The battle to save Pentagon on 9/11 by Enver Masud

Note: as many of you here know, I no longer believe "no 757" hit the Pentagon; i'm posting this here for the record because it's "alternative" 9/11 info, and if anyone cares to analyze this article

I have significantly updated my Pentagon Hole Psyop article, thanks to constructive criticism received at and

The battle to save Pentagon on 9/11 by Enver Masud

Firefight is primarily about the heroic efforts of the firefighters at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. What is of interest to us is the authors ' description of the attack on the Pentagon. The authors, Patrick Creed and Rick Newman, write:

The plane crossed Washington Boulevard , . . . traveling more than 500 miles per hour and was less than 30 feet off the ground.

the planes wings knocked over several light poles that line the road.

As the Flight 77 flew nearly to ground level, its right wing sliced into a 750 kilowatt generator . . . The planes right engine ripped a hole in a fence near the generator . . . the left engine grazed the grass . . . Both wings began to break apart, hurling metal fragments into the air.

The nose of the plane hit the facade, . . . about 14 feet above the ground, going 530 miles per hour.

The airplanes tail, 45 feet tall, was still attached to the plane as it plowed into the Pentagon.

Along the outer wall, 21-inch-wide concrete columns, . . . stood every ten feet, . . . The impact of the plane knocked out eight of them completely, and severely damaged two others.

The body of the hijacker who had been flying the plane ended up in the D Ring about 107 feet from the point of impact.

The punch-out hole . . . was created by explosive energy.

In my article What really happened at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, published by The Wisdom Fund (, I debunk the theory that Flight 77, a Boeing 757, struck the Pentagon.

At the Dept. of Defense (DoD) News Briefing on September 12, 2001, the words "American Airlines," "Flight 77," "Boeing," "Dulles," and "passengers" were not mentioned.

Standing in front of the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, Jamie McIntyre, CNN ' s senior Pentagon correspondent since November 1992, reported: From my close up inspection there ' s no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. . . . . The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage - nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon. . . . It wasn ' t till about 45 minutes later . . . that all of the floors collapsed.

Arlington County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher, incident commander at the Pentagon on September 11, corroborates Jamie McIntyre ' s report. At the September 12, 2001, DoD briefing, when asked: "Is there anything left of the aircraft at all?" said: "there are some small pieces of aircraft t there ' s no fuselage sections and that sort of thing."

Victoria Clarke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs - "presenter" of the DoD briefing, did not contradict Chief Plaugher.

Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, who from her fifth-floor, B-ring office at the Pentagon, witnessed "an unforgettable fireball, 20 to 30 feet in diameter," was called for stretcher duty. She describes a strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner.

This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense, who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a ' missile ' .

Barbara Honegger, military affairs journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School , writes that NORAD's: Gen. Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack that morning, and that his pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building.

Similar skepticism among the firefighters is noted by Creed and Newman. They write in Firefight, Denis Griffin . . . had been working in the aftermath of the attack all day, and seen wreckage that looked like it could be from an airplane, but there were so many wild stories going around that he wasnt sure what to believe.

Two statements in the book by Creed and Newman are striking:

FBI photographer Jennifer Combs (formerly Jennifer Farmer) went far out of her way to pull hundreds of photographs from archives and narrate all of them.

How did they get access to these photographs, when others have Freedom of Information Act requests pending for these photographs and Pentagon videos?

Plaugher came by . . . We think its al Qaeda, he said, citing a villain many of them had never heard of.

What would cause Plaugher, Fire Chief of Arlington County , to make such a statement so soon after 9/11? Plaugher now serves as "a key member of the IAFC Terrorism Committee."

It should be noted, that to this day, the only passenger lists made public have no Arab names on them, Bin Laden is not wanted for 9/11 at the FBIs Most Wanted, and the only evidence offered by the government to substantiate their claim of a Flight 77 having struck the Pentagon is a fuzzy video that proves nothing indeed the flight recorder data released by the government shows that a plane flew about 400 feet above the Pentagon.

(BOOK REVIEW: Firefight: Inside The Battle To Save The Pentagon On 9/11 by Enver Masud. Enver Masud is an engineer, and founder of The Wisdom Fund. http://911sig. blogspot. com/2008/ 06/firefight- inside-battle- to-save.html)

Fair Use Notice
This page contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political issues relating to alternative views of the 9/11 events, etc. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Come on man. Just look at the beginning of the statement. Do

you know what a Boeing 757 going 500 mph, flying less than 30 feet off the ground would do to everything nearby? What it would look & sound like to people underneath? (It would & send them flying & blow out their eardrums.)

Then the nose hits the Pentagon @ the 14-foot mark, @ 530 mph (in the specially renovated wedge no less)? Come on.

Consider mass emailing truth messages. More info here:

Passenger list disinfo

"It should be noted, that to this day, the only passenger lists made public have no Arab names on them."

Completely false. None of the "victim" lists have alleged "hijacker" names on them. Photocopies of the official passenger lists have their names on them.
Arabesque: 911 Truth

Good point, Arabesque, and what about the photos/videos and FOIA

"FBI photographer Jennifer Combs (formerly Jennifer Farmer) went far out of her way to pull hundreds of photographs from archives and narrate all of them.

How did they get access to these photographs, when others have Freedom of Information Act requests pending for these photographs and Pentagon videos?"

I would think there are hundreds of photographs, as well as 360 degrees of video. I wonder how many FOIA requests are pending and the status- i haven't heard reports from the requesters complaining about delays over their requests- if they're being stalled, they should make a public fuss over it, an unreasonable delay would be "news"

the only stuff i've seen on FOIAs is related to Bingham and JudicialWatch, and, unfortunately, they specifically requested "impact" footage- not footage of whatever "approached" the Pentagon (and struck it).

If someone hasn't FOIA'd all 360 degrees of video (plus video of the sky; if the bozos at the Pentagon can't see missiles coming at them from space, what good are they?), plus those hundreds of photos the book says exist, i suppose i'll have to figure out how to FOIA them.

Has this really not been done yet?

9/11 Family Steering Committee Review of the 9/11 Commission Report:

Complete 9/11 Timeline

Cheney learned about secrecy from Nixon

The government is withholding a lot of evidence. Whether you are talking about official documents like the Presidential briefings, the WTC 7 photographs, the eyewitness testimony transcribed by firefighters (eventually released after a lawsuit), and of course, the Pentagon is a gold mine for withheld evidence.

There is an across the board withholding of evidence which is a systematic and deliberate strategy. Dick Cheney learned about secrecy from his time during the Nixon administration, and according to one book that I have read, Dick Cheney is behind the wall of secrecy. And don't think that this is just limited to 9/11, because it isn't. If you have been following any of the scandals, you know that withholding information is a deliberate strategy of this administration. There can be more than one effect of this withholding of evidence. First of all, to hide the truth, and secondly but overlooked, to create confusion and obscure the truth. To create a situation where nothing can be known and to obscure the truth with denials, disinformation in the Media, and silence.

As Karl Rove has said, "we're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality."

It is easy to control reality when you control what information is released, what information is omitted from public discussion in the MSM, and the systematic policy of disinformation and lies from government officials. The neocons started this practice with Russia when they overturned the conclusions of the CIA to create a completely fabricated reality of the capabilities of the USSR. Their motive? To increase military spending and world hegemony.

It is to the benefit of the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks to release as little information as possible. As described above, this serves two useful functions. By not releasing information, the US government is actually encouraging conspiracy theories where the holes are not filled in. By not releasing information, the government can continue it's coverup of the 9/11 crimes by encouraging misinformation. In other words, they want you to focus on what you DON'T know rather than what you DO know.

Conspiracy theories, not facts.

A perfect example: passenger lists are withheld. This encourages misinformation. Victim lists are described as "passenger lists" when they do not have the "hijacker names". In fact, disclaimers explicitly point out that the "hijackers names were not included", presumably because they are "victim lists". By NOT releasing the passenger list, the US government has encouraged misinformation and conspiracy theories. This is spread far and wide as "9/11 truth". Eventually, photocopies of the passenger lists are supplied during the "20th patsy" trial and it turns out that the names are on the lists.

This example can apply to any other types of evidence the government is withholding. The fact is, that the government has implemented a policy of secrecy, likely with the partial intent of encouraging misinformation and "conspiracy theories". The facts must be verified, and the 9/11 movement has to take the time to verify everything it says. Otherwise we are simply a "9/11 opinion" movement.
Arabesque: 911 Truth

That's because the airlines

never published any official lists.