Breakthrough? Pentagon Explosions At 9:32 - 'Jetliner' Impact At 9:45

Breakthrough? Pentagon
Explosions At 9:32 - 'Jetliner'
Impact At 9:45
From Dick Eastman
olfriend@nwinfo.net
5-17-7

A witness - Jeff, the adult son of a General and brother to the aide of a General - was in a 30th floor apartment south of the Pentagon watching the twin towers burning on television. His attention was drawn to the window when "five minutes before the crash" he saw an F-16 flying with a C-130 pass by his window near the Pentagon. (His account is quoted below)
This confirms what Barbara Honegger says about Gen. Larry Arnold of NORAD sending an intecepter to check the Pentagon after the explosions at 9:32 a.m.

-----------------------

Now note that Barbara Honegger tells how a jet fighter was sent to examine the damage to the Pentagon after the 9:32 a.m. explosions to check for damage -- before the official impact time of 9:45 (later revised to 9:37)

Her account:

In the Air Force's own account of the events of 9/11, Air War Over America, the North American AerospaceDefense Command (NORAD) general who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled on 9/11, although too late, Gen.Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack therethat morning, and that this pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building. Thisfighter jet-not Flight 77-is almost certainly the plane seen on the Dulles airport Air Traffic Controller's screenmaking a steep, high-speed 270-degree descent before disappearing from the radar. [When a plane flies low enoughto go undetected, it is said to be "under the radar."] Military pilots-like the one sent by Gen. Arnold on 9/11 to reporton the Pentagon's damage-are trained to fly 500 feet above ground in order to evade radar detection. In fact, whenthe Air Traffic Controller responsible for the plane and her colleagues watched the extremely difficult 270-degreemaneuver on her screen, they were certain that the plane whose blip they were watching perform this extremelydifficult feat was a US military aircraft, and said so at the time. It almost certainly was.
Thus, the likely reason the Pentagon has refused to lower the current official time for "Flight 77" impact,9:37, to 9:32 am-the actual time of the first explosions there-is that they decided to pretend the blip represented byArnold's surveillance jet approaching just before 9:37 was "Flight 77." As the official cover story claims that thealleged 9:37 impact was the only Pentagon attack that morning, yet by the time Arnold's surveillance jet arrived onthe scene the violent event had already happened, the Pentagon cannot acknowledge the earlier 9:32 time withoutrevealing an attack on the building prior to the alleged impact.It is significant that the The 9/11 Commission Report ignoreIn the Air Force's own account of the events of 9/11, Air War Over America, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) general who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled on 9/11, although too late, Gen. Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack there that morning, and that this pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building. This fighter jet -not Flight 77- is almost certainly the plane seen on the Dulles airport Air Traffic Controller's screen making a steep, high-speed 270-degree descent before disappearing from the radar. [When a plane flies low enough to go undetected, it is said to be "under the radar."] Military pilots -like the one sent by Gen. Arnold on 9/11 to report on the Pentagon's damage- are trained to fly 500 feet above ground in order to evade radar detection. In fact, when the Air Traffic Controller responsible for the plane and her colleagues watched the extremely difficult 270-degree maneuver on her screen, they were certain that the plane whose blip they were watching perform this extremely difficult feat was a US military aircraft, and said so at the time. It almost certainly was.

Thus, the likely reason the Pentagon has refused to lower the current official time for "Flight 77" impact, 9:37, to 9:32 am -the actual time of the first explosions there- is that they decided to pretend the blip represented by Arnold's surveillance jet approaching just before 9:37 was "Flight 77." As the official cover story claims that the alleged 9:37 impact was the only Pentagon attack that morning, yet by the time Arnold's surveillance jet arrived on the scene the violent event had already happened, the Pentagon cannot acknowledge the earlier 9:32 time without revealing an attack on the building prior to the alleged impact.

http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=
&Board=news_crime&Number=294911140&t=0

--------------
Now here is the statement by witness Jeff in which he says he saw the F-16 fly by the Pentagon five minutes before he saw the jetliner approach the Pentagon and, he says, crash.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/frameup/message/8617
I was on the 30th floor of a building in Crystal City with an unobstructed view of the Pentagon on 9/11. I watched a C130 cargo plane flying very low come right by the building I was in and over the Pentagon followed shortly by a fighter aircraft. It got everyone's attention and brought all of us to the window. Approximately 5 minutes later I watched the airliner come over the highway and hit the side of the Pentagon. I know the difference between a cruise missile and a Plane. I also watched the live news coverage of the twin towers that morning and saw the second plane turn and hit the building( Live Coverage ) . I also saw the video you are talking about. I will assume that since you are so informed that you also saw the same slow motion version that I did of the second tower being hit and watching the plane slowly dissolve into the building. ( I'm sure that was done with computers and special effects to add to the conspiracy. )

And there is no gas station across the street from the Pentagon or for that matter anywhere within the line of site of the building. Maybe you should climb out of the cave you live in and take a trip to D.C. and see for yourself. I drive the area 2 to three times a week. As far as air defenses, Nobody new for sure what planes were a threat and no official wanted to pull the trigger on a passenger airliner. And how would you explain all the grieving families of the passengers on those planes. Oh wait, I know, the planes were shot down by fighters before the military shot a missile into the pentagon and blew up the twin towers with explosives. Oops, now the air traffic controllers are involved in the conspiracy too. Unless the military used stealth fighters that the air traffic controllers couldn't see on radar and also figured out how to slow a cruise missile down to airliner speed and put wings and windows on it to full idiots like me who saw it hit the building in broad daylight. I truly question the intelligence of anybody who can look at these events and come to the conclusions that you have. You are asserting a conspiracy that would involve Hundreds if not thousands of people.

I must also be part of the conspiracy since I, according to you, am lying about what I saw with my own eyes. You are also asserting that people in our military would knowingly kill American citizens without question and everyone is now keeping this secret. Are you really that ignorant. My father is a retired Brigadier General and my brother is a Lt. Colonel in the Airforce and an executive officer to a Four Star General on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I can assure you that they are not robots and they do not follow orders blindly. You need to get a grip on reality. As far as bodies found or not found, you may want to check the numbers on the temperature that jet fuel burns at and also the physics of what would happen to an Aluminum aircraft hitting a 2 ft. thick concrete wall at 400 MPH. Wake up and take off your blinders. People like you are very scary and not very smart. When you read all of this conspiracy crap, you really need to sit down and think it through. The average person can do this in just a few seconds, but you may need to take a little more time with it. Please don't bore me with a response, because if none of this makes sense to you, it never will. You may also want to sit down and thank all of those evil military people. Without them, you wouldn't have the freedom to voice your scary views.....Jeff
see all of my correspondence with Jeff here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/frameup/message/8617

- Dick Eastman

http://www.rense.com/general76/break.htm

Oh Dick

I couldn't agree with Dick more, on one point. I'm sure there's an abundance of disinfo out there for "full idiots like [you]."

what time did the clocks

what time did the clocks inside the pentagon stop? i seem to remember that the clocks either stopped at 9:32 or 9:45, i don't remember. but i think it was at 9:32 which was when the first set of explosives were detonated.... how does that fit with this account?

- visit http://truth911.net to learn the truth about September 11th, 2001

I think they were stopped at 9:32

And it's funny that few people know or talk about this fact!

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

ya... my brain is filled

ya... my brain is filled with lots of random 9/11 knowledge

- visit http://truth911.net to learn the truth about September 11th, 2001

as much fun as plane/no-plane debates are about the pentagon

maybe they are meant not as a honeypot but to distract us from the fact that yes, tehre apparently was an explosion well before any plane (or no plne) is alleged to have hit....

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

Loads of evidence demonstrates that AA-77 did NOT slam the

Pentagon!

NORAD Stand down

Did you know?

Lamp poles were knocked down in a fashion corresponding to a large commercial airliner?
The structural damage of the Pentagon CORRESPONDS with the lamp pole damage? The direction of the plane implied by the lamp pole damage DIRECTLY corresponds with the internal damage of the Pentagon. Now how do you explain that?

Many witnesses saw the plane hit the lamp poles? 100 witnesses saw it hit the Pentagon? http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/04/911-and-pentagon-attack-what.html
There was a traffic Jam when this happened?
There are major highways in perfect view of the Pentagon?
Eyewitnesses (virtually all) agree that it was a large plane?

NORAD stood down on 9/11? Ignoring this evidence distracts you away from that fact.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

yes of course, and...

tha passports discovered at the crash scenes and the car found in the parking lot at Logan airport all correspond to the arab muslim hijackers and their responsibility for 9/11. what's the point? of course the planted evidence matches the cover story--would you expect otherwise?

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

Because they are incompetent at faking evidence?

Fake passports? Bin Laden Confession? Bin Laden wanted for 9/11? Fake NSTB report? Flight passener lists? Autopsy report lists?

Can these people fake anything well? Provide obvious examples if you disagree.

Lamp poles knocked down. Structural damage corresponding to the implied flight path. Right next to a traffic jam. How did they do that?

What gets lost in endless

What gets lost in endless debates over the the Pentagon is:

1. Nothing should have hit the Pentagon. Nothing should have hit the Pentagon. Nothing should have hit the Pentagon.

2. No military officials were punished for screwing up and allowing something to hit the Pentagon.

3. The long, slow loop over D.C. that left the plane vulnerable to shoot-down and was clearly devised to hit the least vulnerable portion of the Pentagon.

4. The accounting activity in that section that was derailed.

5. Hani Hanjour wasn't experienced enough to accomplish the feat attributed to him.

6. There were three black boxes (instead of the two which would have been on the Boeing) intially reported as having been found.

7. The data released from the NTSB doesn't match the official story (whether it was the actual data or was released as misinformation).

8. The refusal for nearly six years to release the video evidence.

9. The bizarre behavior of the acting CJC (staying out of the loop, not interrupting his meeting) and Rummy (ferrying stretchers like a grunt rather than assuming a command position).

10. The Minetta testimony.

We don't need to speculate about the size of holes, whether or not 77 hit, or anything else. These items are HUGE, and don't leave us subject to honeypot machinations.

I agree

For those who debate "what type" of plane hit the Pentagon are missing the point:

NORAD stand down!

3. The long, slow loop over D.C. that left the plane vulnerable to shoot-down and was clearly devised to hit the least vulnerable portion of the Pentagon.

Here's another point. If they were going to fake a plane strike at the Pentagon, why would they fake this loop if there was no plane?? Why would they make up this ridiculous story? It only makes them look more guilty.

6. There were three black boxes (instead of the two which would have been on the Boeing) initially reported as having been found.

Very interesting. I didn't know that... Why would there be three black boxes... if there was no plane? They would plant 3? This is very suspicious if true.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

We don't need to convince

We don't need to convince all truthers that flight 77 hit or didn't hit to help them see which evidence is least alienating and which evidence should lead. I don't pretend to be anything but agnostic, but these Pentagon issues are important. A person can believe there was more than one plane in that airspace, that some sleight of hand occurred, and that anomolies with a Boeing exist and STILL learn to lead with damning facts that can be proved.

The Pentagon is also the point at which people can understand that LIHOP was not a passive activity but rather consisted of deliberate actions to disable normal procedures. Even the most tepid LIHOP is MIHOP.

What he said...

Repeat pont # 1, rinse, lather, repeat.

The jets at Langley could have been towed the 12 miles faster than they arrived.

Karen Kwiatowski

writes about bomb or missile explosions in her article in 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, Vol. 1.

So, Jeff is an Idiot?

I guess I'm not following the point here.

Jeff states that there are no gas stations in that area and he claims to know the area well, yet we know there is a gas station there, so, what does that mean?

----
Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent

http://www.chico911truth.org/

9/11 — GET rEVENge! (in a peaceful manner, of course)

I don't know what it means

But is clear that this witness is quite angry at the suggestion that something did not hit the Pentagon. Perhaps this emotional state led him to overstate his case about how aware he was of the Pentagon Area. It's like witnesses at the WTC... they generally get mad and defiant when you question that they saw a plane.

We could sit here all day nitpicking individual testimony. A scientific approach would look at all of the testimony. All of it, and record the observations as they are repeated. Claims that are repeated very frequently are much more credible than claims that are not.

For example: 100 people saw X, but 5 people saw Y. Therefore, X is much more credible than Y. You can go through the entire testimony like this and record many specific events (i.e. height of plane, flight path, color of plane, size of plane, where it hit, speed of plane, engine sounds and so on). Determining how many saw what would show how reliable a certain claim is.

In the Pentagon attack... they are not certain about the EXACT kind of plane... 10% claim it was a 757. But close to 100% claimed it was a large commercial plane.

I'm doing an analysis of the PentaCon, and it will answer a lot of confusion regarding the eyewitness testimony. In short the conclusions of the film are not supported by their eyewitness testimony. In fact they contradict their own witnesses.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

Jeff is wrong on several points.

"Jeff" said:

"And there is no gas station across the street from the Pentagon or for that matter anywhere within the line of site of the building. Maybe you should climb out of the cave you live in and take a trip to D.C. and see for yourself."

Others have. The gas station video was already released. The police officers who were there that day gave interviews in an independent film that was highlighted on this website (911blogger). You can clearly see the Pentagon from the gas station.

"Jeff" said:

"As far as air defenses, Nobody new for sure what planes were a threat and no official wanted to pull the trigger on a passenger airliner."

Scrambling fighters is S.O.P. which shouldn't need decoding for such a militarily connected witness. Scrambling is not in any way shape or form the same as "pulling the trigger." This is misinformation, exactly how Dick Cheney tried to explain away what happened in the PEOC bunker that day.

Failing to scramble fighters in order to INSPECT (step one) the aircraft and to attempt to influence its course (step two) is a violation of the standard procedures in place for decades.

People who violate standard procedures need to be investigated.

This rant of Jeff's is bullshit, blabbered without much thought or logic.

"Jeff" said:

"You are also asserting that people in our military would knowingly kill American citizens without question and everyone is now keeping this secret."

I'm not asserting this at all. If some irresponsible people have, then ignore them.

I'm asserting that some people knew what was going on and were in a position to ensure that the attacks succeeded. One of those people was Dick Cheney, another was Donald Rumsfeld.

That is what the preponderance of evidence suggests. The cover up of many, many legitimate questions, such as those proposed by the victim's families, as well as openly disonest "investigations" that contradict sworn testimony and other evidence suggests that we do not have the true story of September 11th.

If you are comfortable in your ignorance, and don't care about the true story of September 11th, then you are one of the idiots you seem so intent on trying to smear.

If you actually do care about September 11th, and what really happened, you need to come over to the other side and start using your brain.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

I checked

Jeff says:

you may want to check . . . the physics of what would happen to an Aluminum aircraft hitting a 2 ft. thick concrete wall at 400 MPH.

The claimed impact speed is actually 531 mph per NTSB.

This is what Purdue engineers say happened:

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/image1/10sep02.gif

I don't believe that the fuselage would behave as they claim, but would rather be crushed upon impact, with less penetration.

And clearly the modelization

And clearly the modelization of the verticle stabilzer
directly conflicts with all pre-collapse photos I've seen.