NTSB data indicates Flight 77 never dropped below 273 feet! Therefore, Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon. The Pentagon is only 71 feet tall. Secondly, according to the black box data, Flight 77 could not have damaged the light poles. 77 was much too high (the poles are only 40 feet) and on the wrong trajectory. Dare we hope that this is the wooden stake driven into the heart of vile, evil, official lies about 911?
Data released by the NTSB in response to an FOIA request by Pilots for 911 Truth are nothing less than the raw "black box' file, the official 'flight data' recorded from Flight 77. It's a digital record of everything that happened on that flight from take off. Additionally, altitude and position are confirmed by the beacon at nearby Reagan National Airport.
After expert review and cross check, Pilots for 9/11 Truth has concluded that the information in these NTSB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001 .According to the 9/11 Commission Report, which relied heavily upon the NTSB Flight Path Study, American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon at 9:37:46 AM on the morning of September 11, 2001 . However, the reported impact time according to the NTSB Flight Path Study is 09:37:45. Also according to reports, American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon and by doing so, struck down 5 light poles on Highway 27 in its path to the west wall.
The information provided by the NTSB does not support the 9/11 Commission Report of American Airlines Flight 77 impact with the Pentagon.
--OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF 9/11 FLIGHT CONTRADICTED BY GOVERNMENT'S OWN DATA, Pilots for 911 TruthThe data proves that the US government is lying to us about 911. The data is consistent with those who suspect that 911 was engineered by a Bush cabal who continues to exploit 911 for geo-political reasons, the acquisition of foreign oil by conquest and the suppression of dissent.
All the documentation for this article as well as the video by Pilots for 911 truth is from the US government or official agencies of the US government, specifically the FBI and the NTSB.
The Flight data recorder is the FA2100 Solid State Flight Data Recorders, a product of L3 Communications.
The purpose of a flight data recorder is to record precisely what happens to a plane during the course of the flight. According to Calum Douglas, Pilots for 911 Truth requested and eventually received a 25 megabyte .fdr file in response to its FOIA request.
Some of the more interesting findings conflict with the 'official conspiracy theory', mass media accounts, and official statements by Bush, Rumsfeld et al.
- Last recorded altitude figure is 273 feet! The height of the Pentagon is 71. There is, in fact, no credible explanation of just how Flight 77 could possibly have crashed into the Pentagon. According to Pilots for 911truth.org: "After take-off Flight 77 never went below 273 ft". Their assertion is based entirely upon official data released to them by the NTSB.
- Flight 77 could not have knocked over or damaged light poles on either side of the motorway beside the Pentagon. Flight 77 data indicates that the flight was at the wrong angle of approach and much to high. The lowest altitude recorded by is 273 feet. The light poles are about 40 feet high. Flight 77s path varies by some 20 degrees a path that would caused pole damage before striking the Pentagon at the point at which it was, in fact, struck by something. According to flight data, Flight 77 was never 'anywhere near' any of the damaged poles at any time.
- Radar altitude data from NTSB confirms the recorded flight data that Flight 77 could not have knocked over the poles. It's another hole Bush's 'official conspiracy theory'.
The only plausible explanation is that whatever struck the Pentagon approached by way of the light poles and at an altitude that, in fact, allowed it to strike and damage the poles enroute. What ever that was it was not Flight 77 which was higher up at the time and on a different trajectory. A missile might have taken that route and would not have been seen by the above mentioned witnesses. Certainly, Flight 77 approached from another altitude and at an angle that would have completely missed the poles EVEN if had been at the lower altitude.
This is a critical point. A single aircraft could not have damaged both the poles AND the Pentagon from the trajectory that the flight data records for Flight 77. Flight 77 was, in fact, too high at 273 feet and would not have been glimpse by DOD employees. The DOD witnesses, in fact, did not, could not have seen whatever it was that struck the poles.
The light poles, only about 40 feet high, are about 50 meters from the Pentagon. At this point the 'Reagan [airport] beacon' and the raw flight data confirm that Flight 77 altitude was never lower than 273 feet. The speed of Flight 77 at some 50 meters was over 500 mph. Even if Flight 77 had been on a trajectory to strike the poles, it would have flown over them. Flight 77 would have flown over the Pentagon on either trajectory.
Could Flight 77 have simply leveled off? Bluntly --no! Flight 77 had only a half second to two seconds in which to dive a couple of hundred feet and then level off thus accounting for both the light pole damage and the hit into the Pentagon. [Aerodynamics Simulation Software] Such a maneuver is outside manufacturers specifications, simply, impossible in that aircraft. Moreover, had that happened the 757 would not have been seen by the eyewitnesses who could ONLY have seen it on the other trajectory.
Calum Douglas presents his investigation into the flight data recorder from Flight 77. The Indian YMCA in Fitzroy Square, London on 8th June 2007.
It is also 'outside the performance envelope' of one Hani Hanjour who 1) trained on a simulator and, in fact, had never set foot inside a 757; 2) was said by the Washington Post to have never board Flight 77 in the first place. The Washington Post said he didn't have a ticket! Nor was his name was not on the original flight manifest. Flight manifests are not official. They are simply a head count done by staff. It is doubtful that a flight manifest would be admissible in court. A coroner's report, however, is considered to be evidence.
Hani Hanjour is not listed among those who were autopsied.
I submit that no 'Arabs' were autopsied because no Arabs ever got on board. According to the official, admissible autopsy report, NO Arabs were autopsied and no Arab names appear on the list of passengers who were autopsied. Indeed, the Washington Post reported that Hani Hanjour was not on board because he did not have a ticket. Then --how was he able to fly the plane? By remote control?
According to Pilots for 911truth.org, "...it's physically impossible for the plane [flight 77] to have caused the damage to the building [Pentagon]". Flight 77 was never closer than 273 feet. It is time to reassess the famous blurry, inconclusive GIF animation of something 'scooting' across the Pentagon lawn at an altitude of about fifteen feet or even less --NOT 273 feet. This blurry GIF shows a craft that was level as it struck.
Flight data indicates that Flight 77 was not only not level at that point it was much too high. It would have had to descend from 273 feet to about 15 feet and leveling within less than a second. Such a maneuver is outside manufacturers specifications, simply, impossible in that aircraft. It would be reasonable to expect that had any such maneuver been attempted, the aircraft would have broken apart before impact leaving most of some 100 tons strewn across the Pentagon lawn. In fact, the proponents of Bush's official conspiracy theory have failed to demonstrate that 100 tons of debris were recovered in any case.
Missing from the alleged Flight 77 crash site are items that one would expect to find at a crash site: airline seats, bodies, luggage, victims clothes, Arab hijackers. The only wreckage that may be immediately identifiable a single rotor that is about one third the size of one of two rotors that would have been found in the wreckage of any crashed 757 wreckage. The explanation is simple if you ignored the unproven assumptions. The explanation is that it was NOT a 757 that crashed into the Pentagon. Unlike a 100 ton 757, a much, much smaller aircraft would not be expected to leave behind 100 tons of debris. A much smaller aircraft than a 757 might, in fact, leave the meager amount of debris (excluding throw-down debris) that was found on the lawn and in the Pentagon itself.
In every other case, crashed airliners are re-constructed! Not this time! Could it be that re-construction was opposed because it was known that by putting all the pieces together again, one would wind up with, perhaps, a Global Hawk or a cruise missile or some other 'weapon'' requiring only one rotor of about three feet or so diameter? Now --if you were a poohbah inside a criminal administration, such a 're-construction' would be downright embarassing and just might get you the death penalty for mass murder.
The rotor that was found is, in fact, the same size as the rotor of a Rolls-Royce engine that is found in the US Global Hawk! Anyone not burdened by official orthodoxy, lies and unproven assumptions need only look at the available evidence. That is, that single rotor could most certainly have been traced to a US Global Hawk --not to a 757 which, in fact, is equipped with two such rotors of diameters about three times that of the Global Hawk rotor. Besides --when NTSB data indicates that Flight 77 was never lower than some 273 feet, it is highly unlikely that it would have dropped but one of its two rotors down onto the Pentagon lawn!!
The Pentagon brass including Rumsfeld himself were safe on the opposite side of the building. Those killed were for the most part, auditors trying to locate some 2.3 trillion dollars gone missing inside the PENTAGON BLACK HOLE, in fact, a theft of some 2.3 trillion dollars from the people of the US who have paid their taxes in good faith! The American people have been betrayed, defrauded, screwed over and lied to --crimes aggravated by the loss of life at the Pentagon. The word for this is high treason, typically and historically a hanging offense! The question is not if but WHO do we hang!
People are often murdered for much less than 2.3 trillion dollars. Some unfortunate souls have been done away with for a buck or two. Among the very evil, namely those calling themselves 'our' government, life is cheap at any price and well worth wasting in order to get rid of the onus of a missing 2.3 trillion dollars. The murder of US citizens by the US government will be remembered among the most heinous crimes ever perpetrated by any arch fiend in world history. Certainly --those who perpetrated this act of mass murder, this fraud, its continuing cover up should hang, publicly, so that it cannot be covered up|!
Every crime is defined by method, motive and opportunity. This article merely summarizes a method which can be re-created in some detail now and even more so when a complete investigation is begun. We have at least one very strong fiduciary motive. The US government is likewise in possession of an ideal weapon with which to murder our fellow citizens: the Global Hawk.
The opportunity was manufactured. What are the odds that Dick Cheney, as you may recall, just happened by chance to be 'gaming' a 'scenario' in which Arab terrorists would crash airliners into the WTC and the Pentagon? Cheney may call it 'gaming' the 'scenario'. I call it 'supervising the mass murder of US citizens by its own government!'
Of related interest:
Four decades ago, the novel (and movie) "Seven Days in May" was a popular political thriller about a military coup d'etat in the United States against a President who sought to scale back the Cold War. In this story, a military cabal schemed to topple the government under the guise of a military communications exercise. This "war game" was to have been used as the cover for toppling the government and installing a General as President who would stop arms control treaties with the Soviet Union.
A different fictional treatment of the use of a "war game" to perpetrate covert objectives was described in "The Lone Gunmen," a television show aired on Fox TV in March 2001. In that show, a small cabal within the military-industrial complex used a war game scenario as cover for remote control hijacking of a commercial flight and crashing it into the World Trade Center in order to boost military spending for the permanent war.
This show was so close to the most likely scenario for 9/11 that it is plausible that this information was deliberately leaked in order to discredit the idea as merely part of a bad television drama, thereby inoculating people from contemplating the probability that 9/11 was a covert operation using remote controlled planes under the guise of a war game.
Lone Gunmen script excerptOn September 11, at least five different "war games" were being conducted by the military and intelligence agencies. These exercises included simulations of 9/11 type events, a plane into building scenario near Dulles Airport in Virginia, and deployment of fighters to northern Canada and Alaska (which reduced the number of fighters that were available to protect the US?). It seems that these exercises were the means used to paralyze the air defenses, thereby ensuring the success of the "attacks." The British Navy was conducting exercises in the Indian ocean near the Middle East. A biowar exercise was also about to start in New York City.
BYERS: We know it's a war game scenario. That it has to do with airline counter-terrorism. Why is it important enough to kill for.
BYERS SNR: Because it's no longer a game.
BYERS: But if some terrorist group wants to act out this scenario, then why target you for assassination?
BYERS SNR: Depends on who your terrorists are.
BYERS: The men who conceived of it the first place. You're saying our government is planning to commit a terrorist act against a domestic airline?
BYERS SNR: There you go again. Blaming the entire government as usual. In fact, a small faction ...
BYERS: For what possible gain?
BYERS SNR: The Cold War's over, John. But with no clear enemy to stockpile against, the arms market's flat. But bring down a fully loaded 727 into the middle of New York City and you'll find a dozen tinpot dictators all over the world just clamoring to take responsibility, and begging to be smart-bombed. BYERS: I can't believe this. This is about increasing arms sales?
Who has the power to coordinate all of these exercises? Osama bin Laden? Saddam Hussein? Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah? Dick Cheney and the White House National Security Council?
It is difficult to believe that it is a bizarre "coincidence" that the military and CIA were conducting war games similar to 9/11 on September 11, 2001. While it seems likely, if not blatantly obvious, that these war games were one of the means used to confuse the air defense system for sufficient time to allow the World Trade Center to be attacked,The war games do not answer the question of how the air defenses were suppressed for another half hour after the second tower was hit (at which time everyone knew that an attack was in progress). The Air Force had another half hour after the second tower to scramble interceptors to defend the Capitol (the plane that is alleged to have hit the Pentagon made its 180 degree turn over Ohio to head back toward DC about the time that the second tower was struck).
“During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President…the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?[See: Minetta tells 9/11 Commission Cheney knew exact flight path of Flight 77]
--Former Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, 911 Commission Hearing
Mineta Testifies to 911 Commission
Journalists covering the hearing verified Mineta's testimony after the hearing. The exchange raises the question: if Cheney were willing to allow what Mineta thought was a 'hijacked' aircraft to strike the Pentagon, would compunction would have prevented Cheney from ordering or agreeing to allow a US Global Hawk to accomplish the same thing with more certainty? At the very least, Dick Cheney is guilty of high treason. At worst --high treason and mass murder.
Any government employee at any level elected or civil service who supports, plans, participates in such a crime should be subject to charges of high treason, murder, accessory, seditious conspiracy, to say nothing of violations of this administration's 'own' US Patriot Act which makes it unlawful to disseminate false information about 'terrorism'. The act of ramming a missile into the US Pentagon is an act of terrorism whether that 'missile' (as Rumsfeld called it) is a Global Hawk or a 757. Every member of the Bush administration who has lied about 911 in any way is therefore prosecutable as a 'terrorist' under the US Patriot Act! There is, in fact, a Federal Grand Jury that is investigating the many crimes of 911. I hope that the members of this panel are paying attention. I would hope that they are doing their patriotic duty to their country, to the truth, and to justice! Let the charges be issued and the trial begin! Those planning and directing this heinous crime should stand trial for their very lives.
A related story:
... the government is hiding evidence regarding 9/11. For example, the government has claimed that no flight recorders were recovered from the airplanes which hit the Twin Towers. However, firefighters stated they did recover the flight recorders. And Dan Rather confirmed that they were recovered.
9/11 activists have repeatedly demanded that the government reveal the videos, photographs, and other documentary evidence so that we can assess the truth for ourselves (see this, for example).
Government Hides Behind Copyright Law
Not only has the government refused to share the evidence, it has threatened to dispose of it. For example, NIST recently responded to a FOIA request by saying that it would not share many videos and photographs but would - instead - give the originals back to the people who shot them.
The government's theory is - apparently - that the copyright for the video and photos is owned by the people who shot them, and that sharing them with others would constitute copyright violation. Specifically, copyright law states that the owner of the copyright can prevent others from duplicating or reproducing the copyrighted work. (Copyright is actually frequently used in an attempt to crush free speech and dissent, but that's another story).
The My Lai/Zapruder ExceptionIs there any way around the government's copyright argument?
Yes, there is a possible exception, which could be called the "My Lai/Zapruder Exception". As one court summarizes the principle:
Is there any way around the government's copyright argument? Yes, there is a possible exception, which could be called the "My Lai/Zapruder Exception". As one court summarizes the principle:Nimmer is the leading treatise on copyright law. So Nimmer's opinions carry great weight.
Citing the exclusive photographs of the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War and the Zapruder home movie of the assassination of President John Kennedy as examples, Nimmer proposes that "where the 'idea' of a work contributes almost nothing to the democratic dialogue, and it is only its expression which is meaningful," copyright protection of the expression should be limited in the interest of public access to information necessary to effective public dialogue. Id. at 1 - 82-1 - 84. Nimmer explains:
No amount of words describing the "idea" of the massacre could substitute for the public insight gained through the photographs. The photographic expression, not merely the idea, became essential if the public was to fully understand what occurred in that tragic episode. It would be intolerable if the public's comprehension of the full meaning of My Lai could be censored by the copyright owner of the photographs. . . .
Similarly, in the welter of conflicting versions of what happened that tragic day in Dallas, the Zapruder film gave the public authoritative answers that it desperately sought; answers that no other source could supply with equal credibility. Again, it was only the expression, not the idea alone, that could adequately serve the needs of an enlightened democratic dialogue.
Nimmer recognizes, however, that denying copyright protection to news pictures might defeat the ultimate First Amendment goal of greater public access to information by inhibiting or destroying the business of news photography. Id. at 1 - 84.1-1 - 85. The treatise therefore suggests a news photograph in which idea and expression are inseparable should be subject to a compulsory licensing scheme unless within a month of its making, the photograph appears in the newspapers, magazines or television news programs servicing a given area. Id. at 1 - 85. n5
--My Lai, Zapruder and 9/11Following is an assorted collection of stupid officialdom followed by my responses.
"It's easy to imagine an infinite number of situations where the government might legitimately give out false information. It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests."
—US Solicitor-General Theodore "Ted Bundy" Olson, Jennifer K. Harbury vs. United States, US Supreme Court, 17 March 2002 (Olson's 3rd wife Barbara, an ex-federal prosecutor and CNN pundit, was allegedly murdered on the invisible American Airlines Flight 77 that did NOT crash into the Pentagon). Mrs. Harbury argued her case pro se (without a lawyer) to the US Supreme Court regarding the US CIA torturing and murdering her husband in Central America during Iran-Contra narcoterrorism perped by White House and US government, which the government did not deny. (Iran-Contra treason resulted in dozens of criminal convictions and assassinations of White House staff during the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations.)Olson also gave about three or four conflicting and otherwise differing versions of this wife's 'alleged' telephone calls from Flight 77. These calls were most probably impossible.
"There is no question, there is no doubt what happened that day. And I think it's appalling that anyone might try to put out that kind of myth. I think it's also appalling for anyone to continue to give those sorts of people any kind of publicity."I think it's appalling that government sellouts are now paid liars on CNN!There is 'no doubt' that the government lied about 911 and continues to lie about 911. Yet --the 'sheeple' are expected to believe absurd cover stories for which there is NOT A SHRED of verifiable or even admissible evidence in support. Who lies about a crime to cover it up? Those who perpetrate them do!
--Department of Defense News Briefing, Pentagon spokesperson Victoria Clarke (now employed by CNN "NEWS"), June 25, 2002
The US government has lied continuously and is still lying about 911!
This government must come clean or resign en masse!
"To even suggest that AA77 did not crash into the Pentagon on September 11 is the ultimate insult to the memory of the 59 men, women and children on AA77 and the 125 dedicated military and civilian workers in the Pentagon who were ruthlessly murdered by terrorists on September 11."
I am not only unimpressed with phony indignation by paid liars inside the FBI, I will work assiduously to see to it that they join ranks of the unemployed!
—FBI statement, April 2, 2002
Note to FBI shills: spare me your disingenuous indignation and phony bullshit patriotism! Rather, help me round up the mass murderers inside a treasonous government that has most certainly waged war upon the citizenry. Those planning and calling the shots should BE shot, possibly hanged!
"I think even the suggestion of it is ludicrous. And finally, it is just an incredible, incredible insult to the friends and the relatives and the family members of the almost 200 people that got killed here on September 11th and the thousands who were killed in New York."
—Department of Defense News Briefing, Victoria Clarke, April 24, 2002The ONLY insult is the US government's insistence upon maintaining this stupid, transparent charade! Victoria, just shut the fuck up and show me the wreckage!
There was a time when Americans coud take for granted that their government told the truth. The very idea that the government would lie to us was virtually unthinkable during the 1940s and the 1950s. During the 1960s, however, things began to change. Lies and deceit over Vietnam, Watergate and the Iran-Contra Affair disillusioned most of us to the point where we could no longer trust our government. While distrusting government used to be a symptom of paranoia (of the left or the right), that no longer remains the case. During the 1990s, anyone who takes for granted what the government tells them is regard as naive. Our problems thus become that of exercising our rationality to avoid naivete without becoming parnoid.
There are many who think that the steady erosion of our faith in our government has roots that can be traced to events in Dallas, TX, on 22 November 1963. ... Knowing the truth might even contribute to restoring our trust in government. And, if the government was involved, then knowing might at least help us to take steps to ensure that it does not happen again.
--Prologue, The Death of JFK, James H. Fetzer, PhD.I wish I could be as optimistic. While the origins of our malaise may be found in the murder of JFK and the government cover up of the crime, it was left to the Bush administration to dash all hope of redemption. It was left to the Bush administration to make it clear that there is no way out of this wilderness short of revolution. The government may never be trusted again whomever calls him/herself "President". The government may never again deserve our trust! The government may never again deserve the good will of those it presumes to governs.