Flight 77: The Flight Data Recorder Investigation Files


Saturday June 16, 2007

Calum Douglas presents his investigation into the flight data recorder from Flight 77, which was supplied to him under the US Freedom of Information Act, to an audience at the Indian YMCA in Fitzroy Square, London on 8th June 2007.

Local Mirror: http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=227

This production demonstrates how high the quality and....

accuracy of our evidence has become and how well people can now communicate it!!

This presentation is absolutely superb and takes the movement to a new level of professional resistance to the outright lies we have been told. We'll done!

How do they think they can stop this movement with so many brilliant and determined truth seekers on their trail?

Thank you Pilots for Truth and all that have assisted you; I believe this work is very thorough, accurate and complete. It appears to me ready for the court room, let’s get there ASAP!

kindest regards John Bursill - Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer Avionics

WE GOT TO TAKE THE POWER BACK!... rage against the machine

Frightening question........

"How do they think they can stop this movement with so many brilliant and determined truth seekers on their trail?"

The answer is simple. They marginalize these people to the extent that they can. Government/corporate media have thus far done an astonishingly superb job of doing this. Unbelievable, really. Even now it is hard for me to wrap my mind around how thouroughly successful they have been at keeping a lid on the truth.

What wakes me up at night is thinking about what happens when their efforts at marginalizaion begin to fail -- and as you have pointed out, they will begin to fail at some point. My guess is that their only recourse will be to stage another false flag attack devastating enough to initiate martial law in at least some regions of the country. This will likely be followed by a very hot war against Iran/Syria and a few African nations containing colorable fundamentalist muslim factions (and oil). Or maybe they switch it up attack Iran and then stage the false flag attack followed by martial law. The order really does not matter, as many here know, the legal mechanisms for an authoritarian police state have already been put into place and the apparatus for enforcment has been with us for a long time.

I know it sounds hyperbolic, but we really are one disaster away from it.

Under this senario, dedicated dissent will be easily squashed, and less dedicated dissent will be effectively chilled. Any discussion (let alone activism) related to 911 truth will be labled as supporting the terrorists, if not an act of terrorist propaganda in its own right.

Game over.............for at least another 10 - 20 years.

I hate to sound so damn pessimistic but this is really the way I see it. I honestly believe these people would burn the entire world before they would allow themselves to be defeated.

Your points are valid, but ..

I am optimistic that Truth will break through, and that their attempts at total control will fail. I do believe we are getting close to the tipping point. Will the US military support these maniacs in martial law? Will Russia and China, and the rest of the world, do nothing if the US goes into Iran? Even the dark forces are splintering, as evidenced by Brzezinski's false flag statement not long ago. Stay fearless awakened people, Truth Will Prevail !!

The control does not have to be total...

Look at the former Soviet Union. The entire world outside of the USSR knew the regime for what it was -- criminal, totalitarian and illegitimate. Certainly millions of dissidents inside the former USSR knew the regime for what it was. Nevertheless, that illigetimate regime was able to control hundreds of millions of people, and threaten the entire world with nuclear annihilation for 50+ years.

That government certainly didn't control everybody even in their own country and they didn't have to. As others have noted, propaganda techniques and technology have significantly progressed since that time. A small group of zealots in control of the world's most powerful military can wreak unspeakable world wide destruction in a few hours..............let that sink in and tell me you can still hug your pillow and smile when you drift off to sleep.

At this point in time, I think that we are on the razor's edge.

I am going to keep spreading the truth as quickly and and calmly as possible because that is the only thing I know how to do. However, I am not optimistic.

BTW, let me echo others here. This presentation is quite excellent, indeed.

I tend to agree.

There are a lot of good people in the movement right now, doing a lot of good things, but on the whole I'm often left feeling like our efforts are "childish" at best. In terms of being in control of the situation, on a scale from 1 to 10 I'd say we're at about 2 or 3.

As for it being "game over for 10 - 20 years" if we don't stop the next false flag... I think it might be permanent. Look how long China has been under totalitarian rule. And they don't have the resources that the U.S. does. And think of the technological advances that will happen over the next 10-20 years. Technology is one factor people don't seem to be taking into account enough. Soon there will be ZERO possibility for resistance.

"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

Let me qualify that...

The professionals researching in their respective fields are doing quite a good job. As far as mobilization and getting our message out... We need to do better.

"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

DVDs or a 20 year sentence - your choice

I'll guess only %5 of the populace read or view anything on the internet. YOU have to bring the VIDEO TO THEM!

60¢ each - 4 Truth Vids on each DVD - Buy 100 and hit the damned streets.

I'd like to sit in their living room, twist their arm behind their back until tears run out , forcing them to WATCH (Eyes taped open :) )

Global Warming is the biggest scam to infect the planet.
Global Warming = Global Tax = Global Police = TOTAL CONTROL

Their goal is a ONE WORLD DICTATORSHIP. COMMUNIST or FASCIST it matters not.

Absolutely fantastic work

Absolutely fantastic work Calum, and Pilots for 911 truth!
Definitely a new level of professionalism, and DEDICATION!
Nothing stopped you in trying to get those CVFR files decrypted and analyzed..
Your efforts go beyond what is usually expected from people like yourselves.


"To know a thing well, know its limits. Only when pushed beyond its tolerances will its true nature be seen."
-The Amtal Rule, DUNE

Journal of 9/11 Studies

I'd like to see the Journal of 9/11 studies tackle some of the evidence at the Pentagon...

The NTSB report is very suspicious and needs a thorough investigation.

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

Journal Of 911 Studies


We are still in the process of putting together a Pilots For 9/11 Truth Conference. The towns have been narrowed down to Cincinnati (CVG) and Chicago. It will most likely be in CVG for our first conference since we have to raise funds and CVG is less expensive. We'll keep you posted.



It's a testament to the good will, determination, and intelligence of decent people all over the world. The individuals who put together this work need to be commended for their thoroughness. As far as the Minetta testimony goes, I don't think it is at all complicated. Six months before 9/11 Rumsfeld had changed shoot down protocol for scenarios like this. The prior and long held protocol deemed power to ground Air Defense Commanders and fighter jet Squadron Commanders to issue shoot down orders. The new protocol redirected the shoot down orders directly to Rumsfeld. On 9/11, during the time of the scenario described by Minetta, Rumsfeld had gone missing, unaccounted for, which basically left no one to make the decision to shoot down the plane. So when the officer kept asking Cheney, "do the orders still stand," he's referring to the new shoot down protocol Rumsfeld had issued obviously with the intent to throw a wrench into the mechanics of our air and ground defenses.

There is no reason to order a plane shot down...

...that is delivering an explosive device to your intended target.

Is that what happened? Is that not why the flight data recorder data indicates that the plane flew over the Pentagon?

"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)


Finally some focus on Flight 77. It was the Pentagon strike that first peaked my interest in 911 truth years ago. Since then, all the emphasis has been on the towers. Finally, some conclusive evidence to show that Flight 77 flew by the Pentagon, while something else hit it.
The implications are enormous, especially in light of the fact that over 100 auditors were killed in that strike, and given Rumsfeldt's testimony before Congress the day before on the missing 2.3 trillion in the Pentagon budget, and given Minetta's testimony.
This video is one of the most significant developments in the truth movement in months. Very well done. Can we get dvds of this? People need to see this.

Hey Dmcgee77, I'll put a

Hey Dmcgee77, I'll put a downloadable copy of this on 911podcasts.com that you can spread around...

Downloadable version

Downloadable version available here:


I'll get a higher quality WMV version up shortly...

A new 340 MB WMV version is

A new 340 MB WMV version is now available at the same site:



We are currently in the process of editing the high resolution versions of the above presentation. We will combine it with Calums' other presentation along with audio interviews/presentations i have done and make it available as a DVD on our site for those who wish to have their own copy for their presentation purposes. It will help us raise funds for future research and hopefully a future Pilots For 9/11 Truth Conference.

The DVD should be available in a few weeks. Keep an eye on the site.

Thank you everyone for your support.


N O T "conclusive proof"

This is a data file.

A data file held by the government for 5 years.

A data file they can easily say has "errors" for whatever reason they can concoct. Most simple would be a mis-calibrated altimeter.

A data file that can be manipulated like any other data file.

This is not "conclusive proof" of anything.

Arabesque's articles of late have shown overwhelming evidence why a "flyover" is implausible (and unnecessary).

Now people are assuming the incoming plane BOMBED THE PENTAGON?

That's not something you can call "conclusive proof." I call that wild and irresponsible speculation.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

The NTSB is suspicious

Personally I think it's very incriminating and most probably fabricated evidence. I don't think we should leap to conclusions, but we should demand answers and remain skeptical. I watched two of the documentaries and it looks like P911 Truth put A LOT of work into this.

Flight 77 - Black Box Data Analysis

Flight 77: The Flight Data Recorder Investigation Files

From what I've seen, I think that the data at the very least is very suspicious and smells of deception. Calum Douglas' work should be appreciated. The effort that these people went through just to get the data to work is impressive, and shows a high level of dedication to finding out the truth.

On the one hand, if the NTSB report is fake, then it proves a COVER UP. On the other, if the NTSB report is "accurate"... it would be devastating to the official story. Personally, I think the data is probably fabricated and reveals a government cover-up.

I have some questions regarding this data:

1. If the data is accurate, and the plane really did fly over the Pentagon, where does the flight data recorder come from? Would the government really be stupid enough to fly a plane over the Pentagon, take the data from this plane, delete the data up until the point where it flew over? I really doubt that.

2. If the Data is problematic, why aren't we getting an explanation for the discrepancies in the data? I really don't want to jump to conclusions here, but it looks like they don't want to answer questions about it because they can't. The fact that professional companies won't touch the data is quite telling.

3. We need the videos. We need to exert the pressure to get these videos so that we can focus on the most important questions. What did and did not hit the Pentagon is not as important as the fact that the Pentagon was attacked at all. We know that H Hanjour could not have done this.

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

If the data was manipulated

If the data was manipulated for a cover-up, but Flight 77 actually hit the Pentagon, what are they covering up? Why not release the real data?

Two possible answers to your

Two possible answers to your questions:

1. It is advantageous to them to suppress the evidence, and allow many elements of the truth movement to pursue a wild goose chase in the idea that AAL77 did not hit the Pentagon. This ultimately benefits the conspirators, as a great deal of resources are misallocated in following a false lead, and the truth movement in general is discredited.

2. The videos may show the real AAL77 hitting the Pentagon, but also reveal other events not consistent with the official story. For example, the videos may show an explosion on board the plane in the seconds before impact. Such an explosion would be the result of a suitcase bomb placed on board for the purposes of evidence destruction. This would be inconsistent with the official story of the 19 al-Qaeda Arabs, and would instead point to a much more sophisticated, well-connected conspiracy with deep contacts in place in the security operations at the three airports.

A similar type bomb may also have been aboard all three other flights, not only for evidence destruction, but as a worst-case, bailout option if everything went wrong with the operation. (If all else fails, simply detonate the bomb remotely, and blame it on Arab terrorists-- No risk of the plane somehow landing safely and the plot being revealed.)

Such a suitcase bomb may have detonated on UAL93 in the moments before the crash. In that scenario, it would have been the bomb, not a shootdown by a US Military fighter jet, that caused the widely scattered debris field in Shanksville.

So, to sum up, even if AAL77 did indeed hit the Pentagon, the conspirators-- working through their operatives in the federal government-- have quite a few reasons to suppress the videos.

There are good reasons

I don't have an answer to that question. But I agree it might be possible that the government would feed disinformation to lead us on wild goose chases. I won't claim my speculation is true, I'm just leaving it out there as a possibility.

For example, there was a story about someone who "witnessed" a global hawk at the Pentagon, and it was highly promoted by some activists... the story turned out to be fake, as the witness was making it up. I don't know his motivations for doing this, or for the promotion it got by certain people, but it begs the question of whether its possible we could be fed fake information intentionally.

Regarding the videos, there is no doubt that they are incriminating.

Why does the fact of a plane hitting the Pentagon make them look any less guilty? How could a hijacker miraculously hit the GROUND FLOOR of the Pentagon? That's impossible. If they release the videos and it showed that, it would be another World Trade 7. No one is going to believe a hijacker WHO NEVER FLEW a 757 before--a real one... could fly it into the ground floor of a building. That in itself is impossible. The problem of ground effect in itself would have thrown off an unprofessional pilot. If remote control was used, it could counter all of these problems.

I also believe that explosives could have been used in combination with the plane, and the frames that they did release seem to indicate an explosive device was used, because of the bright flash--as also reported by witnesses. A shock wave and cordite was also observed.

Of course if there was no plane that would also be extremely incriminating... but I think people underestimate how incriminating it would be to watch "hanni Hanjour" fly into the ground floor of the Pentagon. Any suggestion that he could do that would be absurd. That's good enough reason to me why the government would not release the videos.

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

But the crappy snippet they

But the crappy snippet they already released shows something hitting the Pentagon at that low altitude. They've released the simulations, and the photos and damage show where the impact occurred. So where's the problem for the OCT?

The official story IS that Hanjour flew it in. (I believe he was a patsy tasked with taking flight lessons just to create a thin backstory ala Oswald and Ray, which for most ill-informed Americans suffices as an explanation for how he might have pulled it off.) Why would a real video release -- which wouldn't make possible any determination as to who was piloting the plane at 500 mph -- create a problem for the OCT?

The only point you brought up which poses a problem for the OCT is the possibility of a video showing an explosion inside the Pentagon prior to the hit. After scoping out the Pentagon site, it looks to me as though at least one camera angle from the opposite side could show a 757 flying into the building without letting that cat out of the bag. The one they did release would have either had to be carefully cut to exclude it or was not an issue because the pre-impact explosion was far enough inside to camoflage it.

And doesn't it tell you something about the control of witness statements at the Pentagon that despite a few early whiffs of cordite, there aren't more statements about an earlier explosion?

Good Points

In one of the frames of the released tapes of the Pentagon Strike It looks clearly to me like the front of the fuselage of a plane. It's silver, and pointed downwards, just as witnesses described it.

I don't really know about the "earlier" explosions at the Pentagon. I haven't looked into this very much. I agree that if it happened there should be some witnesses, and apparently there were. Concealing an explosion inside a building is an entirely different matter than faking a plane strike on a building, I'm sure you would agree.

The recent WTC7 testimony only further provides evidence that the government can not control witnesses. If something really different happened at the Pentagon, where are the witnesses? It's a reasonable question to ask, and it can't easily be dismissed.

Neither can this:

Indeed, there is nothing to stop people from coming out and making fake statements. This has also happened. The only way we can reasonably figure out what has happened is to examine the evidence. Corroborated evidence is more credible than evidence that is not. Eyewitness testimony that is NOT contradicted is more credible than testimony that is contradicted. Testimony that is supported by physical evidence is more credible than testimony is not. After reading the testimony, it is possible to show that it does support the physical evidence. The physical evidence is only valuable if it is being interpreted correctly. That's the real problem here. Jumping to conclusions and calling things fake without clear corroborating evidence that it was faked is a dangerous assumption.

Back to the explosions, I have HEARD some of the secondary explosions myself. They were captured on live tv interviews of witnesses. I have heard about the earlier clocks being damaged before the alleged plane strike. While I think this deserves some more research, I'd like to see more evidence before I am compelled to make a conclusion.

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

I flip-flop on the Boeing

I flip-flop on the Boeing issue every week or so. I still find Dave McGowan's analysis of the Pentagon witnesses compelling.

One thing from DRG's new "Debunking" book stuck with me, and I think it's worth keeping in mind. The power of suggestion is so strong with a searing trauma like 9/11 that witnesses' minds can fill in the holes of what they witnessed when they are soon told "what happened." He said that all other things being equal, witnesses who give statements which contradict the official version should carry more weight than those that affirm it. At the time, no one had any vested interest in contradicting it, but there were many who had great interest in protecting it. For example, the statement by Harley Guy carries less weight than the statements of a fireman or William Rodriguez reporting extraneous explosions in the WTC. Another example: why would one of the Pentagon witnesses claim that his car radio antenna was snapped off by 77 flying over his car when he would have been killed if he had been that close to the engines? He's either lying to support the official version or he's a drama queen trying to get in on the media action, but it is proof that not all witnesses cleaving to the story are credible. And should we even consider PNAC signatory Gary Bauer's statement at all?

I appreciate the rigor applied to this issue that allows me to keep churning it. I don't feel that I need to come to a decision right now -- the Pentagon is full of smoking guns with what we already know.
I drive past the Pentagon at least once a week (and was just at National Airport again this morning), and some possibilies just don't fall into place until you are very familiar with the layout and proximities from several angles. Photos and overhead maps don't do it.


1. Most of your questions ask us to speculate here. Please review our mission statement at http://pilotsfor911truth.org. With that said, here are answers with respect to the FDR location, when and where...

2. Agreed.

The FDR information cross-checks the way it is right now. If they try to correct for one "error", another arises. Its a domino effect with other parameters. You cannot correct for one error without throwing off other parameters..


- correct the flight path at end of animation, you will be taking off in a farm field at departure, as Calum explained above.

- Correct for altitude due to "lag" making the airrcraft lower than indicated and vertical speed increases more than it is now making it impossible to be level with the lawn as seen in the DoD video.

These are perhaps some of the reasons they refuse to answer. And quite frankly, why would they? Tell a lie big enough and even the most prominent researchers of truth will make excuses saying "that cant be right, why would they release such a thing?"...

This is perhaps the time when one who doesnt have the experience has to appeal to authority and those with the experience/credentials who put their name on the line and on this work/research/analysis. http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html

3. http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/04_1.html



Good work! You will win!

WE GOT TO TAKE THE POWER BACK!... rage against the machine!!

White House Flyover

Thanks for your answers.

I do have another question. Is it true that the flight data recorder data does NOT place flight 77 anywhere near the White House?

Because if it does NOT, it would appear to be more evidence that it is fabricated.

"We were watching the airport through binoculars, Ford said, referring to Reagan National Airport, a short distance away. The plane was a two-engine turbo prop that flew up the river from National. Then it turned back toward the Pentagon.”

“which had come up the river in back of our building, turned sharply over the Capitol, ran past the White House and the Washington Monument, up the river to Rosslyn, then dropped to treetop level and ran down Washington Boulevard to the Pentagon.”

“They saw the plane hovering over the Washington Mall Area at an altitude lower that the height of the Washington Monument.”

“About 10 minutes ago, there was a white jet circling overhead. Now, you generally don't see planes in the area over the White House. That is restricted air space. No reason to believe that this jet was there for any nefarious purposes, but the Secret Service was very concerned, pointing up at the jet in the sky.”

“I noticed a large aircraft flying low towards the White House. This aircraft then made a sharp turn and flew towards the Pentagon.”

“I did see, myself a plane, about half hour ago, circling over the Capitol.”

from: http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/04/911-and-pentagon-attack-what.html

In fact, there was this news report (taken from Paul Thompson's timeline--an extremely useful resource):


9:36 a.m.: Report of Airliner Approaching White House Sets off ‘Frenzy’ at NEADS
Edit event

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.) September 11, 2001).

Colin Scoggins appears to be a supporter of the 9/11 Truth Movement. He was interviewed extensively in David Ray Griffin's Book Debunking 9/11 Debunking.

I found this information: http://www.rense.com/general76/wdb.htm

"Scoggins told me that after the Pentagon strike he assumed, like everyone else, that this unidentified plane he reported at 9:36 AM was Flight 77. He was also under the impression that it made a pass near the White House. Scoggins is not alone in this view. Even today, many people think Flight 77 flew over Washington before striking the Pentagon. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer actually gave rise to one of these stories, which were widely reported in the media.

from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/11/national/main310721.shtml

"Top government officials have suggested that American Airlines Flight 77 was originally headed for the White House and possibly circled the Capitol building. CBS News Transportation Correspondent Bob Orr reports that's not what the recorded flight path shows. Eight minutes before the crash, at 9:30 a.m. EDT, radar tracked the plane as it closed to within 30 miles of Washington. Sources say the hijacked jet continued east at a high speed toward the city, but flew several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House. ..."At the White House Friday, spokesman Ari Fleischer saw it a different way.
"That is not the radar data that we have seen," Fleischer said, adding, "The plane was headed toward the White House."

As your friends at the PentaCon have pointed out elsewhere, a flight path that did not reach the white house would be contradicted by the C-130 pilot who intercepted the Plane:

You can see the white house in this picture. If the plane flew by the white house, this C-130 pilot would have been able to intercept it, but not according to the official data.

"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.”

MINETA:Well, the question was where is it coming. And so as I was asking Monte, it was following pretty much the DRA, the down river approach, and it had not crossed over towards the White House or towards the Capitol. It was staying on its line towards what would normally be the traffic pattern into National Airport.
And in fact, later on, in looking at the radar track, the plane had actually over-passed the Pentagon, then turned around and then came back into it, and it never took a wide sweep to cross over to the east side of the White House.

MINETA:Oh, absolutely, it's something like that, but at least at the time the track of the radar was following what would be considered the down-river approach and it never came over to cross the east side of the Potomac River and it just followed the river all the way in.

Well, there is even a video of the plane (in restricted airspace) (apparently--I can't confirm it was near the White House here--does someone know this? It was shown on BBC TV. I think I remember reading it was ) by the white house during this time


So Given all of this evidence, would it not be likely to suggest that the FDR is FAKE?

I could give you further evidence to show this. For example, there are no known witnesses who observed a flyover (aside from the C-130), and there are NO witnesses who place the plane at more than 100 feet above the ground after approximately the Navy Annex.

I don't know WHY they would fake this data, but if the FDR data does not put the plane by the WHITE HOUSE, then I think it's safe to say there is a lot of evidence to compellingly contradict this.

Here is the official flight path according to the NTSB data released less than a year ago. The White House is not even VISIBLE on this map, and it is across the river:

Hmmm... I am stunned by this information I just came across. The plane near the White House could have been a different plane?


I'll have to look at this (new to me) information carefully. The plane was an E-4B? I've never seen this before! Perhaps I am mistaken in suggesting the NTSB data is wrong after all. It is CLEARLY NOT a 757, as it has FOUR instead of TWO engines. What the heck is going on here?


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

i dont know about a flyover,

i dont know about a flyover, but i do know that the "attack" on the Pentagon was as much about finances as it was about setting up a "war on terror"(and i tend to agree that the biggest question should be how was ANYTHING able to hit the Pentagon in the first place? because it came up as "friendly" possibly?). ask yourself which specific part of the Pentagon got hit. it was a friggin heist and i personally dont think it would have been left to chance.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA