The Pentagon Attack: Eyewitnesses, Debris Flow and Other Issues – A Reply to Fletcher and Eastman, by John D. Wyndham.

This paper deals with issues raised in a November, 2012 letter to the Journal of 9/11 Studies by Tod Fletcher and Timothy E. Eastman. These involve eyewitness testimonies as analyzed by Jerry Russell and by David Ray Griffin in his book, “9/11 Ten Years Later,” together with other topics that include debris flow through the Pentagon interior, energy considerations, and questions previously unaddressed by the author.

Four appendices focus on inaccuracies in the Fletcher and Eastman letter; on David Griffin’s list of physical evidence items that, in his view, weigh against the 757 impact theory; on the testimony of the unfairly-maligned taxi driver, Lloyde England; and on Jerry Russell’s and David Griffin’s analyses of Pentagon eyewitnesses.

You can read the paper and submit comments for moderated discussion at:

http://www.scientificmethod911.org/docs/Eyewitnesses_DebrisFlow_FandE_Apr12_2013.pdf

John D. Wyndham
April 12, 2013

"The Pentagon announced it is boosting "cybersecurity" personnel to 4,900. Is this really a move for defense, or to ramp up efforts to spy on Americans?".

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/pentagon-boosts-cybersecurity/5...

"The Pentagon has approved plans for a five-fold increase in its cyberwar fighting force. The U.S. Cyber Command would see its ranks jump from 900 to 4,900, including both uniformed and civilian personnel. Defense officials say the boost in the cybersecurity force is necessary because of the nation's growing vulnerability to cyber attacks and also the need to prepare for more offensive cyber combat operations. But there is already a shortage of cyber specialists, and the new recruitment effort would increase the competition for skilled personnel within the government and the private sector. Audie Cornish talks to Tom Gjelten".

http://www.npr.org/2013/01/28/170494486/pentagon-to-dramatically-expand-...

Black 9/11: Money, Motive, Technology, and Plausible Deniability
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsDtvu2uTuA

Published on Nov 21, 2012
Special thanks to Michael C. Ruppert, Mark H. Gaffney, and Kevin Ryan for their dedicated research in bringing this information out of the shadowy black operations underworld from which it came. This video is a compilation of evidence they have uncovered.

"Inside Job" Documentary on the Financial "Crisis" of 2008
http://www.theotherschoolofeconomics.org/?p=2499

"Crossing the Rubicon" - The Decline of American Empire at the end of the age of oil
http://www.fromthewilderness.com

"Black 911" by Mark H. Gaffney:
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/05/25/black-911-a-walk-on-the-d......

Was 9/11 an Inside Job?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20521.htm

A guide to 9/11 Whistleblowers
http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20100305_911_whistleblowers.htm

Project Hammer
http://decryptedmatrix.com/live/bushs-project-hammer/

WTC 6
http://www.whale.to/b/wtc_6_h.html

SEC Act Section 12(k)2:
http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/34-44791.htm

Richard Grove's testimony (complete transcript)

On September 10, 2001, $2.3 trillion were announced to have gone missing from the Pentagon. Radio Host Barry Shainbaum will be interviewing Jim Minnery, a military accountant, Elyria, OH., and Dina Rasor, investigative journalist, San Francisco, CA.

Upcoming Radio Show: Jan. 13, 2013, Sundays 12:30 pm to 1:30 pm. EST. Topic: Pentagon spending & accounting
http://www.barryshainbaum.com/radio.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU

Posted on June 15, 2012

“I have no desire to attack the Pentagon; I want to liberate it. We need to save it from itself.”  Donald Rumsfeld, September 10, 2001

The official account of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 leaves many questions unanswered.[1]  The work of independent investigators has also failed to address those questions. In an attempt to find answers, an alternative account of the Pentagon attack is considered.

An alternative account would be more compelling than the official account if it explained more of the evidence without adding unnecessary complications.  Considering means, motive and opportunity might allow us to propose a possible “insider conspiracy” while maintaining much of the official account as well.

A few of the more compelling unanswered questions are as follows.

1. How could American Airlines Flight 77 have hit the building as it did, considering that the evidence shows the alleged hijacker pilot, Hani Hanjour, was a very poor pilot?[2]
2. Why did the aircraft make a 330-degree turn just minutes before hitting the building?
3. Why did the aircraft hit the least occupied one-fifth of the building that was the focus of a renovation plan and how was it that the construction in that exact spot just happened to be for the purpose of minimizing the damage from a terrorist explosion?[3]
4. Why was the company that performed the renovation work, just for that one-fifth of the building, immediately hired in a no bid contract to clean-up the damage and reconstruct that area of the building?  (Note: The same company was also immediately hired to clean-up the WTC site within hours of the destruction there.)[4]
5. What can explain the damage to the building and the aircraft debris or lack thereof?
6. Why were the tapes from the surveillance videos in the area immediately confiscated by the FBI and never released?

These questions should be considered along with the fact that U.S military and “Homeland Security” expenditures since the 9/11 attacks have totaled approximately $8 trillion.[5]  This paints a picture that calls for an in-depth investigation into the people running the Pentagon, to see if they might have had the motivation and ability to plan and execute the attack.

When involved with the topic of 9/11, it becomes by default that we look at non-mainstream sources that most of the general public tend not to read, and because 9/11 was such a gnarly event, the type of news that runs parallel to it can often be tough going. Well, this following topic really takes the proverbial biscuit.

Genocidal war is not as out of fashion as perhaps most people think. Wired.com has just broke the news that the US-military is teaching its top cadres that Islam+is+the+enemy+and+total+war+necessary:

"The U.S. military taught its future leaders that a “total war” against the world’s 1.4 billion Muslims would be necessary to protect America from Islamic terrorists, according to documents... Among the options considered for that conflict: using the lessons of “Hiroshima” to wipe out whole cities at once, targeting the “civilian population wherever necessary.”

TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: //www.corbettreport.com/?p=4050

Washington Post

By Craig Whitlock

Some human remains recovered from the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the Pentagon and in Shanksville, Pa., were incinerated and dumped in a landfill, the Defense Department said Tuesday in the latest revelation about mishandled body parts at the Dover Air Force Base mortuary.

A new Pentagon review of the troubled mortuary disclosed several other problems — including fresh allegations of fraud and misplaced remains — over the past decade despite previous assurances by Air Force officials that they had adequately investigated operations at the base.

In ongoing research into the Pentagon attack the following peer-reviewed paper has now been published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies:

“The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact” by John D. Wyndham.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/Wyndham1.pdf

As stated in the abstract, this paper shows that, of all the theories about what caused the damage and debris at the Pentagon on 9/11, a large plane impacting the Pentagon is in best accord with the majority eye witness testimony and main physical evidence, and is by far the most plausible theory. The failure of the 9/11 truth movement to reach consensus on this issue after almost a decade is largely due to a failure to rigorously apply the scientific method to each proposed theory.

This work is supported by recent papers by Frank Legge and David Chandler:
http://stj911.org/legge/Legge_Chandler_NOC_Refutation.html
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/12/27/addendum-to-the-paper-ref...

David Chandler and I have now published an Addendum to our paper "The Pentagon Attack on 9/11:
A Refutation of the Pentagon Flyover Hypothesis Based on Analysis of the Flight Path"
http://stj911.org/legge/Legge_Chandler_NOC_Refutation.html

The Addendum draws on two additional pieces of evidence to revise the calculations of bank angle and wing loading which would be required if the plane followed the curved path north of the Citgo service station. This strengthens the previous conclusions set out in the original paper. Previously the failure of the many witnesses to mention a steep bank was taken as proof that the curved path did not happen, while the survival of the aircraft, if it deviated round the service station, was regarded as unlikely. With this new analysis of the witness testimony, showing the plane was flying wings level near the Naval Annex, survival of the plane is now found to be absolutely impossible. There is thus no rational explanation of the event other than that the plane flew virtually straight past the Naval Annex and the service station to the impact point.

From Kevin Ryan's Blog:

http://digwithin.net/2011/12/04/gofer-and-trout-questions-on-two-flights-out-of-andrews-afb-on-911/

Gofer and Trout: Questions on Two Flights Out of Andrews AFB on 9/11

Due to the incredible number of coincidences proposed by the official reports on the events of September 11, 2001, it makes good sense for citizens to question any improbable claims related to that day.  We have been given at least two such odd stories about flights that left Andrews Air Force Base that morning.  One represents a highly improbable flight path and the other has produced a contradiction in official accounts.

The first of these flights concerns a large military cargo plane, a C-130H, called Gofer 06.  This plane was from the 133rd airlift wing of the Minnesota Air National Guard.  The 9/11 Commission Report claims that the Gofer 06 pilot and crew were first-hand witnesses to the demise of both Flight 77 and Flight 93.

It was said that the C-130H pilot, Lt. Col Steve O’Brien, was returning from delivering supplies to the Carribean, which more specifically meant the U.S. Virgin Islands.  Air Force Magazine recently reported that seven other crew members were on board, including copilot Maj. Robert Schumacher and flight engineer MSgt Jeff Rosenthal.[i]

The official timeline of this improbable flight begins as follows:  Just after 09:30, Gofer 06 took off from Andrews AFB and Flight 77 flew “right in front of [it], a mile and a half, two miles away.”[ii]  Air traffic controllers (ATCs) from Reagan National Airport (in Arlington, VA) asked the C-130H pilot to identify and follow the “suspicious aircraft.”[iii] According to the Commission report, Gofer 06 identified the aircraft as a Boeing 757 and, seconds after impact, Lt. Col. O’Brien said — “it looks like that aircraft crashed into the Pentagon, sir.”  In the recent Air Force Magazine article, Rosenthal claims that – ”We saw it crash into the Pentagon.”

"Do the orders still stand?" -- Military aide to Vice President Navy Capt. Douglas Cochrane

Was there a stand down on 9-11? In a sense yes, but there is no evidence that a stand down order was issued. There would be no reason for VP Cheney to issue a stand down order, since he issuing a shoot down order, would have the same effect. I will proceed to show this as a fact along with the disturbing fact that the President of the United States, and the Secretary of Defense, both deserted their posts in a time of war. These two individuals who are the only ones authorized to issue shoot down orders of civilian aircraft, created the stand down, by deserting their posts, and then further disgraced themselves, and their offices, by lying to the American people.

"On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country." - Pres G Bush
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/gwbush911jointsessionspeech.htm

First - the players involved:

Condoleezza Rice -- National Security Adviser
Dick Cheney -- Vice President of the United States
Donald Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense
George W Bush - President of the United States

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals imposed sanctions and penalties against attorneys involved in bringing forward a 9/11 Truther lawsuit, specifically for frivolous and vexatious appeals and motions. The suit, originally filed by a survivor of the Pentagon attack, accuses various U.S. leaders of conspiring to arrange the September 11 attacks. In addition to learning how hard it can be to convince a court of controversial subject matter, the lawyers discovered something more fundamental: If you’re upset that the judges on a federal circuit panel aren’t buying into your conspiracy theories, it might be wise to refrain from making bold accusations regarding their professionalism in your subsequent submissions—as it turns out, judges do read them and can be rather unamused.

http://cryptome.org/info/fbi-pentagon/fbi-pentagon.htm

Also, http://911datasets.org/index.php/PENTAGON_FBI_FOIPA_1141552 has images and video that the FBI released.

.
The Pentagon Attack on 9/11: A Refutation of the Pentagon Flyover Hypothesis Based on Analysis of the Flight Path

Frank Legge
(B.Sc., Ph.D., Chemistry)
and
+David+Chandler
(B.S. Physics, M.S.,Mathematics)

September 2011

Introduction

The legal and political implications of 9/11 have turned scientific research in this area into a high stakes competition for the minds of the public. Pertinent information has been kept secret, the corporate media has systematically kept "damaging" information (such as video images of the World Trade Center Building 7) out of public view, 9/11 research has been marginalized, and the official investigations have failed to answer, or in many cases even address, the most troubling questions. One development that appears to be a tactic in the ongoing cover-up is the high profile promotion of transparently false theories, "straw men," the only purpose of which appears to be to allow the 9/11 Truth Movement to be ridiculed.

Your support is needed for our appeal of a recent ruling by the U.S. District Court of Nevada which erroneously blocked access to responsive records from the FBI regarding the Pentagon attack and the cockpit voice recording from United Airlines flight 93. An attorney specializing in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is representing the plaintiff in this case at a reduced public interest rate. Funds will be applied to appeal court filing fees, the creation of required appeal briefs, and attorney travel expenses to the hearing to provide in-person oral arguments before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, California in this matter.

Unfortunately, the legal services being provided cannot continue beyond what can be paid for. Please donate today so that this extensive effort to obtain long awaited 9/11 information can be completed.

Washington's Blog

A whistleblower using the alias "Iron Man" was the head of a special joint military-intelligence operation called DO5, a branch of the Joint Forces Intelligence Command, alleges that his team knew that the World Trade Centers and Pentagon were likely targets of Al Qaeda, and that he ran this information up the chain of command.

As Truth-out reports:

"I kept the original classifications on the slides, as historical documents, although the fact that al-Qa'ida was likely to attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was clearly no longer classified" ...

Iron Man further elaborated on this point by stating that high-level DoD officials held discussions about DO5's intelligence activities between the summer of 2000 and June 2001 revolving around al-Qaeda's interest in striking the Pentagon, the World Trade Center (WTC), and other targets.

In other words, the Bush administration was fully aware the terrorist organization had set its sights on those structures prior to 9/11 and, apparently, government officials failed to act on those warnings.

A mysterious helicopter was seen flying near the Pentagon in the minutes before the attack there on September 11, 2001. Several witnesses have described seeing the helicopter, which circled the Pentagon and then apparently landed for a brief period on the helipad, near where the building was subsequently hit. It then flew off very shortly before the attack took place. And yet there has never been any public acknowledgement of this incident, or any official explanation of what the helicopter was doing at the Pentagon at that time.

While interviewing one of the witnesses to the incident, however, a Navy historian revealed that the helicopter belonged to the United States Park Police, and, the historian said, had been instructed to intercept the aircraft that was on a crash-course for the Pentagon.

As the aircraft attacks of September 11, 2001 unfolded at the World Trade Center (WTC) and Pentagon buildings, maximum and near maximum augmented GPS positioning quality for the entire daylight period was provided to the geographic coordinates for the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Arlington, VA. Based on output graphs generated by Trimble’s free and highly regarded downloadable GPS planning software [1], which utilizes GPS “almanac” data transmitted by the GPS constellation on September 11, 2001 and now archived at the website for the United States Coast Guard [2], conditions such as GPS satellite visibility and geometric “dilution of precision” are both shown to be at maximum or within minutes of maximum during the aircraft impacts at the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Such augmented GPS service is now in routine use by the U.S. commercial aviation industry to allow aircraft flight management computers to utilize precise aircraft positional information, accurate to within just several meters. This GPS service was activated on a conditional basis by the FAA just one year before the September 11, 2001 attacks [3]. This service provided virtual aerial guidance corridors only 243 feet wide and a 95% confidence that an aircraft's true position will fall within any such designed corridor. The augmented GPS service was also utilized to precisely survey the Ground Zero site immediately after September 11, 2001. [4] Such corridors can be navigated entirely by autopilot and flight management systems scheduled in 1996 and 1998 to be contained by United and American airlines Boeing 757 and 767 aircraft like those used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Real-Time Raid Hoax Exposed As Photo Op
http://wearechangenewjersey.com/?p=1426

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/05/panetta-...
Panetta: Obama did not see bin Laden being killed
May 03, 2011
By Michael Winter

In an interview with the PBS NewsHour, CIA Director Leon Panetta said that although President Obama was watching some "real-time aspects" of the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound, he did not see the al-Qaeda leader being killed.

Here's part of the exchange with Jim Lehrer:

JIM LEHRER: Did you have access to video of what was actually happening in the compound, etc.?

LEON PANETTA: We had live-time intelligence information that we were dealing with during the operation itself.

JIM LEHRER: Did you actually see - or did you actually see Osama bin Laden get shot?

http://wearechangenewjersey.com/?p=1409

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/140099/20110502/osama-bin-laden-never-ch...
Osama Bin Laden never charged for 911 – Inside Job likely
May 2, 2011

Osama Bin Laden’s death is being celebrated, and everyone seems to repeat the old conspiracy theory that he was indeed the mastermind behind the terror attacks of 9/11. But that was never proven, and there is not even evidence hinting at such a connection according to the FBI. It is very well possible that completely different organizations than al-Qaeda were responsible for the planning and execution of 9/11, and that the latter was merely one of the involved parties.

Another in a series of warships "honoring" 9/11 is christened into action.

From the Mississippi Sun Herald:

The third in a series of U.S. Navy amphibious assault vessels named in honor of the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks [was] christened Saturday, and a key responder at the Pentagon nearly a decade ago is bringing the heroics of his fellow emergency workers with him.

The future USS Arlington is being built at the Northrop Grumman Corp. shipyard in Pascagoula. It's named in honor of Arlington County, Va., where American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, killing 184 people, after being hijacked en route from Washington-Dulles International Airport to Los Angeles.

The ship's sponsor is Joyce Rumsfeld, wife of former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who was in the Pentagon on the day of the attack.

Army officers at the Pentagon were planning a training exercise that would take place less than a week after 9/11 and that would, extraordinarily, be based around the scenario of a plane crashing into the World Trade Center. Preparations for the exercise were being made about a week before September 11.

The existence of the planned exercise was revealed by Major General Peter Chiarelli, who on September 11, 2001, was the Army's director of operations, readiness, and mobilization. In that position, which he had moved into about a month before 9/11, Chiarelli was in charge of current operations in the Army Operations Center (AOC) at the Pentagon.

Peter Dale Scott has asked me to circulate the following statement:

Like Richard Gage, I too was impressed by CIT's assemblage of witnesses asserting an approach path of Flight 77 at odds with the official version, and said so. I have never believed that the 757 flew over the Pentagon, and have never stated that I did.

In the light of what Gage has learned about CIT's methods, I wish, like him, to withdraw my original endorsement of the CIT video.

Sincerely,

Peter Dale Scott

I'm not the most tech savvy dude. This is the reason that I have never posted stuff here, but I think this time I will give it a try. Below please find a link to an interview given by Jim Hoffman, 911 researcher and engineer. I think this interview is important, even though it is now over a year old, because it clearly describes the struggle in the movement over the pentagon, and forcefully defends the view that the debate is being used to destroy the movement from the inside. I think anybody listening to the podcast should go on to read about disinformation more generally. Visibility 911 has some great links on that topic, and is one of the leading cites for 911 truth IMO.

Here's the link

http://visibility911.com/blog/2009/08/04/visibility-9-11-welcomes-9-11-r...

In early 2009, I watched the “National Security Alert” video by the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) where recollections of 10 eyewitness accounts of the attack on the Pentagon were presented (of many more that were interviewed). These accounts included the witnesses’ recollection of the path being taken by the plane prior to impact. The path that many of them recalled was to the north of the former CITGO gas station. Based on these few accounts CIT presented its case that the plane flew over the Pentagon since the damage trail was not consistent with the north path.

In this podcast, Dr Frank Legge discusses his new paper which was co-authored with Warren Stutt and has been published at the The Journal of 9/11 Studies, titled Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon

Listen here: http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1899

In this lengthy and detailed discussion Dr Legge is careful to lay out clearly his way of thinking on the Pentagon issue and why it is so important to the 9/11 Truth Movement not to make unsupported claims about the events there. Legge looks at this issue from a purely scientific perspective and is only interested in what he can prove to be true based on hard evidence. It is clear to Legge and to the vast majority of scientists who have studied the issue that while the Pentagon is a mystery to a degree, it is most likely that AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757-200 did hit the building based on the physical evidence available.

Show notes and interview by: John Bursill

This timely and important Podcast is a MUST listen!

Listen here: http://visibility911.com/blog/?p=1874

David who describes himself as a “pacifist” talks in great depth about his journey on the campaign for 9/11 Truth and Justice which he is passionately dedicated. Many of you may be aware it was David who is credited with getting NIST to admit WTC Building 7 fell at a an acceleration consistent with free-fall due to gravity; which I and many others view as the single most powerful debating tool for us as 9/11 Truth advocates! David disputes he is solely responsible for this and says that Jones, Ryan and others were central to this achievement but it was his question that drew the answer in the end so it seems. David also talks about the highly political timing and nature of the NIST Building 7 report.

Gregg Roberts

Published January 8, 2011

“The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.”

        Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, section 191

        German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

This article is a response to “Is Leading 9/11 Truth Site Working For The Other Side?”, credited to “staff writers” at the Rock Creek Free Press, November 2010 edition, available at:

http://www.rockcreekfreepress.com/CreekV4No11-Web.pdf

The “leading 9/11 Truth site” being referred to is 911Blogger.com. The authors of the article critiqued here chose to remain anonymous, and the article’s title doesn’t lend itself to an easily pronounceable acronym. Therefore I will refer to the article’s authors, along with their vocal message board sympathizers and Barrie Zwicker, as The Complainers. We will abbreviate Citizen Investigation Team as “CIT” and their video National Security Alert as “NSA” (noting the irony).