Pentagon Video From Doubletree To Be Released Within a Week

Doubletree video release to 'shock & awe' before election? - Killtown

The much anticipated release of the Doubletree Hotel security video that has been speculated it will show a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon is due to be released by one week from today the latest:

“The FBI has agreed to release to Judicial Watch a videotape obtained from the Doubletree Hotel near the Pentagon by November 9, 2006.” - Judicial Watch

View from Doubletree Hotel resteraunt showing the Pentagon (red arrow). Source.

This is thought to be the same security video that Doubletree employees watched in "shock and horror" over and over again before the FBI came and confiscated it reportedly the next day:

“A security camera atop a hotel close to the Pentagon may have captured dramatic footage of the hijacked Boeing 757 airliner as it slammed into the western wall of the Pentagon. Hotel employees sat watching the film in shock and horror several times before the FBI confiscated the video as part of its investigation.” - Inside the Ring/Gertz File (09/21/01)

So how much do you want to bet that this Doubletree Hotel security video will be released before this Tuesday (election day) to “shock & awe” the voters in hopes to sway the elections, especially if this video finally shows a plane hitting the Pentagon?

Check out the full article via the link above.

Thanks Killtown for the reminder!

it was always said it would be released by 11/9...

nothing new here.

///////////////////// - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Lucky for me...

I've always said it was Flight 77.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

What makes you think

What makes you think that?
I'm not saying you are wrong...just how did you draw those conclusions?

From talking with people...

Like John Judge, and from research presented by, and the fact that the argument is a waste of time in and of itself. In my opinion anyway.

The argument is a waste of time, to me, because it's one of those discussions that could go on and on and on and on and on, and ultimately, you never come to a conclusion. Reason being, there's no video (to date) that shows it.

So, I focus on different things... which people are tired of hearing me say, but that's the way it is.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Different things...

  • How is it possible that 34 minutes after the SECOND tower was hit, when even Joe Schmoe's like me knew America was "under attack", that a hijacked plane with kamikaze pilots managed to penetrate Washington D.C. airspace, the most defended airspace in the world? Don't you think it would have been intelligent of them to deploy fighters over the skies of D.C. RIGHT when the attacks occurred? Why weren't they? Who was in charge of making those kinds of decisions?

  • Norman Mineta testified that he arrived at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center at 9:20, and Dick Cheney was already there. By 9:25, a young man came in and out of the room three times to tell Cheney the position of Flight 77, and asked for confirmation of orders. Orders that couldn't have been a "shoot-down" order because according to the latest Vanity Fair piece, fighter pilots claimed by 10:10:31, they had, "negative clearance to fire." So what order was it? Who is the young man, and why didn't he testify before the 9/11 Commission? Why did Dick Cheney claim that he had given a "shoot down" order? Why did the 9/11 Commission claim that Dick Cheney arrived at the PEOC by 9:58am? Why did the 9/11 Report completely omit Norman Mineta's testimony?

Stuff like that.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


Obviously, details like inept patsies and protective moles leading to multi-billion-dollar defense failures and ultimately "Angel is next" are much harder to deal with than throwing the Popular Mechanics propeller heads at Dylan Avery and crew. For any of the leadership to go off SOP while the "nation is under attack" is treasonable. They will testify only with the threat of the noose before them. Treason for the lot of them!


I'd rather be proven wrong than right. If a video comes out that shows Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, it's gonna hurt.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Its probably a plane, but it

Its probably a plane, but it wasn't 77 based on radar data.

Terrorstorm is #21 at Amazon!!! 

To which...

Radar data are you referring to?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Flight 77


I very much apologize for this rather long posting, but I think it is important for this thread.

August 2001: Hani Hanjour Successfully Takes Certification Flight?
According to the 9/11 Commission Report, some time this month alleged Flight 77 pilot Hani Hanjour successfully conducts “a challenging certification flight supervised by an instructor at Congressional Air Charters of Gaithersburg, Maryland, landing at a small airport with a difficult approach.” The instructor thinks that “Hanjour may have had training from a military pilot because he used a terrain recognition system for navigation.” [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 248 and 531] However, besides the 9/11 Commission Report, no other evidence exists of Hanjour passing this certification flight. A search of the Lexis Nexus database indicates there are no mentions of Hanjour attending this school, or any witnesses recalling him there. This account is also in contradiction to numerous other reports, according to which Hanjour was a very poor pilot who “could not fly at all.” (see January-February 2001; Mid-August 2001)

Mid-August 2001: Hanjour Still Not Skilled Enough to Fly Solo
Hani Hanjour goes to the Freeway Airport in Bowie, Maryland, about 20 miles west of Washington. He wants to rent a single engine Cessna airplane. However, when two instructors take him on three test runs, they find he has trouble controlling and landing the plane. One instructor has to help him land. Due to his poor skills, therefore, he is not allowed to rent one of their planes without more lessons. Further, while Hanjour appears to have logged over 600 hours of flying experience and possesses a valid pilot’s license (though it has in fact expired), he refuses to provide contact information: He gives no phone number and only gives his address as being a hotel in Laurel. In spite of Hanjour’s lack of flying skills, chief instructor Marcel Bernard later claims, “There’s no doubt in my mind that once [Flight 77] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it.” [Washington Post, 10/15/2001; Capital News, 9/19/2001; Gazette (Greenbelt), 9/21/2001; Newsday, 9/23/2001] However, on 9/11, in piloting Flight 77 into the Pentagon, Hanjour would have needed to do much more than simply point the plane at a target. Because Flight 77 at first seemed to overshoot its target, the Washington Post will note that “the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees to the right to approach the Pentagon from the west, whereupon Flight 77 fell below radar level... Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm...” [Washington Post, 9/12/2001] One Washington flight controller will later comment, “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane.” [ABC News, 10/24/2001] One law enforcement official who will study Flight 77’s descent after 9/11 will call it the work of “a great talent ... virtually a textbook turn and landing.” [Washington Post, 9/10/2002] Remarkably, the 9/11 Commission will overlook the numerous accounts of Hanjour’s terrible piloting skills (see April 15, 1999; January-February 2001) and state that 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed assigned the Pentagon target specifically to Hanjour because he was “the operation's most experienced pilot.” [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 530]

(8:20 a.m.): Flight 77 Takes Off 10 Minutes Late
Flight 77 departs Dulles International Airport near Washington, ten minutes after its 8:10 scheduled departure time. [CNN, 9/17/2001; Washington Post, 9/12/2001; Guardian, 10/17/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004; Associated Press, 8/19/2002]

8:25 a.m.: Boston Flight Control Tells Other Centers About Hijack, but Not NORAD
The Guardian reports that Boston flight control “notifies several air traffic control centers that a hijack is taking place.” But it does not notify NORAD for another 6-15 minutes, depending on the account. [Guardian, 10/17/2001] However, the Indianapolis flight controller monitoring Flight 77 claims to not know about this or Flight 175’s hijacking twenty minutes later at 8:56 a.m. Additionally, the flight controllers at New York City’s La Guardia airport are never told about the hijacked planes and learn about them from watching the news. [Bergen Record, 1/4/2004]

(8:46-8:50 a.m.): New York and Boston Flight Control Conclude Flight 11 Has Hit WTC
Rick Tepper, a flight controller at the Newark, New Jersey, tower, looks across the Hudson River at New York City in time to see the explosion caused by Flight 11. Another flight controller there tries to find out what caused it. He recalls that in the next few minutes, “We contacted La Guardia, Kennedy Tower, and Teterboro Tower to find out if they lost an airplane. And they all said they didn’t know what it was. I got on the phone to the en route air traffic control’s facility out in New York on Long Island, and I asked them if they’d lost any airplanes, and they said, ‘No, but Boston [flight control] lost an airplane. They lost an American 767.’” New Jersey flight controller Bob Varcadapane says to the Long Island flight controller, “I have a burning building and you have a missing airplane. This is very coincidental.” The assumption is quickly made at New York and Boston flight control centers that Flight 11 has hit the WTC. NBC later reports, “Word of the fate of Flight 11 quickly travels throughout the air traffic control world.” [MSNBC, 9/11/2002] However, the Indianapolis flight control center that handles Flight 77 reportedly does not learn of Flight 11’s crash until around 9:20 a.m. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

8:50 a.m.: Last Radio Contact with Flight 77
The last radio contact with Flight 77 is made when a pilot asks for clearance to fly higher. However, six minutes later, the plane fails to respond to a routine instruction. Presumably, it is hijacked during that time. Indianapolis flight control center is handling the plane by this time. [Guardian, 10/17/2001; Boston Globe, 11/23/2001; New York Times, 10/16/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

(8:54 a.m.): Flight 77 Veers Off Course
Flight 77 from Washington begins to go off course over southern Ohio, turning to the southwest. [Washington Post, 9/12/2001; Newsday, 9/23/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

(8:56 a.m.): Flight 77 Transponder Signal Disappears; NORAD Not Informed
Flight 77’s transponder signal is turned off at this time. [Guardian, 10/17/2001; Boston Globe, 11/23/2001; Newsday, 9/23/2001] According to the 9/11 Commission, the Indianapolis flight controller in charge of the flight has watched it go off course and head southwest before the signal disappears. He looks for primary radar signals along its projected flight path as well as in the airspace where it has started to turn. He cannot find the plane. He tries contacting the plane but gets no answer. “‘American 77, Indy,’ the controller said, over and over. ‘American 77, Indy, radio check. How do you read?’ By 8:56 a.m., it was evident that Flight 77 was lost.” [New York Times, 10/16/2001] The controller has not been told about any other hijacked planes. (Other centers have been notified about the Flight 11 hijacking more than 20 minutes earlier at 8:25 a.m. [Guardian, 10/17/2001] ) He assumes Flight 77 has experienced electrical or mechanical failure. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Apparently, American Airlines headquarters and the Pentagon’s NMCC are notified that Flight 77 is off course with its radio and transponder not working, but NORAD is not notified at this time. [9/11 Commission, 1/27/2004]

(8:56-9:05 a.m.): Flight 77 Disappears from Radar Screens
According to the 9/11 Commission, “Radar reconstructions performed after 9/11 reveal that FAA radar equipment tracked [Flight 77] from the moment its transponder was turned off at 8:56 [am.].” However, for eight minutes and 13 seconds, this primary radar data is not displayed to Indianapolis flight controllers. “The reasons are technical, arising from the way the software processed radar information, as well as from poor primary radar coverage where American 77 was flying.” [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Apparently, a radar tower in West Virginia doesn’t have primary radar. [Washington Post, 11/3/2001] But the 9/11 Commission notes that other centers had primary radars that covered the missing areas, yet they weren’t asked to do a primary radar search. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] In its final report, the commission will add a rather elaborate further explanation for the loss of primary radar contact, saying it was because “the ‘preferred’ radar in this geographic area had no primary radar system, the ‘supplemental’ radar had poor primary coverage, and the FAA ATC [air traffic control] software did not allow the display of primary radar data from the ‘tertiary’ and ‘quadrary’ radars.” [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 460]

(After 8:56-9:24 a.m.): Pentagon Emergency Center Knows Flight 77 Is Hijacked; NORAD Not Notified?
The New York Times reports, “During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 [is] under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in [the Pentagon’s NMCC] [are] urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do.” [New York Times, 9/15/2001] Yet, although the Pentagon’s NMCC reportedly knows of the hijacking, NORAD reportedly is not notified until 9:24 a.m. by some accounts, and not notified at all by others. [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/18/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

(Before 9:00 a.m.): American Airlines Learns of Flight 77 Problems; Cancels All Flight Take Offs in the Northeast; NORAD Not Notified
American Airlines headquarters in Fort Worth, Texas, learns that Flight 77 is not responding to radio calls, is not emitting a transponder signal, and flight control has lost its location since 8:56 a.m. [9/11 Commission, 1/27/2004] According to the Wall Street Journal, a call from the FAA roughly says that Flight 77 has “turned off its transponder and turned around. Controllers [have] lost radio communications with the plane. Without hearing from anyone on the plane, American [doesn’t] know its location.” American Airlines executive Gerard Arpey gives an order to stop all American flight take-offs in the Northeast. By 8:59 a.m., American Airlines begins attempts to contact the flight using ACARS (a digital communications system used primarily for aircraft-to-airline messages). Around this time, Within minutes, American gets word that United also has lost contact with a missing airliner (presumably Flight 175). When reports of the second WTC come through after 9:03 a.m., one manager recalls mistakenly shouting, “How did 77 get to New York and we didn’t know it?” [Wall Street Journal, 10/15/2001; 9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 454]

9:00 a.m.: Pentagon Ups Alert Status
The Pentagon moves its alert status up one notch from normal to Alpha. After Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon, it increases the alert to Delta, the highest level. The alert level will be reduced to Charlie on September 12th. [MSNBC, 9/11/2001; Agence France-Presse, 9/12/2001]

(After 9:00 a.m.): Indianapolis Flight Control Issues Alert to Look for Flight 77; FAA and NORAD Not Notified
According to the 9/11 Commission, shortly after 9:00 a.m., Indianapolis flight control begins to notify other government agencies that American 77 is missing and has possibly crashed. For instance, at 9:08 a.m., Indianapolis contacts Air Force Search and Rescue at Langley Air Force Base, Virginia, and tells them to look out for a downed aircraft. It is not clear what Air Force Search and Rescue does with this information. They also contact the West Virginia State Police, and ask whether they have any reports of a downed aircraft. However, they apparently do not notify the FAA or NORAD. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

9:00 a.m.: 9/11-Styled Simulation Cancelled
An “emergency response exercise” is scheduled to take place at 9 a.m. the morning of 9/11, involving the simulated crash of a small corporate jet plane into a government building. The exercise is to be conducted by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) in Chantilly, Virginia—just four miles from Washington Dulles International Airport, from where Flight 77 took off, and 24 miles from the Pentagon. The NRO draws its personnel from the CIA and the military, and operates many of the nation’s spy satellites. John Fulton, chief of the NRO’s strategic war gaming office, and his team at the CIA, are in charge of the exercise. It is to involve the jet experiencing mechanical problems then crashing into one of the four towers at the NRO. In order to simulate the damage from the crash, some stairwells and exits are to be closed off, forcing NRO employees to find other ways to evacuate the building. However, according to an agency spokesman, “as soon as the real world events began, we cancelled the exercise.” After the attacks, most of the agency’s 3,000 staff are supposedly sent home. [National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, 8/4/2002; National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, 8/6/2002 ; Associated Press, 8/21/2002; United Press International, 8/22/2002]

9:05 am (and After): Flight 77 Reappears on Radar, but Flight Controllers Do Not Notice
According to the 9/11 Commission, Flight 77’s radar blip, missing for the last eight minutes, reappears on Indianapolis flight control’s primary radar scope. It is east of its last known position. It remains in air space managed by Indianapolis until 9:10 a.m., and then passes into Washington air space. Two managers and one flight controller continue to look west and southwest for the flight, but don’t look east. Managers don’t instruct other Indianapolis controllers to join the search for the flight. Neither they nor FAA headquarters issues an “all points bulletin” to surrounding centers to search for Flight 77. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Newsday claims that rumors circulate the plane might have exploded in midair. [Newsday, 9/23/2001] However, the 9/11 Commission’s conclusion that Indianapolis flight controllers did not look east is contradicted by an account indicating that American Airlines headquarters was told that Flight 77 had turned around.

9:09 a.m.: Indianapolis Flight Control Tells Local FAA Flight 77 Is Missing, but FAA Headquarters and NORAD Are Not Yet Told
Indianapolis flight control reports the loss of contact with Flight 77 to the FAA regional center. They describe it as a possible crash. The center waits 16 minutes before passing the information to FAA headquarters at 9:25 a.m. (see 9:25 a.m.) [Washington Post, 11/3/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] However, American Airlines headquarters has been notified of the same information before 9:00 a.m. (see (Before 9:00 a.m.)).

(9:10 a.m.): Rice and Cheney Apparently Go to White House Bunker; Other Accounts Have Cheney Moving Locations Later
According to counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke and others, Vice President Cheney goes from his White House office to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), a bunker in the East Wing of the White House, at about this time. National Security Adviser Rice, after initiating a video conference with Richard Clarke in the West Wing, goes to the PEOC to be with Cheney. There is no video link between response centers in the East and West Wings, but a secure telephone line is used instead. [Clarke, 2004, pp. 3-4; ABC News, 9/14/2002; New York Times, 9/16/2001; Daily Telegraph, 12/16/2001] One eyewitness account, David Bohrer, a White House photographer, says Cheney leaves for the PEOC just after 9:00 a.m. [ABC News, 9/14/2002] However, there is a second account claiming that Cheney doesn’t leave until sometime after 9:30 a.m. In this account, Secret Service agents burst into Cheney’s White House office. They carry him under his arms—nearly lifting him off the ground—and propel him down the steps into the White House basement and through a long tunnel toward an underground bunker. [Washington Post, 1/27/2002; BBC, 9/1/2002; Newsweek, 12/31/2001; New York Times, 10/16/2001; MSNBC, 9/11/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] At about the same time, National Security Adviser Rice is told to go to the bunker as well. [ABC News, 9/11/2002] In addition to the eyewitness accounts of Clarke and Bohrer, ABC News claims that Cheney is in the bunker when he is told Flight 77 is 50 miles away from Washington at 9:27 a.m., suggesting that accounts of Cheney entering the bunker after 9:27 a.m. are likely incorrect.

(9:10 a.m.): Washington Flight Control Sees Unidentified Plane, Apparently Fails to Notify FAA or NORAD
Washington flight control notices a new eastbound plane entering its radar with no radio contact and no transponder identification. They do not realize it is Flight 77. They are aware of the hijackings and crashes of Flights 11 and 175, yet they apparently fail to notify anyone about the unidentified plane. [Newsday, 9/23/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Another report says they never notice it, and it is only noticed when it enters radar coverage of Washington’s Dulles International Airport at 9:24 a.m. (see (9:24 a.m.)). [Washington Post, 11/3/2001]

(9:12 a.m.): Flight 77 Attendant Has Confirmed Hijacking, American Airlines Learns
Renee May, a flight attendant on Flight 77, uses a cell phone to call her mother in Las Vegas. She tells her mother that the flight has been hijacked, and that everyone has been asked to move to the back of the plane. She asks her mother to call American Airlines and let them know Flight 77 has been hijacked. Her mother (Nancy May) calls the airline. [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 9/13/2001; Las Vegas Review-Journal, 9/15/2001; 9/11 Commission, 1/27/2004; San Francisco Chronicle, 7/23/2004] American Airlines headquarters is already aware that Flight 77 is hijacked, but supposedly Indianapolis flight control covering the flight still is not told.

(9:20 a.m.): FAA Command Center Notifies Field Facilities That Flight 77 Is Lost; Indianapolis Flight Control Reportedly Finally Learns of National Crisis
According to the 9/11 Commission, Indianapolis flight control learns that there are other hijacked aircraft by this time (presumably at least Flights 11 and 175). Millions of people have known about the crashes since CNN and all other media began broadcasting images from New York at 8:48 a.m., but Indianapolis is reportedly unaware until this time. The Indianapolis flight controllers begin to doubt their assumption that Flight 77 has crashed and consider that it might be hijacked. After a discussion between the Indianapolis manager and the FAA Command Center, the Command Center notifies some other FAA facilities that Flight 77 is lost. By 9:21 a.m., the Command Center, some FAA field facilities, and American Airlines join the search for Flight 77. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

(9:20 a.m.): FBI Washington Office Is Warned Flight 77 Has Been Hijacked
In a government report analyzing the effectiveness of rescue worker response to the Pentagon crash, it is mentioned that, “At about 9:20 a.m., the WFO [FBI Washington Field Office] Command Center [is] notified that American Airlines Flight 77 had been hijacked shortly after takeoff from Washington Dulles International Airport. [Special Agent in Charge Arthur] Eberhart dispatche[s] a team of 50 agents to investigate the Dulles hijacking and provide additional security to prevent another. He sen[ds] a second team to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport as a precautionary step. At the WFO Command Center, Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) Jim Rice [is] on the telephone with the Pentagon when Flight 77 crashe[s] into the building.” [US Department of Health and Human Services, 7/2002] Yet according to the 9/11 Commission, NORAD is not told that Flight 77 had been hijacked at this time or any time before it crashes. However, the FAA has claimed they officially warned NORAD at 9:24 a.m. (see (9:24 a.m.)) and informally warned them even earlier (see (9:24 a.m.)).

(9:20 a.m.): Barbara Olson Said to Call from Flight 77, but Account Is Full of Contradictions
A passenger on Flight 77, Barbara Olson, calls her husband, Theodore (Ted) Olson, who is Solicitor General at the Justice Department. [San Francisco Chronicle, 7/23/2004] Ted Olson is in his Justice Department office watching WTC news on television when his wife calls. A few days later, he says, “She told me that she had been herded to the back of the plane. She mentioned that they had used knives and box cutters to hijack the plane. She mentioned that the pilot had announced that the plane had been hijacked.” [CNN, 9/14/2001] He tells her that two planes have hit the WTC. [Daily Telegraph, 3/5/2002] She feels nobody is taking charge. [CNN, 9/12/2001] He doesn’t know if she was near the pilots, but at one point she asks, “What shall I tell the pilot? What can I tell the pilot to do?” [CNN, 9/14/2001] Then she is cut off without warning. [Newsweek, 9/29/2001] Ted Olson’s recollection of the call’s timing is extremely vague, saying it “must have been 9:15 [am.] or 9:30 [am.]. Someone would have to reconstruct the time for me.” [CNN, 9/14/2001] Other accounts place it around 9:25 a.m. [Miami Herald, 9/14/2001; New York Times, 9/15/2001; Washington Post, 9/21/2001] The call is said to have lasted about a minute. [Washington Post, 9/12/2001] By some accounts, his message that planes have hit the WTC comes later, in a second phone call. [Washington Post, 9/21/2001] In one account, Barbara Olson calls from inside a bathroom. [Evening Standard, 9/12/2001] In another account, she is near a pilot, and in yet another she is near two pilots. [Boston Globe, 11/23/2001] Ted Olson’s account of how Barbara Olson made her calls is also conflicting. Three days after 9/11, he says, “I found out later that she was having, for some reason, to call collect and was having trouble getting through. You know how it is to get through to a government institution when you’re calling collect.” He says he doesn’t know what kind of phone she used, but he has “assumed that it must have been on the airplane phone, and that she somehow didn’t have access to her credit cards. Otherwise, she would have used her cell phone and called me.” [Hannity & Colmes, 9/14/2001] Why Barbara Olson would have needed access to her credit cards to call him on her cell phone is not explained. However, in another interview on the same day, he says that she used a cell phone and that she may have been cut off “because the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well.” [CNN, 9/14/2001] Six months later, he claims she called collect “using the phone in the passengers’ seats.” [Daily Telegraph, 3/5/2002] However, it is not possible to call on seatback phones, collect or otherwise, without a credit card, which would render making a collect call moot. Many other details are conflicting, and Olson faults his memory and says that he “tends to mix the two [calls] up because of the emotion of the events.” [CNN, 9/14/2001] The couple liked to joke that they were at the heart of what Hillary Clinton famously called a “vast, right-wing conspiracy.” Ted Olson has been a controversial choice as Solicitor General since he argued on behalf of Bush before the Supreme Court in the 2000 presidential election controversy before being nominated for his current position.

9:21 a.m.: FAA Command Center Advises Dulles Airport Control to Be on Lookout
According to the 9/11 Commission, the FAA Command Center advises the Dulles Airport terminal control facility in Washington to look for primary targets. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] By at least one account, Dulles notices Flight 77 a few minutes later.

9:23 a.m.: NEADS Wants Fighters to Track Phantom Flight 11
According to the 9/11 Commission, NEADS has just been told that the hijacked Flight 11 is still in the air and heading toward Washington. Major Kevin Nasypany, the mission crew commander, says to NEADS Commander Robert Marr, “Okay, uh, American Airlines is still airborne. Eleven, the first guy, he’s heading towards Washington. Okay? I think we need to scramble Langley right now. And I’m gonna take the fighters from Otis, try to chase this guy down if I can find him.” After receiving approval to do so, Nasypany issues the order. “Okay ... scramble Langley,” he says. “Head them towards the Washington area.” The Langley, Virginia, base gets the scramble order at 9:24 a.m. (see (9:24 a.m.)). NEADS keeps its fighters from the Otis base over New York City. In 2004 the 9/11 Commission will state, “this response to a phantom aircraft, American 11, is not recounted in a single public timeline or statement issued by FAA or DOD. Instead, since 9/11, the scramble of the Langley fighters has been described as a response to the reported hijacking of American 77, or United 93, or some combination of the two.” Yet the “report of American 11 heading south as the cause of the Langley scramble is reflected not just in taped conversations at NEADS, but in taped conversations at FAA centers, on chat logs compiled at NEADS, Continental Region headquarters, and NORAD, and in other records.” [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004; Vanity Fair, 8/1/2006]

(9:24 a.m.): By Some Accounts, FAA Notifies NORAD Flight 77 Is Hijacked and Washington-Bound; 9/11 Commission Claims This Never Happens
Shortly after 9/11, NORAD reported that the FAA notified them at this time that Flight 77 “may” have been hijacked and that it appears headed toward Washington. [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/18/2001; Associated Press, 8/19/2002; CNN, 9/17/2001; Washington Post, 9/12/2001; Guardian, 10/17/2001] Apparently, flight controllers at Dulles International Airport discover a plane heading at high speed toward Washington; an alert is sounded within moments that the plane appears to be headed toward the White House. [Washington Post, 11/3/2001] In 2003, the FAA supported this account, but claimed that they had informally notified NORAD earlier. “NORAD logs indicate that the FAA made formal notification about American Flight 77 at 9:24 a.m. (see (9:24 a.m.)), but information about the flight was conveyed continuously during the phone bridges before the formal notification.” [Federal Aviation Administration, 5/22/2003] Yet in 2004, the 9/11 Commission claims that both NORAD and the FAA are wrong. The 9/11 Commission explains that the notification NEADS received at 9:24 a.m. was the incorrect information that Flight 11 had not hit the WTC and was headed south for Washington, D.C. Thus, according to the 9/11 Commission, NORAD is never notified by the FAA about the hijacking of Flight 77, but accidentally learns about it at 9:34 a.m. (see 9:34 a.m.). [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

(9:24 a.m.): Langley Fighters Are Ordered to Scramble; but One Pilot Claims the Order Is Only a Battle Stations Alert
The BBC later reports that at this time, Robert Marr, head of NEADS, gives the scramble order to the F-16 fighters based in Langley, Virginia: “North East sectors back on. We ought to be getting the weapons crews back in. Get the scramble order rolling. Scramble.” [BBC, 9/1/2002] The 9/11 Commission concurs that the scramble order is given now. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] NORAD also has agreed. [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/18/2001] However, many media reports have placed it later. [CNN, 9/17/2001; Washington Post, 9/12/2001; CNN, 9/17/2001; Washington Post, 9/15/2001] A pilot codenamed Honey gives a slightly different account. He claims that at this time a battle stations alert sounds and two other pilots are given the order to climb into their F-16s and await further instructions. Then, Honey, the supervising pilot, talks to the two other pilots. Then, “five or ten minutes later,” a person from NORAD calls and Honey speaks to him at the nearby administrative office. He is told that all three of them are ordered to scramble. Honey goes to his living quarters, grabs his flight gear, puts it on, runs to his plane, and takes off. [Longman, 2002, pp. 64-65] Honey appears to be the codename for Capt. Craig Borgstrom, because in another account, Borgstrom is given an alert and then talks to the two other pilots. [Associated Press, 8/19/2002] A different pilot account has the battle stations warning three minutes earlier, while the 9/11 Commission claims that it happens fifteen minutes earlier. Pilot Major Dean Eckmann recalls, “They go ‘active air scramble, vector zero one zero one, max speed.’ And then I push us over to the tower frequency and get our departure clearance and they launch us out right away. ... We can carry M9-Heat Seekers, Side Winders for the M7-Sparrow, plus we have an internal 20mm Vulcan Cannon, and we were pretty much armed with all that. We had a pretty quick response time. I believe it was four to five minutes we were airborne from that point.” The BBC reports, “Even while last minute pre-launch checks are being made, the controllers learn that a third plane—American Airlines flight 77 out of Washington—may have been hijacked.” Just before the fighters take off, the BBC says, “The pilots get a signal over the plane’s transponder—a code that indicates an emergency wartime situation.” [BBC, 9/1/2002]

9:25 a.m.: FAA Command Center Finally Tells FAA Headquarters About Flight 77
According to the 9/11 Commission, the FAA Command Center advises FAA headquarters that American 77 is lost in Indianapolis flight control’s airspace, that Indianapolis has no primary radar track, and is looking for the aircraft. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] The Command Center had learned this 16 minutes earlier at 9:09 a.m. (see 9:09 a.m.). American Airlines headquarters was notified of the same information before 9:00 a.m. (see (Before 9:00 a.m.)).

(After 9:25 a.m.): Flight 77 Passenger Call Reaches Justice Department and Beyond
Theodore (Ted) Olson, the Justice Department’s Solicitor General, calls the Justice Department’s control center to relate his wife Barbara’s call from Flight 77. Accounts vary whether the Justice Department already knows of the hijack or not. [Washington Post, 9/12/2001; Channel 4 News (London), 9/13/2001; New York Times, 9/15/2001] Olson merely says, “They just absorbed the information. And they promised to send someone down right away.” He assumes they then “pass the information on to the appropriate people.” [Hannity & Colmes, 9/14/2001]

(9:27 a.m.): Cheney Given Updates on Unidentified Flight 77 Heading Toward Washington
Vice President Cheney and National Security Adviser Rice, in their bunker below the White House, are told by an aide that an airplane is headed toward Washington from 50 miles away. The plane is Flight 77. FAA deputy Monty Belger says, “Well We’re watching this target on the radar, but the transponder’s been turned off. So we have no identification.” They are given further notices when the plane is 30 miles away, then ten miles away, until it disappears from radar (time unknown, but the plane is said to be traveling about 500 mph and was 30 miles away at 9:30 a.m., so 50 miles would be about three minutes before that). [ABC News, 9/11/2002] Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta gives virtually the same account before the 9/11 Commission. [9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003] However, the 9/11 Commission later claims the plane heading toward Washington is only discovered at 9:32 a.m. (see 9:32 a.m.). [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

9:29 a.m.: Autopilot on Flight 77 Disengaged
Flight 77’s autopilot is disengaged. The plane is flying at 7,000 feet and is about 38 miles west of the Pentagon. [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 9] Information from the plane’s recovered flight data recorder (see September 13-14, 2001) later will indicate the pilot had entered autopilot instructions for a course to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (which is nearby the Pentagon). [9/11 Commission, 1/27/2004]

9:30 a.m.: Langley Fighters Take Off Toward Washington; They Could Reach City in Six Minutes but Take Half an Hour
The three F-16s at Langley, Virginia, get airborne. [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/18/2001; ABC News, 9/11/2002; Washington Post, 9/12/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] The pilots are Major Brad Derrig, Captain Craig Borgstrom, and Major Dean Eckmann, all from the North Dakota Air National Guard’s 119th Fighter Wing stationed at Langley. [Associated Press, 8/19/2002; ABC News, 9/11/2002] If the assumed NORAD departure time is correct, the F-16s would have to travel slightly over 700 mph to reach Washington before Flight 77 does. The maximum speed of an F-16 is 1,500 mph. [Associated Press, 6/16/2000] Even traveling at 1,300 mph, these planes could have reached Washington in six minutes—well before any claim of when Flight 77 crashed. Yet it is claimed they are accidentally directed over the Atlantic Ocean instead, and they will only reach Washington about 30 minutes later. NORAD commander Major General Larry Arnold admits in 2003 testimony that had the fighters been going at full speed, “it is physically possible that they could have gotten over Washington” before Flight 77. But asked if the fighters would have had shootdown authorization had they reached the hijacked plane, Arnold says no, claiming that even by this time in the morning it is only “through hindsight that we are certain that this was a coordinated attack on the United States.” [9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003 Sources: Larry Arnold]

(9:30 a.m.): Dulles Flight Controllers Track Flight 77; Timing Disputed
Radar tracks Flight 77 as it closes within 30 miles of Washington. [CBS News, 9/21/2001] Todd Lewis, flight controller at Washington’s Dulles Airport, later recalls, “... my colleagues saw a target moving quite fast from the northwest to the southeast. So she—we all started watching that target, and she notified the supervisor. However, nobody knew that was a commercial flight at the time. Nobody knew that was American 77. ... I thought it was a military flight.” [MSNBC, 9/11/2002] Another account is similar, saying that just before 9:30 a.m., a Dulles Airport controller sees an aircraft without a transponder traveling almost 500 mph headed toward Washington. [USA Today, 8/13/2002] In yet another account, Danielle O’Brien, the Dulles flight controller said to be the first to spot the blip, claims she doesn’t spot it until it is around 12 to 14 miles from Washington. [ABC News, 10/24/2001; ABC News, 10/24/2001] There are also accounts that Vice President Cheney is told around 9:27 a.m. that radar is tracking Flight 77, 50 miles away from Washington. The 9/11 Commission says the plane isn’t discovered until 9:32 a.m.

(9:30 a.m.): Who Warns Who of Flight 77’s Impending Approach to D.C.?
Chris Stephenson, head flight controller at Washington’s Reagan National Airport tower, says that he is called by the Secret Service around this time. He is told an unidentified aircraft is speeding toward Washington. Stephenson looks at the radarscope and sees Flight 77 about five miles to the west. He looks out the tower window and sees the plane turning to the right and descending. He follows it until it disappears behind a building in nearby Crystal City, Virginia. [USA Today, 8/12/2002] However, according to another account, just before 9:30 a.m., a controller in the same tower has an unidentified plane on radar, “heading toward Washington and without a transponder signal to identify it. It’s flying fast, she says: almost 500 mph. And it’s heading straight for the heart of the city. Could it be American Flight 77? The FAA warns the Secret Service.” [USA Today, 8/13/2002] In short, it is unclear whether the Secret Service warns the FAA, or vice versa.

(9:30-9:37 a.m.): Langley Fighters Fly East to Ocean Instead of North to Washington; Explanations Differ
The three Langley fighters are airborne, but just where they go and how fast are in dispute. There are varying accounts that the fighters are ordered to Washington, New York, Baltimore, or no destination at all. The 9/11 Commission Reports that, in fact, the pilots don’t understand there is an emergency and head east. They give three reasons. “First, unlike a normal scramble order, this order did not include a distance to the target, or the target’s location. Second, a ‘generic’ flight plan incorrectly led the Langley fighters to believe they were ordered to fly due east (090) for 60 miles. The purpose of the generic flight plan was to quickly get the aircraft airborne and out of local airspace. Third, the lead pilot and local FAA controller incorrectly assumed the flight plan instruction to go ‘090 for 60’ was newer guidance that superseded the original scramble order.” [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] However, the Wall Street Journal gives a different explanation, surprisingly from 9/11 Commission testimony. “Once they got in the air, the Langley fighters observed peacetime noise restrictions requiring that they fly more slowly than supersonic speed and takeoff over water, pointed away from Washington, according to testimony before the [9/11 Commission].” The fighters that departed to New York City over 30 minutes earlier at 8:52 a.m. (see 8:52 a.m.) traveled faster than supersonic because they realized they were in a national emergency. [Wall Street Journal, 3/22/2004 ] In 2003 testimony, NORAD Commander Major General Larry Arnold explains that the fighters head over the ocean because NORAD is “looking outward” and has to have clearance to fly over land. [9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003] One of the Langley pilots, Craig Borgstrom, later says that after taking off, “They (NEADS) [are] giving us the heading and altitude of north-northeast up to 20,000 feet. Then shortly after takeoff they changed our heading more north-westerly and gave us max-subsonic. That’s as fast as you can go without breaking the sound barrier.” Reportedly, the Langley fighters are now being vectored toward Washington, instead of New York. [Filson, 2004, pp. 63-65] Yet, in contrast to these accounts, the BBC reports that just before takeoff at 9:24 a.m., the pilots are specifically told that Flight 77 may have been hijacked, and they get a cockpit signal indicating they are in an emergency wartime situation (see (9:24 a.m.)). All the above accounts concur that, for whatever reason, the fighters go too far east. They don’t reach Washington until roughly around 10:00 a.m.

9:32 a.m.: Cheney Is Notified That Flight 77 Is Headed To Washington
According to the 9/11 Commission, the Dulles Airport terminal control facility in Washington has been looking for unidentified primary radar blips since 9:21 a.m. (see 9:21 a.m.) and now finds one. Several Dulles flight controllers “observed a primary radar target tracking eastbound at a high rate of speed” and notify Reagan Airport. FAA personnel at both Reagan and Dulles airports notify the Secret Service. The identity or aircraft type is unknown. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] However, other accounts place the discovery of this plane by Dulles around 9:24 a.m. (see (9:24 a.m.)) or 9:30 a.m. (see (9:30 a.m.)), and Vice President Cheney is told radar is tracking Flight 77 at 9:27 a.m. (see (9:27 a.m.)

(9:33-9:37 a.m.): Eyewitness Reports Indicate There Was No Loss of Control on Flight 77
Radar data shows Flight 77 crossing the Capitol Beltway and headed toward the Pentagon. However, the plane, flying more than 400 mph, is too high when it nears the Pentagon at 9:35 a.m., crossing the Pentagon at about 7,000 feet up. [CBS News, 9/21/2001; Boston Globe, 11/23/2001] The plane then makes a difficult high-speed descending turn. It makes a “downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes. The steep turn is so smooth, the sources say, it’s clear there [is] no fight for control going on.” [CBS News, 9/21/2001] It gets very near the White House during this turn. “Sources say the hijacked jet ... [flies] several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.” [CBS News, 9/21/2001] The Daily Telegraph later writes, “If the airliner had approached much nearer to the White House it might have been shot down by the Secret Service, who are believed to have a battery of ground-to-air Stinger missiles ready to defend the president’s home. The Pentagon is not similarly defended.” [Daily Telegraph, 9/16/2001] White House spokesman Ari Fleischer suggests the plane goes even closer to the White House, saying, “That is not the radar data that we have seen. The plane was headed toward the White House.” [CBS News, 9/21/2001 Sources: Ari Fleischer]

9:34 a.m.: FAA Mentions in Passing to NORAD That Flight 77 Is Missing
According to the 9/11 Commission, NEADS contacts Washington flight control to ask about Flight 11. A manager there happens to mention, “We’re looking—we also lost American 77.” The commission claims, “This was the first notice to the military that American 77 was missing, and it had come by chance. ... No one at FAA Command Center or headquarters ever asked for military assistance with American 77.” [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Yet, 38 minutes earlier, flight controllers determined Flight 77 was off course, out of radio contact, and had no transponder signal (see (8:56 a.m.)). They’d warned American Airlines headquarters within minutes. By some accounts, this is the first time NORAD is told about Flight 77, but other accounts have them warned around 9:25 a.m.

(9:35 a.m.): Treasury Department Evacuates; Pentagon and Other Washington Department Do Not
The Treasury Department is evacuated a few minutes before Flight 77 crashes. [9/11 Commission, 1/26/2004] Yet, CNN notes that “after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) warned the military’s air defense command that a hijacked airliner appeared to be headed toward Washington, the federal government failed to make any move to evacuate the White House, Capitol, State Department, or the Pentagon.” [CNN, 9/16/2001] A Pentagon representative says, “The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way.” Even Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and his top aides in the Pentagon remain unaware of any danger up to the moment of impact. [Newsday, 9/23/2001] Senators and congresspeople are in the Capitol building, which is not evacuated until 9:48 a.m. (see 9:48 a.m.) Only Vice President Cheney, National Security Adviser Rice, and possibly a few others are evacuated to safety a few minutes after 9:03 a.m. (see (After 9:03 a.m.)). Yet, supposedly, since at least the Flight 11 crash, “military officials in a Command Center [the National Military Command Center] on the east side of the [Pentagon] [are] urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do.” [New York Times, 9/15/2001] The White House is evacuated at 9:45 a.m. (see (9:45 a.m.))

9.36 a.m.: Military Cargo Plane Asked to Identify Flight 77
Reagan Airport flight control instructs a military C-130 (Golfer 06) that has just departed Andrews Air Force Base to intercept Flight 77 and identify it. [Guardian, 10/17/2001; New York Times, 10/16/2001] Remarkably, this C-130 is the same C-130 that is 17 miles from Flight 93 when it later crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside (see 10:08 a.m.). [Star-Tribune (Minneapolis), 9/11/2002; Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/2001] The pilot, Lt. Col. Steve O’Brien, claims he took off around 9:30 a.m., planning to return to Minnesota after dropping supplies off in the Caribbean. He later describes his close encounter: “When air traffic control asked me if we had him [Flight 77] in sight, I told him that was an understatement—by then, he had pretty much filled our windscreen. Then he made a pretty aggressive turn so he was moving right in front of us, a mile and a half, two miles away. I said we had him in sight, then the controller asked me what kind of plane it was. That caught us up, because normally they have all that information. The controller didn’t seem to know anything.” O’Brien reports that the plane is either a 757 or 767 and its silver fuselage means it is probably an American Airlines plane. “They told us to turn and follow that aircraft—in 20 plus years of flying, I’ve never been asked to do something like that.” [Star-Tribune (Minneapolis), 9/11/2002] The 9/11 Commission Reports that it is a C-130H and the pilot specifically identifies the hijacked plane as a 757. Seconds after impact, he reports, “Looks like that aircraft crashed into the Pentagon, sir.” [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]

(Before 9:37 a.m.): Sheer Coincidence Brings Emergency Rescue and Secret Service Near to Pentagon
In response to an emergency 9-1-1 telephone call, the Arlington County Emergency Communications Center dispatches several units to deal with an apartment fire in Rosslyn, Virginia—within the vicinity of the Pentagon. Because this fire is in a high-rise building, nine different fire and medical service units are dispatched. However, the first engine crew to arrive radios to the other units that the fire has gone out. Consequently, by “sheer coincidence,” at the time when the Pentagon is hit, there are a significant number of available fire and medical service units already on the road nearby. [US Department of Health and Human Services, 7/2002; Fire Engineering, 11/2002] Additionally, Secret Service personnel are concentrated around the heliport a short distance from where Flight 77 will hit: “President Bush was scheduled to fly from Florida that afternoon, and his helicopter, Marine One, would carry him to the Pentagon. That meant Secret Service everywhere and their cars blocking the driveway.” [Scripps Howard News Service, 8/1/2002]

(Before 9:37 a.m.): Flight 77 Turns, Then Disappears from Radar
Washington flight controllers are watching Flight 77’s radar blip. Just before radar contact is lost, FAA headquarters is told, “The aircraft is circling. It’s turning away from the White House.” [USA Today, 8/13/2002] Then the blip disappears. Its last known position is six miles from the Pentagon and four miles from the White House. The plane is said to be traveling 500 mph, or a mile every seven seconds. [CBS News, 9/21/2001; Newhouse News Service, 1/25/2002; ABC News, 9/11/2002; USA Today, 8/13/2002]

(Before 9:37 a.m.): Rumsfeld Said to Make Eerie Predictions, but Witness Who Gives Account Is Long Gone
Representative Christopher Cox later claims he is still meeting with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. They are still discussing missile defense, apparently completely oblivious of the approaching Flight 77. Watching television coverage from New York City, Rumsfeld says to Cox, “Believe me, this isn’t over yet. There’s going to be another attack, and it could be us.” According to the Daily Telegraph, Flight 77 hits the building “moments later.” [Daily Telegraph, 12/16/2001] In another telling, Cox claims that Rumsfeld says, “If we remain vulnerable to missile attack, a terrorist group or rogue state that demonstrates the capacity to strike the US or its allies from long range could have the power to hold our entire country hostage to nuclear or other blackmail. And let me tell you, I’ve been around the block a few times. There will be another event.” Rumsfeld repeats that sentence for emphasis. According to Cox, “Within minutes of that utterance, Rumsfeld’s words proved tragically prophetic.” Cox also claims, “I escaped just minutes before the building was hit.” [Office of Representative Christopher Cox, 9/11/2001] However, Rumsfeld claims that this meeting with Cox ended before the second WTC crash, which occurred at 9:03 a.m. Cox himself said that after being told of the WTC, “[Rumsfeld] sped off, as did I.” Cox says he immediately headed to his car, making it impossible for him to still be in the Pentagon “just minutes before” it is hit. [Associated Press, 9/11/2001] Another account puts Rumsfeld’s “I’ve been around the block a few times. There will be another event” comment two minutes before the first WTC crash at 8:46 a.m., when Rumsfeld reportedly makes other predictive comments. [Associated Press, 9/16/2001]

9:36 a.m.: Report of Airliner Approaching White House Sets off ‘Frenzy’ at NEADS
Colin Scoggins at Boston flight control calls NEADS to report a low-flying airliner he has spotted six miles southeast of the White House. He can offer no details regarding its identity. The plane is reportedly Flight 77, but as it has its transponder turned off, no one realizes this at the time. The news of the plane “sets off a frenzy.” Major Kevin Nasypany orders Major James Fox, head of the NEADS Weapons Team, “Get your fighters there as soon as possible!” Staff Sergeant William Huckabone says, “Ma’am, we are going AFIO [emergency military control of the fighters] right now with Quit 2-5 [the Langley fighters]. They are going direct Washington.” [Vanity Fair, 8/1/2006] The Langley fighters will arrive over Washington some time around 10 a.m. (see (9:55-10:15 a.m.)).

9:37 a.m.: Fireman Dodges Flight 77; Immediately Notifies Superior About Crashed Jumbo Jet
Fireman Alan Wallace is busy with a safety crew at the Pentagon’s heliport pad. As Wallace is walking in front of the Pentagon, he looks up and sees Flight 77 coming straight at him. It is about 25 feet off the ground, with no landing wheels visible, a few hundred yards away, and closing fast. He runs about 30 feet and dives under a nearby van. [Washington Post, 9/21/2001] The plane is traveling at about 460 mph, and flying so low that it clips the tops of streetlights. [CBS News, 9/21/2001] Using the radio in the van, he calls his fire chief at nearby Fort Myer and says, “We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a 320 Airbus.” [Scripps Howard News Service, 8/1/2002]

9:37 a.m.: Flight 77 Crashes into Reinforced Section of the Pentagon
Flight 77 crashes into the Pentagon. Approximately 125 people on the ground are later determined killed or missing. [North American Aerospace Defense Command, 9/18/2001; CNN, 9/17/2001; Guardian, 10/17/2001; USA Today, 8/13/2002; ABC News, 9/11/2002; CBS News, 9/11/2002; Associated Press, 8/19/2002; MSNBC, 9/3/2002] Flight 77 strikes the only side of the Pentagon that had recently been renovated—it was “within days of being totally [renovated].” [US Department of Defense, 9/15/2001] “It was the only area of the Pentagon with a sprinkler system, and it had been reconstructed with a web of steel columns and bars to withstand bomb blasts. The area struck by the plane also had blast-resistant windows—two inches thick and 2,500 pounds each—that stayed intact during the crash and fire. While perhaps, 4,500 people normally would have been working in the hardest-hit areas, because of the renovation work only about 800 were there...” More than 25,000 people work at the Pentagon. [Los Angeles Times, 9/16/2001]

From the 9/11 Report...

There is conflicting evidence about when the Vice President arrived in the shelter conference room. We have concluded, from the available evidence, that the Vice President arrived in the room shortly before 10:00, perhaps at 9:58.


"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

There are...

15 references to "Cheney" in that little "timeline" I posted. Mostly having to do with what he knew, when he knew it, and at what time he arrived at the PEOC.

Of course, the timeline ends at 9:37am. Dick Cheney didn't arrive at the PEOC for another 18 minutes. At least according to the 9/11 Report.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


Want to explain to me why this man deserves a "free pass" in regards to his actions on 9/11, and why he doesn't have to explain them publicly, or under oath?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

didn't richard clarke and mineta both contradict Cheney's story?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force



One eyewitness account, David Bohrer, a White House photographer, says Cheney leaves for the PEOC just after 9:00 a.m.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I do agree that Cheney is key

He seems the type who would be willing to take a leading role, knowing that people are probably more afraid of him than anyone else in Bushworld. This is a guy who has no problem telling people to go f themselves on the floor of congress, and shoots his own friends. who would want to mess with him?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force



....our exalted Air Defense can't protect the PENTAGON from a COMMERCIAL airliner 34 minutes after the 2nd Tower is hit in exactly the same manner? With Andrews AFB just 10 miles away? It's ludicrous. Insultingly ludicrous.

Also, how is it possible they "lost" track of 77's flight path? It's not. There is no explanation given for that, is there? WTF.

Jon Gold: "Stuff like

Jon Gold: "Stuff like that."

Too funny. And no one has answers for all you bring up.

Anyone can watch the Mineta testimony in my signature below:

They can't explain the Mineta Testimony:

Davin Coburn of Popular Mechanics takes beating from Charles Goyette:

I agree Jon

The so-called new video won't show a thing, you can bet on it. It's like a dog chasing it's tail. To me the whole Pentagon thing is just a distraction. Lets stick with what we can prove like the controlled demolition of WTC7 and the impossibility of the "Official Story."

Spot on. I bet they had a

Spot on. I bet they had a commercial plane flow low and towards the pentagon and pull up at the last minute and allowed the missle that was not too far behind and the the left of it to do the damage

Diving planes over Washingtonn

There were eyewitness reports saying there was another plane in the sky flying low over Washington after the explosion at the Pentagon.... it would make sense that the plane simply flew over the top of the Pentagon as a missle hit..... all the witnesses would be focused on the explosion and just assume it were the plane that crashed.


and we saw it in loose change in the spanish language footage...

if that's legit... i wonder though--misdirection would be possible for sure. then there's the cnn account of the helicopter flying down below view after which the explosion happened--did the helicopter shoot the missile as the plane flew over? i'd buy that... eyewitness accounts would have been so jumbled and confused (as we know they have been)


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


The Pentagon is a huge smoking gun!

the Pentagon is a huge smoking gun!

· Hani Hanjour could not have flown back from the Kentucky/Ohio border to D.C.

· Hanjour could have not made that incredible maneuver in a B-757 to hit the renovated section of the Pentagon.

· A B-757 would NOT make a hole the size of a missile in the Pentagon.

· 84 videos of whatever hit the Pentagon are being withheld for no damn good reason except to cover-up. The only video released looks like an A3 Skywarrior!

· There is no way they could ID a planeload of people that smashed through the Pentagon @ 530 mph. The fictitious DNA results were made to bolster the official story.

Since they found the black boxes "right where the plane came

into the building" according to this old USA Today article, why won't they release the information to us???

Pentagon Withholding Complete Truth

Why don't they release the pentagon security camera footage and the DC Traffic Control footage and all the video available so that a true picture may be drawn. Seeing a large jet fly low towards the pentago from the perspective of a restaurant is fine, but when all other angles and vantages are available, what could possibly be the reason for not allowing the big picture to be seen. As well, the pentagon still is not the center of all things suspicious and damning. Let's talk about demolition.

I know Alex Jones and others

I know Alex Jones and others says that the Pentagon could be a 'honeypot', I don't think I agree like I usually do with him.
I think if it was, it would of came out with the popularity of Loose Change and totally discredited the entire video (in the mainstream view).
I'm 99% sure that this video will barely show what happened...why else would the FBI release it now?

I still say

Its bullshit, the video wont show a damn thing.

If it does I hope people can see the CGI and how they spliced it.

Cameras, lights ACTION

Here's the deal . . . Gone with the Wind didn't take this much time to produce and it was on celluloid and hand spliced. Most security cameras are time-domain multiplexed. At the NTSC frame rate of 30-frames-per-second, recording equipment divides the total cameras by this frame rate. For instance ten (10) camers, 1/30th of the time is dedicated or 3 frames per second. This is why most security cameras typically appear like a sequence of time-lapse still frames.
Now, let's say we see a video that runs at the full frame rate. I'd have ask is it possible that the hotel had only one camera to one recording device, thus the full frame rate?
I hope the truth "is" shown and this does not look like a hi-def full frame-rate production, again I'd really have questions if this be the case.
If I recall correctly, Tom Hanks shook hands with President Kennedy in the movie Forest Gump - we all know that looked pretty convincing - more developed technology today. Just a personal observation - hoping for the best.

I agree

It will show a fuzzier shot than what is depicted here. Thats a quality film camera photo, not a webcam or surveillance cam photo.
And with a perspective as such it would be easy to superimpose a airliner in to the video since we all know a 767 is bigger than a skywarrior or global hawk. There is no way a 767 hit the pentagon. There are TWO engines, one hole. Argument over.

The fact that the Gov is

The fact that the Gov is coming out with new videos 5 years after of the pentagon is a smoking gun that a new investigation is needed in itself


If it shows a 757,which i doubt.Has there been enough time to make a good fake?
Or just add a little blue,red and silver paint to the blur to convince the sheepel.


What difference will it make? You twoofers see what you want to see. If the video is low quality, you'll say it was a "missile". If it is high quality, you'll claim it was doctored. Your dopey theory isn't based on evidence, so facts are immaterial. You believe America attacked itself because you believe America is evil.

You watch too much Fox news

"You believe America attacked itself because you believe America is evil," sounds like it came right out of Bill O'reilly's mouth on Fox News. This is the typical disinginuous twisting and misrepresenting of any and all criticisms anybody brings forth against the Bush Fascist Regime. Well, you may have memorized the right wing's talking points, but you have not offered any intelligent arguments to refute the "twoofers", whatever that means.

So, a little lesson in Orwellian double speak distortions:

First of all, we don't believe that, "America attacked itself." That is the most assinine thing anybody could possibly say. No, we believe that the Bush Fascists attacked America. The Bush Fascist cabal is not America, they attacked America.

Second of all, we don't believe "America is evil." That is yet the same assinine distortion of our position. No, we believe that the Bush Fascists are evil. So, let's please dispense with this Bill O'reilly crap.

If "RealWorld" is not receiving a paycheck from some unstated 3-lettered agency, "RealWorld" sure acts like an imposter of one.

Looks like I hit a nerve.

Hey Keenan, where are the Democrats and the anti-Bush media outlets like the New York Times or the Nation? How come they aren’t endorsing your America-hating crackpot drivel? These ludicrous theories would have taken the active participation of thousands and you and your fellow twoofers slander many good people. You don’t have one iota of evidence, all you have is your fanatical hate.

Three letter agency? You think the CIA or FBI is going to waste time watching you pathetic loons? Don't flatter yourself, pal, you ain't important.

Wow, you are a real piece of work!

You're like one of those wind-up Bill O'reilly dolls, just the same talking points over and over and over and over again...

"you hate America!...America-hating crackput drivel! don't have one iota of evidence!'re saying America attacked itself! just believe America is evil! have no evidence!...terrorists!...hate!...freedom hating!...
hate America!...

Careful, don't have an O'reilly spasmatic attack. What version of the Bill O'reilly chip did you install? You might need an upgrade.

Sheraton National Hotel Memories

Remember when the Twoof Movement was so sure of itself that the FBI conficated a security tape from the Sheration Nation Hotel, and that the video captured crystal-clear images of the object that hit the Pentagon?

Those were some good times.

Guess you guys just decided to quitely brush that one under the rug, huh?

Pentagon video another possible disappointment

"The top photo [in the above link] shows the view from inside the hotel. On the diagram below (courtesy of Google Maps) it is obvious that they could not have recorded the impact since it was around the corner of the building. But depending on their camera locations they may have been able to record the flight path from various angles since the aircraft would have essentially looped around the building."

Where is evidence of Flight 77 hitting pentagon?

Normally I dismiss people who think F77 hit the pentagon as believers in the official story. Outside of the "no-planers" in regards to the WTC, there seems to be a breed of "yes-planers" in regards to Flight 77 hitting the pentagon, which breeds life within the 9/11 truth movement. Given the amount of evidence that F77 did not hit pentagon, such as, hole too small on pentagon wall (before outside wall collapse), and lack of significant debris, what evidence is there that points to F77 hitting Pentagon?

The "yes-planers" at the

The "yes-planers" at the Pentagon group are composed of either A: a small but vocal bunch of disinfo agents such as Jim Hoffman, John Judge, and Mark Robinowitz at or B: people who are dupes of the above. The fact is that there is no evidence so support the OGCT (Official Government Conspiracy Theory) that fllight 77 hit the pentagon, so instead, the agents generally resort to PSYOP tactics, such as ridicule and attempts to discredit the messenger. "The argument that flight 77 didn't hit the pentagon is a waste of time," for example.

All the physical evidence proves that flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Disinfo agents such as John Judge and Jim Hoffman never discuss this evidence. The "yes-planers" only point to eyewitness testimony, which does not hold as much weight as physical evidence, which any experienced investigator will tell you. Most of the eye-wittnesses are not credible, being that they are mostly military and msm employees. How did 10 USA Today employees wind up in the right place at the right time to "witness" flight 77 hitting the Pentagon? What are the odds of that being possible?

Check out Dave McGowan's discussion of the "Tatoo Theorists" - ("Ze Plane, Ze Plane!") at to take a look at the "witnesses" to see just who they really are.

Serious Disinfo Here!!!!

I am part of a 9/11 Truth group on the west coast. I know many people who have left the San Fransisco 9/11 group because people have told me the group is guided by Jim Hoffmans theory that Flight 77 hit the pentagon, and apparently the group does not tolerate anyone who thinks otherwise. People got disgusted with this practice, and many left to either form a new group or do individual research.

In regards to the group I am involved in, I have had a couple people attack me specifically on the Flight 77 issue, but not on any other issue. Folks, I'm sorry but there is some serious disinfo going on with the pentagon situation. Now we do not know what for sure what exactly hit the pentagon, but it should not be hard to figure out that there is plenty more evidence to show that F77 did not hit the pentagaon than there is evidence to show that it did. That's a no-brainer.

The "yes-planers" at the

The "yes-planers" at the Pentagon group are composed of either A: a small but vocal bunch of disinfo agents such as Jim Hoffman, John Judge, and Mark Robinowitz at or B: people who are dupes of the above. The fact is that there is no evidence so support the OGCT (Official Government Conspiracy Theory) that fllight 77 hit the pentagon, so instead, the agents generally resort to PSYOP tactics, such as ridicule and attempts to discredit the messenger. "The argument that flight 77 didn't hit the pentagon is a waste of time," for example.

All the physical evidence proves that flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Disinfo agents such as John Judge and Jim Hoffman never discuss this evidence. The "yes-planers" only point to eyewitness testimony, which does not hold as much weight as physical evidence, which any experienced investigator will tell you. Most of the eye-wittnesses are not credible, being that they are mostly military and msm employees. How did 10 USA Today employees wind up in the right place at the right time to "witness" flight 77 hitting the Pentagon? What are the odds of that being possible?

Check out Dave McGowan's discussion of the "Tatoo Theorists" - ("Ze Plane, Ze Plane!") at to take a look at the "witnesses" to see just who they really are.


Aaaaaaaaaaaaagent man...

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

I assure you, they did not & could not have IDed 63 of 64

passengers at the Pentagon! The enormous forces + the explosion & fire, would've certainly destroyed any DNA that had been present!

So if the airplane really hit the Pentagon, why did they then feel the need to fabricate DNA results???

Jon Gold shows his true Aaaaaaagent colors...

I always had my suspicions about Jon Gold, but his comments in this discussion thread really confirmed it for me. For one thing, the fact that Jon Gold uses known liar John Judge to reference his support of the official government fiction that flight 77 hit the Pentagon is kind of a dead giveaway. Besides John Judge's ridiculous fairy tale about the amazing and mysterious AA flight attendent/fellow conspiracy researcher/friend/rescue worker/expert plane parts identifier who "proved" that flight 77 hit the Pentagon, John Judge has also been busy inventing ridiculous fairy tales to support the official government fiction that the plane crashes and ensuing fires is what brought down the 3 WTC towers...

YES, IN CASE ANYBODY MISSED IT, JOHN JUDGE REJECTS THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION THEORY OF THE 3 WTC TOWERS - EVEN BUILDING 7! Why on earth would Jon Gold risk his reputation by siding with such a professional liar?

Second of all, Jon Gold uses typical PSYOP type arguments - attacking the messenger rather than talking about the evidence that the messenger is presenting. His one line comment above is the typical example. When a PSYOP agent has no valid arguments against the evidence that contradicts an official government lie (such as regarding the Pentagon attack), they resort to BADJACKETING - which is to accuse the messenger of being an agent in front of other people in the movement. BADJACKETING has long been the favorite tactic of COINTELPRO for the purposes of attempting to discredit someone in the movement in the eyes of other people in the movement.

So when Jon Gold responds to someone's argument by saying only, "you're an agent" without offering any valid reasons, and without offeriing any counter-evidence, he is just showing his true colors. It gets tiresome when he does this over and over again.

"Professional Liar"

You're saying John gets paid to lie? Ever see his car?

Click Here

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

What does his car prove?

So, Jon, how could you possibly support someone like John Judge when he even lies about he collapse of the WTC towers? You really need to address this. Talking about John's car is just smoke and mirrors to distract us away from the uncomfortable fact that by referencing and supporting a known liar, your credibility comes into question.

As far as I'm concerned...

The only thing I have to address are envelopes. He lies, or he has a difference of opinion? Or are you forgetting that according to the Scripps Howard poll, only "16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed?"

He is in the remaining 84% that don't believe the buildings were brought down by Controlled Demolition, however, I have spoken to him on several ocassions, and he most certainly believes elements of our Government were complicit in the attacks.

I have a good relationship with Professor Jones, and Dr. Griffin. I have posted all of their information. I have promoted every single movie that has come out with regard to Controlled Demolition.

Considering all that I've sacrificed, and all that I've done for this movement, my "credibility" should only be doubted by those who seek to destroy it.

The fact that I even have people trying to destroy it tells me that I must be doing something right.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

John Judge does not simply

John Judge does not simply "believe" with the 84% of the population who haven't looked into the evidence of controlled demolition. Rather, John presents himself as a researcher on 9/11. He HAS looked into the evidence, but he does not address it. Instead, he manufactures absurd and quite elaborate fabrications to uphold the official gov't fiction of how the buildings collapsed. For example, he said that building 7 was structurally damaged by 1.5 richter quakes that occured when the planes hit the twin towers. Obviously, anybody with, like, an IQ higher than 80 would not believe such nonsense and we know that John's IQ is higher than 80. He tells lie after lie - such as claiming that the bottom 10 stories of building 7 was somehow cut out 1/3 into the building - a blatent lie. If that were true, several central columns would have been cut out, which we know did not happen. John fabricates this without offering a shred of evidence. Besides, he knows damn well that even if that were true, building 7 would not have fallen symmetrically within its own footprint in less than 7 seconds. This list of absurd lies that John fabricates to support the official collapse theory is endless and there is no way that an experienced researcher like John could possibly believe such nonsense that he spews. John Judge is not a stupid moron, he knows what he is doing. He is very clever. Again, it is not about disagreement, John goes out of his way to lie and fabricate elaborate fictions to add to the official story, then he goes out of his way to disparage good 9/11 researchers who have proven that controlled demolition was used. That is the obvious behavior of PSYOPS agents.

And don't forget Judge's ridiculous fable about his friend/fellow JFK conspiracy researcher/AA flight attendent/rescue worker/high-clearence Pentagon volunteer/expert plane parts identifier story that becomes more absurd and outrageous with every new version he tales. Yet again, John Judge does not address the physical evidence but can only see fit to fabricate elaborate and clever nonsense to support the official government story, like a true PSYOPS agent.

"I have spoken to him on several ocassions, and he most certainly believes elements of our Government were complicit in the attacks."

Well obviously, he has to say that! That's how it works. How else can someone infiltrate the 9/11 movement in order to poisen and attempt to confuse and divide the movement? By saying that it was NOT an inside job? It's a no brainer that any disinfo agent has to at least pretend to be a 9/11 truther.

"I have a good relationship with Professor Jones, and Dr. Griffin"

Then why to you attack and ridicule them and everybody else who does not accept the Boeing at the Pentagon official fiction? The overwhelming consensus among the credible 9/11 researchers, including the Schollars for 9/11 Truth, Barrie Zwicker, Webster Tarpley, SPINE (Scientific Panel Investigating Nine Eleven), Jim Marrs, etc., is that the physical evidence scientifically disproves that flight 77 could have hit the Pentagon, and they have published their research to back it up. Who does that leave? Lets's see...only Jim Hoffman. And Jim Hoffman has not published anything to support his position that flight 77 hit the Pentagon, he only engages in PSYOP-type arguments basically ridiculing and attacking everybody else. That is why Hoffman hasn't been invited to any recent 9/11 conferences. People are tired of his divisive and destructive behavior towards other good 9/11 researchers.

Your stupid and assinine arguments to support the official government fiction of the Boeing at the Pentagon theory in which you use PSYOPS-type attacks - "it's all disinso" or "it's a waste of time", etc., while ignoring the scientific evidence that everybody else has put on the table just convinces people that YOU are the disinfo agent.

The question is why are YOU trying to destroy the majority of good 9/11 researchers with your Pentagon disinfo crap?

Sorry, but if I have to choose between Dr. Griffin, Professor Jones, Jim Fetzer, Kevin Barret, most of Schollars of 9/11 Truth, SPINE, Barrie Zwicker, Webster Tarpley, Jim Marrs, etc., on one side, and a tiny clique consisting of Jon Gold, Jim Hoffman, John Judge on the other, common sense forces me to go with the former. So, Jon Gold, you should either put up or shut up and stop trying to create division and discord in the movement. If you act like a PSYOP agent, then you have to expect that people will see you as one.


When I do, you'll be the first one I tell.

Incidentally, are you sure you're not thinking of Nico Haupt?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Also Keenan...

Tell me why the stats suggest that my posts are the most popular on this site. Is everybody just stupid or are your accusations just bullshit?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Ah, but you still haven't addressed any of my points

Nice try, but everybody can see that you still refuse to address my points, and those of all the good 9/11 researchers that you attack with your Pentagon disinfo nonsense. Playing popularity contest is just more smoke and mirrors. All you can do is respond in typical PSYOPS fashion, yet again...still waiting for you to address my points...

You are simply proving over and over again that you do not have any valid arguments.

I have never...

"Attacked" any of the individuals you cited, and I am friends with several of them.

As far as my "Pentagon disinfo nonsense", you mean this, or this?

It's interesting that your first posts on this site are to attack me.

Did Nico send you?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

BTW Keenan...

I'm off to take part in some 9/11 Truth activism.

When's the last time you did the same?

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Still waiting for you to address the issue

You have consistently attacked anybody on this forum who does not accept the official government fiction of flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. You typically use arguments such as, "the no Boeing at the Pentagon theorists are disinfo agents", or "arguing that flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon is a waste of time". By implication, you are therefore attacking all the good 9/11 researchers who do not accept the official myth of flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, including your friends Professor Jones, David Griffin, Kevin Barret, James Fetzer and most of the Schollars for 9/11 Truth, Webster Tarpey, Barrie Zwicker, Jim Marrs, Dylan Avery, Jasen Bermes and the folks at Louder than Words, SPINE, Dave Von Kleist, Eric Hufschmid, etc., and all the folks on this forum who also question the official myth of the Pentagon attack.

"I'm off to take part in some 9/11 Truth activism.
When's the last time you did the same?"

Yet again, more smoke and mirros to deflect attention away from the issue you still refuse to address, which is why are you trying to destroy so many good researchers in the 9/11 movement with your Pentagon disinfo crap?

At this point, I realize that you are not going to address the real issue because you don't have any valid arguments to dispute what all the above-named researchers have put on the table, all you can do is attack. Therefore, I'm not going to waste any more time with you. You have been exposed for all to see what your true purposes are.

So you're saying...

That giving advice to individuals, based on my experience, to focus on different aspects of the Pentagon, is "attacking" them? As far as calling people "disinfo", there ARE "disinformationists" out there. Some have frequented this site. I know for a fact that I'm not one of them.

In regards to John Judge, I created this thread to try and find out why people don't like him. I have always found him to be a tremendous resource. He is a walking encyclopedia of information, and anyone who's been around a long time knows that. I thought it would be interesting to get his perspective on different issues.

Just as I would like to hear what Michael Parenti has to say. Just as I would like to hear what Gore Vidal has to say. Just as I would like to hear what Ray McGovern has to say.

Just because you have a difference of opinion about a certain aspect of 9/11, doesn't mean you have to be bitter enemies. There are individuals out there who try to make it this way, but that's not how it's supposed to be. To me, as long as you make an honest effort at getting people involved, without hurting the movement, then you're fine by me.

Feel free to ask Prof. Jones, David Griffin, Kevin Barrett, Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas if they think I've ever "attacked" them. Jim Fetzer and I have had a few disagreements. Barrie Zwicker and I have only corresponded a few times. I don't know Jim Marrs, the people at SPINE, or Dave Von Kleist. Eric Hufschmid and I used to be friends. We aren't any more.

Tell me... Have I ever been an individual with a history of causing disruption within this movement? An individual who starts email campaigns directed against certain individuals in this movement? An individual who writes denouncing articles against certain organizations within this movement? An individual who writes denouncing articles about certain events that take place within this movement? An individual who keeps tabs on what certain individuals within this movement are saying so that he can use their statements against them in the future? An individual who makes sure to act like a lunatic when the mainstream media decides to give this movement some attention? An individual who takes it upon himself to "investigate" certain individuals within this movement in the hopes of discrediting them?

The answer to that long list of questions is no.

Some people have. Do you condone that kind of behavior?

Also, tell me why you think it's ok to promote a missile or an A-3 Sky Warrior hitting the Pentagon on National Television where all a pundit has to do to make you look like a fool is ask, "Then where are the passengers?"

I don't like the fact that they have the ability to do that. Therefore, I try to ask that different aspects are promoted.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

There is no evidence, only disinfo

The "yes-planers" at the Pentagon group are composed of either A: a small but vocal bunch of disinfo agents such as Jim Hoffman, John Judge, and Mark Robinowitz at or B: people who are dupes of the above. The fact is that there is no evidence so support the OGCT (Official Government Conspiracy Theory) that fllight 77 hit the pentagon, so instead, the agents generally resort to PSYOP tactics, such as ridicule and attempts to discredit the messenger. "The argument that flight 77 didn't hit the pentagon is a waste of time," for example.

All the physical evidence proves that flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Disinfo agents such as John Judge and Jim Hoffman never discuss this evidence. The "yes-planers" only point to eyewitness testimony, which does not hold as much weight as physical evidence, which any experienced investigator will tell you. Most of the eye-wittnesses are not credible, being that they are mostly military and msm employees. How did 10 USA Today employees wind up in the right place at the right time to "witness" flight 77 hitting the Pentagon? What are the odds of that being possible?

Check out Dave McGowan's discussion of the "Tatoo Theorists" - ("Ze Plane, Ze Plane!") at to take a look at the "witnesses" to see just who they really are.

virtually every single

virtually every single eyewitness who claimed to see Flight 77 hit the Pentagon either worked for USA Today(they have been connected for years to the agency. but dont ask me, just google USA Today-CIA connections) or the government. im just saying............

I have a friend...

Who told me their grandparents live in a building within view of the Pentagon, and that they saw an explosion but no plane. Granted, they are old folk, but there it is. Add my eyewitnesses to the pile of contradictory ones, fwiw!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


we need to prepare for a

we need to prepare for a flurry of moronic puppet attack dog presenters like Hanitty and Oh 'Really saying "see i told you a plane hit it, derrrp" whislt wiping the sliva away from there mouths, there gonna use this to discredit all other theories, there stock reply to people who claim inside job will be "well you said a plane didn't hit the pentagon but it did blah blah blah" can't wait :(

this is the problem with the 9/11 truth movement, there are so many diverse theories, i'm not nocking anyone it's just when they release a video of a plane clearly hitting the pentagon it could have a profound effect on the truth movvment.

In saying that, they said the last video they released would clear everything up, and obviously it didn't but was that the whole idea of it ? to make people suspicious,

ohh i don't know anymore :)

doesn't make sense (as i

doesn't make sense (as i type this post) to release it after the election. makes you wonder what's up.

what is the reason this

what is the reason this couldn't just be released with the Citgo video? granted I don't know all the red tape procedural stuff that comes with something like this, but they're both security videos from private businesses, why is this one taking longer to reach us? i'm not suggesting something untoward, but it just really doesn't make much sense.

they needed more time

to get it JUST RIGHT.

maybe, but...

I think they had time and this is more of an election thing. watch them pretend that whatever they release "puts the conspiracy theories to rest."

yep, the truth movement is ïn its last throes." we can only hope, given what that phrase seems to mean in Iraq!!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


will only continue speculation (obviously)

whatever it shows it won't reveal any objective truth on the matter.
The FBI or whoever has had it all this time and can make it show whatever. Most likely it won't have been manipulated, it will simply show an ambiguous object hitting the pentagon, or only the explosion and smoke will be visible. If that plane does show up on the video it will consist of perhaps 8 pixels to argue about what it was or wasn't, or what it's trajectory is or is not. The fact that the pentagon issue cannot be precisely determined (like the rest of 9/11) only indicates it's most likely total BS. I agree with Jim Fetzer and the whole mindset that if anything on that day happened how the OTC claims it should be fairly obvious. Every day that goes by leaving these matters which should be scientifically verifiable to a matter of faith, only further cements my knowledge that this whole thing is a lie. I mean comeon people, at this point, how much more obvious can it get? The sheer amount of time these questions and contradictions have hung in the air without being resolved is a proof itself. The air is thick with stale lies and it's really starting to stink to where more and more people are noticing.

Until some kind of real investigation takes place nothing can really be verified. And these things (false flag operations) are set up in such a way to leave evidence appearing one way when the opposite is true. I sure hope we're not still talking about evidence about what did and didn't happen 5 more years from now. And who knows the kind of myth and folklore and further divide 9/11 will come to represent 10 and 15 more years from now. Will it pass to become another JFK? An event rife with contradiction and speculation, where most of the public knows it's BS, and yet the government will always stick to it's own history, a history that it wrote?


our friends over at flight77dotinfo, whose website is dedicated to this issue and who claim the following:

"please note that we still have a second FOIA request active for the other 84 flight 77 recordings. we WILL get those as well. they should include the citgo tape and the doubletree hotel tape (there's no sheraton hotel tape, BTW)"

have nothing to say about this upcoming release?

when the gas station tape came out...

it was mentioned that by 11/9 the doubletree would be out

check blogger's archives

///////////////////// - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Just curious...

Where did the number 84 come from (in terms of pentagon attack videos out there)?

RE: Just curious...

Also, see this link:

"September 9, 2005: Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division files a DECLARATION describing her search for records responsive to Bingham's FOIA request. Maguire admits to determining that 85 videotapes in the FBI's possession are "potentially responsive" the the request, that she personally viewed 29 of the tapes, and that she located only one videotape that showed the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. Maguire also refers to "one videotape taken from a closed circuit television at a Doubletree Hotel in Arlington Virginia," but states that it did not show the impact of Flight 77.

September 26, 2005: Hodes files a request seeking "copies of 85 videotapes in the possession of the FBI described in the declaration of Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire dated September 7, 2005."

if we do see a "Fly By" in

if we do see a "Fly By" in the upcoming release, i'll believe even more strongly in the "Fly Over" theory. credible eyewitnesses saw the plane fly towards the Pentagon fromthe left of the Citgo gas station, the FDR recently released by the NTSB shows almost the same thing, the evacuation of Reagan Airport, the other white plane over DC. its a perfect deception really.

how low did the 757 fly?

If they have a 757 video, then they also have to show us how it made this ground-level hole. Someone made a 3d reconstruction of how it was possible for the 757 to disappear in the hole. But this model only went to show how unlikely it all is - almost like the "magic bullet theory" of JFK, nothing is really "impossible".
Sadly, i assume the video will once again be like the gas station video, something that shows almost nothing. And even if a plane is seen on it, remember the official version had a military C130 flying behind the 757 and the pilot seeing it crash (the same magic C130 that appeared in Shanksville later).

What shill keeps giving -1 points to thoughtful posts that just

happen to push the envelope a little bit??? It's getting sort of annoying.

Are you talking about the up/down arrows?

Or the stars that go with the blog posts?

I find the up/down arrows helpful in that I sometimes just want to note that I agree, or that the post was a good one without adding a post that says next to nothing -- like "Good post!" Also, there are certainly times when I want to express disagreement without contributing to a thread. I don't think I have an ax to grind, though some may disagree.

Given that only registered users can vote on posts, what would make you think a really dumb one would get a lot? Ten votes in either direction happens pretty infrequently -- which means most people don't vote, most of the time.

I think the arrows are an excellent idea

and the site owners should be able to detect abuse... normally I think they tell us a lot about how strongloy people feel how about which issues.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


haha, democracy in action

haha, democracy in action man. the people have spoken by giving casseia 5 and you -5. dont take it personally, ive gotten my share of negative posts before myself. i like the point system because it saves me from going on rants or getting in arguments. i can just give somebody a negative point and move on if i dont feel like getting into it. my 2 cents.

sure, i think its

sure, i think its consistent. you got a -7 on your post because obviously more people here like the points system than dont like it. thats why casseias post got almost the mirror opposite in positive points. same thing with the Jon Gold-Keenan exchange. i would guess that more people on this site(at least people who voted) think that its more likely Flight 77 didnt hit the Pentagon than did. and Jon may be popular with many people here, but there are some who dont appreciate how he and others like John A. compare the no Flight 77 theory with CGI and holograms and make little snide remarks about how speculating about Flight 77 "hurts the movement" and causes the media to slander and ridicule as, as if they wouldnt do that anyway. both Jons do great work, but they likely lose some points by ridiculing CD and Pentagon theories regularly. just a guess. and for the record Andrew, i typically dont give your posts thumbs down, in fact, the one you have negative 7 on right now i only clicked down becuase im one of the ones who likes the point system. i typically agree with what you say, and agree that you have the right to talk about CGI or anything else. recently when there was discussion about banning no-planers i voiced my opinion that we should not, despite being very much against that theory. so basically, i think the point system is useful.

which quotes were you

which quotes were you referring too? I only give minus to anyone who agrees with the official story or says it wasn't an inside job because I'm 100% confirmed that it was. And I was a supporter of Bush and the war for a few years!

the employees

The article stresses the point that the employees watched them multiple times - who were the employees and what do they say they saw?

Perhaps the gov't agents who will vouch that the special

effects in the manipulated video are real, and that they did see the same thing themselves.


Please, how can any video released by the gov't after 5+ years

have any credibility whatsoever?

Any CG enthusiasts?

Someone needs to bring out a couple of CG examples of similar things to show how easy it is to fake these things, before the Officials do the same thing.

Preempt this stuff, guys.

Preempt this stuff, guys. Just say that clear video is coming out in the next week of the Pnetagon hit. If it is anything less, alternative theorists look good.

I agree

According to Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, the Doubletree Hotel videotape "did not show the impact of Flight 77."

If what they release on the 9th (Doubletree Hotel video) shows flight 77 impacting the Pentagon, we know it's lie (according to what the FBI has already admitted).

good point!

great post stallion! Either way, they are liars!
But I already know that it won't be anything significant.

Im glad They're Releasing this Video

I hope ithe video has a good view of the object that hit the pentagon. Hopefully this will show what it was and put an end to this chapter in the 9/11 book. The other recently released footage didnt show jack. I still think it was a jet airliner but until we see some good footage its technically an unidentified flying object. My vote goes to commercial airplane.


Of course, just for the sake of posibilities, what if the new tapes show something other than flight 77.


Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. ~ Unknown

Success is as dangerous as failure. Hope is as hollow as fear.~ Tao Te Ching

A hushed heart hears the unuttered word.~ Sri Aurobindo

Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance like nobody's watching.~ Satchel Paige

I'm pretty sure that's the

I'm pretty sure that's the only option completely outside the realm of possibility at this point. If there was anything at all on that tape that could in any way damage the official conspiracy theory, the Feds just would have lost the tape, burnt it by accident or shredded it and thrown it away (in several trash cans in several locations, preferably). If you haven't noticed, evidence has been blatantly destroyed throughout this painful process, in plain sight of anyone who cares to look.

I'm with the guy who said we'll at most see a few distorted pixels of somethingness and the explosion. And the Hannitys and O'reillys of this world will feel totally vindicated. Og, it must feel good being them, or suffering from the same illness... Ignorance must truly be bliss.

Why be afraid of Pentagon NPT?

Even if they released a sophisticated piece of CG imagery, there'd still be the fact that the entry hole is way too small and the "exit hole" is way too big and way too far in (10ft of reinforced concrete, I mean WTF). Matter of fact is that the physical evidence does not match the official narrative. And thus, there's nothing wrong with calling the Pentagon issue to everyone's's a truly big stinking fish, and no amount of special fx high gloss envelope will ever change that. Unless we'll all be lobotomized, of course.

So in short, don't fear the Pentagon NPT, the facts speak for themselves. If someone had an inkling that the PTB might release footage of a hellish inferno engulfing WTC7's south face, would you stop bringing its controlled demolition up?

does nobody else even

does nobody else even consider that this will be a really good film....if i was them i woulda kidnapped the best techy in hollywood and forced him to sit in chair until he produces a fake video capable of convincing the unconvinced! dont underestimate their intelligence and deviousness.

DoubleTree Photos

The chief suspect holds all the "evidence" and gets to release bits and pieces of said "evidence" a politically opportune times, if at all. The Ben Laden tapes strongly appear to have been faked and the cell phone calls from the planes also appear to be faked. Why would any released photos be accepted as unaltered true and correct photos?

Even when and if we see photo of a "plane" hitting the Pentagon, we still do not know what it was that "hit" the Pentagon, much less if the photo is faked.

The chief suspect(s) are murderous treasonous despots and evil thugs.

This story is much ado about nothing.

Jon Gold

Our opinions and positions on so many issues are so similar - actually identical - that people are going to begin to wonder why they have never seen us in the same room together.

Your analysis of the Pentagon brew-ha-ha is quite lucid.

I told you...

We must share the same brain.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."


Abby Scott thought I was you.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Pentagon Plane

Karl Rove promised something spectacular for October, but it makes better sense to wait until Monday...however the computer technology available today can make anything look any way you want it to. My guess is, it'll be a doctored fake. Good, but faked.

That still won't explain the perfectly round cirlcle of impact though.

Maybe it wil show...

...Hani Hanjour waving to the camera as the plane passes by....

(Albanese and Gold need to get a room :)

My guess is that the

My guess is that the explosion will obscure the impact.... there will not be full penetration prior to an explosion.

I think that we were given a hint though.... the FOIA request mentions the videos showing an impact with the Pentagon..... the person reviewing the videos said that there were only so many videos showing that.... perhaps we simply need to request the videos showing a plane flying over the pentagon.

what we can expect

It will either be something totally unhelpful like the Citgo tape, just so people can say they're not hiding anything (except all the PENTAGON surveillance camera tapes) or a decent fake to "put it all to rest" except of course for the LIHOPPERS who will harp on about warnings and missed chances to kill bin Laden, yatta yatta.

Of course thanks to Nico we'll have to choose a term other than "video fakery" to describe what they did. Video forgery might be a good alternative. It's almost like the NPT folks were setting us up for something like this, no?

In any case, just goes to show how important the demolitions are compared to the Pentagon. Larry Silverstein didn't sign the lease on the Pentagon 6 weeks before 9/11, after all!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


In any case, just goes to

In any case, just goes to show how important the demolitions are compared to the Pentagon. Larry Silverstein didn't sign the lease on the Pentagon 6 weeks before 9/11, after all!

no, but they did just happen to renovate it ;)


Lucky for you I have a sense of humor. It's true though... John and I say a lot of the same things. Let's say for instance that there are 9/11 Truthers who tend to focus on things of a scientific nature. As inconceivable as that is... :P John and I lean more towards the other side of the spectrum. People's actions, contradicting statements, historical references, and stuff like that. I also think that he and I probably had a lot of the same influences.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Probably is lucky for me.... I recall, someone I know who has met you said you were a pretty big guy...

Seriously, I'm a big fan of what you and John do here....just having a wee bit of fun....

I agree that the science can be Donald Sutherland's "Mr. X" in the movie JFK says (to paraphrase), what's really important is "why" (why 9/11)?.......


The "debunkers" like to make fun of my 'weight problem." I can't "weight" to eat.

The actions of this Government after the fact point to why.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Pentagon Video in the Nick of Time for Midterms?

“The much anticipated release of the Doubletree Hotel security video that has been speculated it will show a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon is due to be released by one week from today,” writes the blogger Killtown. “So how much do you want to bet that this Doubletree Hotel security video will be released before this Tuesday (election day) to ’shock & awe’ the voters in hopes to sway the elections, especially if this video finally shows a plane hitting the Pentagon?”

If I was a betting man, I’d bet the farm on it.

However, simply releasing a five plus year old video with a predictable corporate media broadside taking “conspiracy nuts” to task, thus questioning their patriotism and even sanity, and suggesting Republicans were right all along about those cave-dwelling Muslims with their boxcutters, may not be enough to flip the election and keep the House and Senate in neocon hands.

As Killtown points out, “four days before the [2004] elections, the first video of bin Laden publicly taking credit for 9/11 which boosted Bush’s poll ratings in Ohio which lead to him being re-elected.” Indeed, after the video was aired, according to the Telegraph, Bush “opened a six-point lead over John Kerry…. If the trend is confirmed by other polls, Mr Bush may have his greatest enemy to thank for helping him secure another four years in the White House after the appearance of the video sparked a sharp final round of argument over which candidate can best defeat terrorism.” Of course, a little vote fraud in Ohio sure the heck didn’t hurt.

It would seem, as well, the Osama in the “October Surprise” video had plastic surgery, specifically to make sure he did not resemble the real Osama, who died nearly three years before the fake Osama went before the camera. Compare the Osamas on this page and decide for yourself.

A blurry security camera video shot from atop the Doubletree Hotel will be a shade better than the ludicrous video frames released in May, a pathetic effort lauded by the corporate media as a bold finale putting to rest once and all conspiracy theories about what hit the Pentagon. No doubt, as well, this latest effort, promised by the FBI and the suspicious Judicial Watch to be released no later than November 9th, will be heralded as conclusive evidence the aerobatic Hani Hanjour, who had trouble controlling and landing the Cessna 172, executed a flawless, 500 miles per hour maneuver of a Boeing 757 into the Pentagon.

I'm not buying this

I think the elites WANT democrats to win this election.

It will make people think they have "demanded change", when democrats instead give us the status quo. The media will no doubt be falling all over telling the world how the "people have spoken" as the dems "take back" the house and/or senate.

Democrats winning will put lots of people back to sleep, thinking that they've "done all they can" and we'll just have to "wait for congress to do something".

In the next few weeks the phony left/right paradigm will be exploited in the media like you've never seen before. Then we will get nothing, not a peep, out of the democrats for the next two years and beyond!


right on, that is exactly what is going on... they're switching the folks at the top on us is all. MAYBE they'll try to then use a little LIHOP to defuse the truth movement. SEE? democrats are INVESTIGATING 9/11 - the loonies will NEVER be satisfied though. with a few LIHOPPERS from the movement cheering on the Dems, who knows they may have some success... but I doubt it. it may help them contain the truth for a little while longer until the 2008 october surprise, right befor McCain and... someone beat Hillary and Obama... or the other way around depending how things go. they think they cover all the bases--our job is to keep making new bases!!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero - Harvard Task Force


There is no 2-party system in this country any longer!

It's a 1-party system, just the way the elites want it! No checks & balances!

Could you ever image two leading Democrats, Kerry & Hillary, acting like such jellyfish in dire times like these? They should be ripping the Bushies to shreds, but there's hardly a peep out of them!

This is why

GREEN PARTY candidates must start winning elections.
Democrats need to abandon this worthless spineless party and start supporting REAL candidates that stand for change.

There are only two things

There are only two things related to the Pentagon on 9/11 that have potential for the 9/11 Truth Movement, and videos being released by the FBI ain't one of them. There is absolutely no way the government will ever release a video that shows a missile impacting the Pentagon on 9/11, so all speculation about these FOIA requests is pointless.

Two things are relevant: (1) What happened to the $2.6 trillion? (2) What were Cheney's "orders" as he watched a plane approach the Pentagon?

The No-Boeing theory will remain unproved.

The No-Boeing theory was never unproved

Um, how can the No-Being theory remain unproved when it was never unproved? The scientific evidence proves the No-Boing theory and you cannot dispute it, regardless of the "eye-witness" statements, most of whom are not credible, and much of it is contradictory anyway. The science of the physical evidence outweighs any eyewitness testimony - Just ask any experienced investigator. On top of that, you have the official lies and cover-up behavior (hiding the videos for example) - itself strong evidence that the government's version of what happened at the Pentagon is not true.

There really is no reasonable argument to support the government's fable that flight 77 hit the Pentagon theory. When you have both A: Physical evidence contradicting the official story and, B: Massive cover-up behavior, it's pretty much an open and shut case for any experienced investigator to conclude that the No-Boeing theory is the only reasonable one.

Anyone who argues that the "No-Boing" theory is unscientific either has not done their homework, or has been duped by the small but loud clique of "yes-planers" such as John Judge, Jim Hoffman, or Mark Robinowitz, who's arguments pretty much consist of ridiculing those who do not accept the official Pentagon fable and accusing them of being disinfo agents.

I happen to agree with Jim

I happen to agree with Jim Hoffman. The No Boeing theory is full of holes, if you will, and represents a huge "honey pot" for skeptics.

But what about the evidence?

You didn't provide any counter arguments. Just saying that the No Boeing theory is full of holes without providing any specifics is an argument which is full of holes itself. You are just behaving like a dupe of disinfo agents such as Jim Hoffman. The physical evidence scientifically proves that a Boeing dit NOT hit the Pentagon and you can not dispute it scientifically, just as you can not dispute the scientific evidence of controlled demolition at the wtc. Now, go do your homework...

No counter arguments? I

No counter arguments? I linked to Jom Hoffman's essay chock full of counter arguments. The fact that you call Hoffman a "disinfo agent" does not make him so. He provides several photos of airplane parts on the Pentagon lawn (unlike Loose Change, which pretends there is only one such photo), and photos of parts inside the Pentagon. Reading fuzzy photos of the Pentagon is not "scientific evidence".

You mention controlled demolition of WTC, but I never said anything about the WTC. I do believe explosives were used at the WTC. I don't believe a missile hit the Pentagon.

It's weak arguments like the No Boeing stuff that continue to undermine this movement. Everytime the Loose Change people are on TV, the first question they are asked has to do with their theories concerning the Pentagon. Why do you think this is so? Because they make dubious claims about the Pentagon, and because No Boeing is a honey pot that will eventually be used to discredit everything 911 truth has done.

The better questions to ask about the pentagon are, how did anything hit the pentagon? and what did cheney order as a plane approached the pentagon? these questions lead to real evidence, not fuzzy photos.

Now go do your homework.

Video meaningless

In five years since 911 the gov't has had plenty of time to create whatever sort of fake footage they would like.

Whatever the video contains will have no bearing on what actually happened to the Pentagon.

while I think

that it is "possible" that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, virtually all of what little evidence there is shows that one DID NOT.
I have to pretty much agree with "most" of the 9/11 researchers, at this point I would have to say the odds of "something" other than Flt 77 hitting the Pentagon are at least 90%.

There is a slight chance that a miracle was preformed and Hanjour top gunned his way to hit the Pentagon perfectly or that it was remote controlled and some how managed to fly 20' off the ground at 500mph and "flow" into a 16' hole while the Government kept a video tape clearly showing it -hidden for 5 years, but dont sound to feasible to me.

Pentagon 9/11 Video Being Held Back by FBI

Government says it needs "more time" before releasing a video that shows nothing

Steve Watson
Tuesday, November 7, 2006