Pentagon lawn thus stands as a "smoking gun" proving the official trajectory cannot be sustained.

Members of Scholars have contributed to a new book that analyses the government's official account, according to which 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacked four commercial airliners, outfoxed the most sophisticated air-defense system in the world, and committed these atrocities under the control of a man in a cave in Afghanistan. Entitled, THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007), it includes photographs of the hit point before and after the upper floors collapsed, the crucial frame from the released videos, and views of the clear, smooth, and unblemished lawn.

 1  |  2

 

911scholars.org

Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Spurl      Tag!RawSugar      Shadows Tag!      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 comments

CB Brooklyn

Other information some may find useful

vidya If a 767 crashes into a building, is its plastic nosecone going to pop out the other side? The groundbreaking 9/11 film "September Clues" offers NEW analysis and is a must watch for anyone interested in the real truth of 9/11:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8045542387672451515

 

Check out this 10 minute analysis video of newscasters on different NYC channels. How come the newscasters on channels 5 and 11 are using the same phrases on a developing story on live TV?

911 Octopus 8: Media Perps Unmasked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_ySSJ_L6Zs

 

Former Professor of Mechanical Engineering Dr Judy Wood has done excellent and detailed analysis of the World Trade Center destruction. All she wants is for people to look at the data! Check out her site and see the most obvious evidence for directed energy weapon usage at the WTC there is:

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/dirt1.html
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html

And don't be fooled by others in the "truth movement", such as Steven Jones and Greg Jenkins, who try to discredit Judy Wood and distract people from looking at the evidence.

Believe me, it's no coincidence that both Jones and Jenkins have ties to Los Alamos where directed energy weapon research is conducted!

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/Jenkins_transcript.html 

by CB_Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 27 comments) on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 9:00:23 AM
 


CB Brooklyn

Judy Wood's Site and Web Browser Problems

It has recently been discovered that some users with Internet Explorer have difficulty accessing Dr Wood's site. She is planning to move her site soon, but in the meantime please use an alternate browser, such as Firefox.

by CB_Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 27 comments) on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 9:53:47 AM
 



Tony Forest

Thanks CB

for puttin up the link to "September Clues".

It's quite obvious no 757 hit the Pentagon and the area chosen for the impact makes for a story on its own. Basic knowledge in aviation or even a few drops of common sense will tell you the alleged appoach pattern could not have been held because of the missing cushion of air needed to keep an aircraft afloat. The alleged manouvers the alleged aircraft made prior to the alleged (friggin broken record!) crash are far from anything anyone short of the best pilot on earth would have been able to accomplish. But we moved our focus away from the Pentagon in fear we were being set up. Thanks to these new conclusions we can now safely say the setup has failed ;

No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon

Interesting title, Jim. You know how people like to take things out of context and mis-quote. Well done.

As sceptical as ever, Curtis 

by rossini (4 articles, 5 quicklinks, 290 comments) on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 11:41:59 AM
 


Joe Plummer

Re: Pentagon Strike

I have long suspected it was a global hawk (perhaps equipped with a missile), that actually struck the Pentagon. Per this article: http://stopthelie.com/doug_thompson.html

...Yes, I know some of you who are in the Judy Wood camp (No Planes hit the towers, No Bombs, Directed Energy Beams) will find some of what I've written irritating. Try to get over it. At least on this one point, we're in some kind of agreement.

by stopthelie (7 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 comments) on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 2:34:49 PM
 


Alessandro Machi

If No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, then

to me that makes the official collapse of both WTC buildings, if I am recalling correctly, at 10:00 and 10:29, as being suspicious as well.


Kind of like they were set off to down on the hour and on the half hour.
The odds of both buildings going down basically on the half hour would be around 1 out of a 100.  (I'm allowing for a 3 minute span, 1 minute prior to one minute after for the top of the hour, and the same three minute span for the bottom of the hour).

So there was a 1 out of 100 chance that both buildings would collapse at such tidy times.  On the other hand. I do think it's plausible that jet fuel went down the elevator shafts that seemed to house huge wind forces which in turn would have created a fierce internal oxygen aided fire.

by Alessandro (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 52 comments) on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 2:39:53 PM
 


meremark

When the stonewall around you falls, no need to jump ...

... anywhere to conclusions.

It is enough to agree, everyone, that the TV-made story is false. TV LIARS.

Okay, Nine Eleven Op did NOT happen as the LIARS, including NYTimes, have said ... all the ridiculous nonsense 'pancaking Towers' foolish talk.

Mission accomplished when the stonewall of LYING falls down, and everyone rejects the LIARS.

Some people may like to go on and figure out what DID happen, jump over the stonewall rubble to a conclusion they like. But they don't need a majority to agree with them. Just a majority to agree that every Official thing said so far is false, and the newspapers and TV which said it are LIARS.

BOYCOTT the newspapers and those advertisers. BOYCOTT cable TV and those sponsors. Turn OFF the LIES.

Then the rest is going to take care of itself. Give people some credit, we are not stupid babies like MassMind media treats us -- Up Yours! mainstream media LIARS, jerking us around -- we can do this, damn straight we can figure it out. Eyewitnesses who know things are going to start saying what they know. Investigators are going to bring together what they found out, and are finding. A central evidence collection and coordination group, and place, is going to come into being. Everyone in the country is going to be paying attention and asking what is the new, truer version?, once we ALL know the old Official version is LIES and the old newspaper people and old TV people are LIARS.

I little care what things are found out and what things happened, I have no set preconclusion on which I want the facts based.

I mostly care where I hear it from. I prejudge that NY Times and Associated Press all is LIES. Cable TV, even the Daily Show, all is LIES -- get a job, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, get a life, get cleaned up, you got LIARS Slime all over you working there -- and local TV and all the shock-talk-mock radio is LIES. Let me talk with real people, honest-to-goodness, in-the-flesh, real people. Even just talk on the phone, (which is the same as the internet), a real time conversation, I speak, they speak back, I speak back, they speak back ... REAL time.

AND every real person who has Bush brand government branded on their paycheck is a LIAR, shut up, we've heard enough. And that includes most of Pelosi and Reid's Congress, just more Bush brand LIARS. There are, easy, 10,000 new people in America who can fill the Big Seats in Washington, do the Big Jobs with the Big Responsibilities, and get the Big Bucks -- and do a better job than today's LIARS. Bush brand Congress and government is NOT OUR BEST people.

BUSH means LIAR. And it looks as though the BUSH FAMILY INFECTED every government-working, public-employee within fifty miles of The Fright House, including the lying Supreme Court, judges, and the Pentagon and our once-honorable military. Quit. Resign. Leave. Get out! SHAME on you'all government. EAT your damn paycheck, choke on it. Sneak away and slink away. GET OUT of our sight. GO hide under a rock the rest of your life, that's your tombstone grave marker. America DON'T WANT NO LIARS.

by Meremark (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 85 comments) on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 3:45:53 PM
 


RCG

Meremark, IGotta Agree With Pretty Much Everytthing You Said

You nailed it - the only thing I might slightly disagree with is Jon Stewart being a liar - unless you count "lies by omission". And I think he does that because he is afraid that if he says too much he will be targeted and destroyed by the mass-media, plus the brainwashed riech wingnuts would have a field day. Perhaps, I missed your point here or I am being somewhat naive, but I think Jon Stewart is terrific and doing the best he can in this environment.

by rcg (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 65 comments) on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 5:00:04 PM
 

 

7 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 


Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2007

 

Tags for This Article:

9 11 Truth (112)  9 11 Lies (85)  9 11 Coverups (77)  Lies- Pentagon (53)  Lies DOD (31)  Lies Rumsfeld (15) 

Populum Tag Cloud
Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
All Articles
Diaries
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Also Sub-levels