Another Pentagon Crash Thread...

[BoneZ]

I'd like to first address the latest video of the Pentagon crash. I see people in this forum talking about the "white" object entering the picture being the supposed aircraft. It is not. The white "object" is in fact smoke. There is, however, an aircraft that is visible directly in front of the smoke:

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a197/dotcosm/compositeSm2.gif

In my opinion, this plane looks too small to be a HUGE 757. This plane has the colors and shape of an F-16, but it is hard to tell with the video that we have. By the way, there is NO discernible distortion of the picture due to the "refraction of the lens". We know from professional commercial pilots that a 757 CANNOT fly this close to the ground at the speeds reported. Any military fighter jet can, however.

Don't know if any of you at this forum know this, but there was a jetliner near the Pentagon at the exact time of the alleged crash. (courtesy of Merc @ Loose Change forums)

American Airlines Flight 77:

Tail#: N644AA
Owner: Wilmington Trust Co.
Disappearing transponder signal location: Ohio, 8:56 am
Impact time: *9:38 am*, Pentagon



America West Flight 0098:

Tail#: N644AW
Owner: Wilmington Trust Co.
Departure: Ohio, 8:28
Arrival: *9:39 am*, Reagan National Airport (directly on the other side of the Pentagon)

Notice how the 2 tail numbers are nearly identical? Notice that both jets are owned by the same company? Notice that AA transponder signal disappeared over Ohio and the AW jet is coming from Ohio? Notice that AW jet flew near the Pentagon and landed nearly the minute the Pentagon was hit?


http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/7465/n644awarrival6qu.jpg

Here's a picture of the actual AW jet that landed with tail number N644AW:

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/n644aw10ltakeoff.jpg

Now here's a quote from a fireman that saw this plane:


"Firefighter Alan Wallace was standing outside his fire station when he looked across the nearby interstate and saw a white airplane with orange and blue trim heading almost straight at him. It slammed into the building just a couple hundred feet from him. "When I felt the fire, I hit the ground," he said.

"I just happened to look up and see the plane," said Wallace. "It was about 200 yards away, and was coming in low and fast. I told Mark that we needed to get the hell out of there."

Wallace switched on the truck's radio. "Foam 61 to Fort Myer," he said. "We have had a commercial carrier crash into the west side of the Pentagon at the heliport, Washington Boulevard side. The crew is OK. The airplane was a 757 Boeing or a *320 Airbus*."

There is a person from London with a PhD. in CCTV technology and editing over at the Loose change forum. He is doing an in-depth analysis on the latest Pentagon video. He and another person at the forums with CCTV tech experience show evidence that the video has been altered and then changed back to analog and then back to digital again so that the pixels of whatever was added into the video would look almost the same all the way through the picture. Either way, it most definitely does not look like a 757 hit the Pentagon with the video evidence and the PHYSICAL evidence that we have. Not to scrutinize you Jon, but i just don't know how you can believe a 757 hit the Pentagon when all available evidence we have points AWAY from that theory.

And finally, a retired Air Force Col. and aircraft crash investigator's take on all 4 jet crashes on 9/11:

http://www.physics911.net/georgenelson.htm

[PhilosophyGenius]

Why are you spreading disinfo? The video clearly shows that a plane hit the Pentagon. Are you trying to make us all look bad with this mockery?






Just kidding, nice article. I agree with you 100%.

[911TRUTH]

Where did you get those arrival times? Where did you get that quote from the firefighter?

[AndrewLoweWatson]

I tremble with fear at the wrath of Gold as I post this link.

http://www.osamawasframed.com/pentagonvideos.html

[BoneZ]

Where did you get those arrival times? Where did you get that quote from the firefighter?
Arrival times would be from BTS Research (Bureau of Transportation Statistics www.bts.gov (http://www.bts.gov/) ). The firefighter quote, you can view his whole story here:

http://web.telia.com/~u43109230/flight77/texts/Wallace.txt

Though if you google Alan Wallace's name, you will come up with several websites with his story.


I tremble with fear at the wrath of Gold as I post this link.

http://www.osamawasframed.com/pentagonvideos.html (http://www.osamawasframed.com/pentagonvideos.html)
In that link, the author of the picture assumes that the white "object" that's entering the picture is the jet. Although i do see a resemblance to the Skywarrior and the white "object", i've show above that the actual jet (whether added in or not) precedes the white "smoke/object".

Since we know from the first release of Pentagon footage that there is actual smoke and the aircraft that precedes the smoke has a dark tail fin, then it's safe to assume that the white "object" is in fact smoke. You can clearly see an aircraft of some sort preceding the smoke (white object) and it is also dark in color like in the first video.

[911TRUTH]

Ok say I went along with saying that America West was involved in the events of 9/11...made some interesting finds...they may mean nothing - take with a grain of salt.

I found this is their history available on their website - they have now merged with 3 other airlines to make US Airways

7/16/01 - America West Vacations announced that it was offering optional Certified Airline Passenger Services (CAPS) to all customers who book Las Vegas vacation packages through the America West Vacations Web site or telephone reservations center. CAPS allows customers to check in for flights from the convenience of their hotel from two to 12 hours prior to their flight’s departure time. They can obtain a boarding pass, seat assignment and check their bags for a nominal fee of $6 per person. The CAPS program was discontinued September 2001.

Didn't the hijackers go to Las Vegas for some unexplained reason? Would this program make dealing with security easier? Im not sure here.

9/10/01 America West Holdings Corporation announced a restructuring of the company’s senior management and its subsidiary America West Airlines. Bernard L. Han was elected executive vice president and chief financial officer; Stephen L. Johnson was elected executive vice president, corporate; J. Scott Kirby was named executive vice president, sales and marketing; and Jeffrey McCIelland was named executive vice president, operations.

10/11/01 America West announced that it had completed the sale and leaseback of eight Airbus aircraft, three flight simulators and two spare aircraft engines, resulting in proceeds of approximately $70 million to the airline.

America West recieved seemingly much more than any other airline in the Air Transportation Stabilization Board - a program made to pay struggling airlines, which is an arm of the US Treasury. Seems suspicious - not sure.

"the Air Transportation Stabilization Board ("Board") has carefully considered the revised application of America West Airlines ("AWA"), dated December 26, 2001, for a federal guarantee of a $445 million financing. The Board is asked to participate on an unsecured basis and provide a Federal government guarantee of $379.55 million, which represents 85.3 percent of the total financing." (Total financing of AWA loans, not program as a whole)

Dec 28 2001 - http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/po890.htm
Oct 19 2005 - http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js2979.htm

They rejected United Airlines plea for money and the rest agreed upon seem to be around 40 mil - 60 mil.

[BoneZ]

Great find and information 911Truth! Just more coincidental puzzle pieces to add to the puzzle i guess. :)

[911TRUTH]

The obvious question this theory poses is - what is the purpose/benefit of using this alternate jet and what happened to flight 77?

That interview with the firefighter is interesting... and the theory would fit in with many people thinking it was an american airlines plane, many being not quite sure.

However, more info could shed some light on American Airlines flight 98...Gold?

[AndrewLoweWatson]

In that link, the author of the picture assumes that the white "object" that's entering the picture is the jet. Although i do see a resemblance to the Skywarrior and the white "object", i've show above that the actual jet (whether added in or not) precedes the white "smoke/object".

Since we know from the first release of Pentagon footage that there is actual smoke and the aircraft that precedes the smoke has a dark tail fin, then it's safe to assume that the white "object" is in fact smoke. You can clearly see an aircraft of some sort preceding the smoke (white object) and it is also dark in color like in the first video.


But it's not dark in the other video - it's long thin and white - like the nose cone here.

[911TRUTH]

Ok the plane still exists...

Some photos going up this recent April 2006:
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=N644AW&distinct_entry=true

here was a near crash in 2003:
http://www.aviationattorneys.com/FinalDrilldownofCrash.cfm/ID1/20030624X00945/ID2/1/FAAReport.html

Ok, so if that plane landed at Reagan airport(which is literally right next to the Pentagon) at 9:39 *which im only going by that pic u posted above - I couldn't find the same page on that government site you linked* - the pentagon crash time was 9:40 right? Looking at a satellite photo of the area It would actually be coming in from the same direction that the plane that hit the pentagon was going. SO - is it possibile this is the plane people saw? If it was in the area at the same time, then logically even if flight 77 hit the pentagon - some would have reported seeing that plane. Many of these eyewitnesses for flight 77 could be referring to American West flight 98 - Plane n644aw.

Was this a decoy plane?

Does this help the theory that flight 77 did not hit the pentagon? Could the people saying they saw a plane ALL be referring to this plane? I don't know, but it could make sense - can anyone debunk this?? The question of why they wouldn't just use flight 77 remains a problem to this theory however...

Can someone please find a fresh, official link that says n644aw landed at Reagan airport @ 9:39? The pic looks official but I can't find it.

Oh and about that thing in the first frame
1) It could be the tip of a wing
2) The lens was curved so the edges are distorted

[PhilosophyGenius]

The question of why they wouldn't just use flight 77 remains a problem to this theory however...


One possible theory why is that they knew a 757 couldnt menuever good enough to hit a target like the Pentagon

[911TRUTH]

Could be..

Ok this is the page that those screenshots of America West flight 0098, plane# n644aw were taken from
http://www.bts.gov/xml/ontimesummarystatistics/src/dstat/OntimeSummaryArrivals.xml

however, when you do a search for that flight - nothing comes up.

I think the search may not be working at all however, I can't seem to get any flights to come up. It says tried the "above search" with no results, but the catagories about are just blank, like it didn't register... the other detailed statistics don't even have airports to choose from... its all messed up

[PhilosophyGenius]

Could be..

Ok this is the page that those screenshots were taken from
http://www.bts.gov/xml/ontimesummarystatistics/src/dstat/OntimeSummaryArrivals.xml

however, when you do a search for that flight - nothing comes up.
has this been taken down or is that pic a hoax? Without that screenshot - the theory has absolutely nothing.

I think the search may not be working at all however, I can't seem to get any flights to come up.

I don't think the latest Pentagon video was doctored in any way if that's what your suggesting. I think they put out the real video and knew no one would question it because of how grainy the quality is and that fact that you can only see the head of the object before a huge explosion appears. Therefor you should just take the govn't word on it.

[911TRUTH]

misunderstanding, i meant the screenshots of the arrival time of America West, Flight 0098 - plane n644aw ...ill edit it

[PhilosophyGenius]

Oh, ok sorry. Shoulda clicked on the link.

[BoneZ]

You people are still seeing the white spot at the edge being the jet. It is not! The jet is in front of the white spot and i don't know why you guys can't see it. I guess i'll have to outline it for you.

[911TRUTH]

I sort of see what you are referring to now...it kind of blends in with the trees behind it - looks like a black smudge... I really don't think its clear enough to really make any judgement....

I know Gold is probably seething over us fleshing out the pentagon thing but I'm curious as to what he thinks... don't you think there's something to another plane landing right next to the pentagon a minute before flight 77 crashed that was owned by the same company and had a near identical tail #?? It was coming from the Northwest - Ohio to DC...it very possibly could have been flying low and slowing down to prepare for its landing right behind the pentagon - people would have seen it..possibly mistook it for American Airlines - being America West, unlike AA, wasn't heavily advertised. Not easy to dismiss. Can someone shed some light?

I wish I could get more details on the flight.

[Ignatius Riley]

You people are still seeing the white spot at the edge being the jet. It is not! The jet is in front of the white spot and i don't know why you guys can't see it. I guess i'll have to outline it for you.

Yeah, I sorta see it, in front of the smudge. Too damn small to be the boeing 757, which would have been twice as long as the Pentagon is tall at the point of impact. Plus, as I have pointed out on earlier threads, it is most likely physically impossible that a Boeing 757, 150+ feet long, 120+ foot wingspan, 100+ tons, could travel at 500 miles per hour at any less than, say, 30 feet off the ground. A sizeable air cusion under the wings and resulting from the mass/momentum/wingspan of the plane makes it technically impossible that a 757 would coast in at 300+ mph at any less than 30 feet off the ground. Simple mathematics folks.

... http://physics911.net/missingwings.htm

http://physics911.net/c-pentagon_montage.jpg

This image alone depicts how unreal the official take is. In my opinion, believing that AA Flight 77 hit the Pentagon is a dangerous illusion to entertain. The best argument against it is the first I always present: really big plane, itty bitty hole, no wreckage

team8plus.org has pretty much proven through radar reconstructions that the original planes were swapped with drones. Makes sense. Why trust a Boeing 757 on a super technical, important mission to patsy/dupe Hani Hanjour who couldn't fly a single prop?

http://physics911.net/harel.htm

The video I think confirms that a military jet packed with explosives was remote controlled into the Pentagon on that day.

[BoneZ]

You guys are saying it's a black smudge, but in fact it's more like a dark gray color to me on my screen. I have a high-definition, high-contrast 20.1" Samsung LCD monitor and i can clearly see the jet. Remember in the first pentagon video, we can see the dark tailfin behind the other camera station? This jet is dark. Dark military gray is what it looks like on my screen and TO ME, looks like an F-16 as to the shape of it. If you look closely at the picture i posted above from the new video, you can see the tail fin, and the whole jet.