Since it seems like too much to ask you to read something you think might not support what you want to believe, beardedbruce...


Subject: RE: BS: Michael Moore - 9/11 could be inside job
From: CarolC - PM
Date: 15 Jul 07 - 10:35 PM

If it was really the plane they said it was that hit the Pentagon, Bill, there shouldn't be any problem with releasing the video footage that was taken by the security cameras at the hotel across the street from the Pentagon, and which were confiscated by the FBI, so everyone can see for themself. This would end the speculation.

On the other hand, there are also eyewitnesses who say when they got to the crash site immediately following the 'crash', they could not see any sign of an airplane having crashed into the building.


From this site...

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. 20-year Air Force veteran. Member adjunct faculty, Political Science Department, James Madison University. Instructor, University of Maryland University College and American Public University System. Author of African Crisis Response Initiative: Past Present and Future (2000) and Expeditionary Air Operations in Africa: Challenges and Solutions (2001).

* Contributor to 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out 8/23/06: Account of Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. "I believe the Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research. ...

It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics. ...

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this 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 [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile". ...

I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...

More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."


From this site...


http://911courage.org/linked_docs/pentagon.pdf


-Barbara Honegger, M.S. is Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School (1995−present), the Navy's advanced science, technology and national security affairs university. This research, as all of Honegger's research and publications on September 11, are solely in her capacity as a concerned private citizen and do not imply official endorsement. Honegger served as Special Assistant to the Assistant to the President and White HousePolicy Analyst (1981−83); was the pioneering Irangate author and whistleblower on the October Surprise (October Surprise, Tudor, 1989; and Iran−Contra expose documentary film "Cover−Up"); and was called as a researcher / witness at both the October 23, 2004, and August 27, 2005, Los Angeles Citizens 9/11 Grand Jury hearings held at Patriotic Hall in Los Angeles, Calif. Much of the information and analysis contained in this evidence summary was presented at the L.A. Citizens Grand Jury hearings and at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence conference held at American University in Washington, D.C. in July, 2005.-


Converging Lines of Proof of a 9:32 Violent Event at the Pentagon on September 11, well before the Official Story says anything hit the building:

Multiple standard−issue, battery−operated wall clocks on the walls of the area of the Pentagon attacked on 9/11−including one in the heliport just outside the west face−were stopped between 9:31 and 9:32−1/2 by a violent event, almost certainly a bomb or bombs inside the building and/or in a truck or construction trailer parked right outside the west face. The first Associated Press report, in fact, stated that the Pentagon had been damaged by a "booby trapped truck." The Navy posted the stopped heliport clock on an official website and another of the stopped clocks is in the 9/11 display at the Smithsonian Institution.2 These are just some of the west section Pentagon clocks that stopped between 9:31 and 9:32−1/2 on September 11.

April Gallop, an Army employee with a Top Secret clearance, was at her desk in the Army administrative offices in the west section of the Pentagon on 9/11, the area of the building most heavily destroyed, when what she said sounded and felt "like a bomb" went off. "Being in the Army with the training I had, I know what a bomb sounds and acts like, especially the aftermath, and it sounded and acted like a bomb. There was no plane or plane parts inside the building, and no smell of jet fuel." Ms. Gallop still has the watch she was wearing that morning, which stopped shortly after 9:30.

The FAA's [Federal Aviation Administration] timeline document "Executive Summary−Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis−−September 11, 2001" reads: "0932: ATC (Air Traffic Control) AEA reports aircraft crashes into west side of Pentagon."3 The time is the critical fact here, not the claimed cause.

Denmark's soon−to−be Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller was in a building in Washington, D.C. on 9/11 from which he looked out, heard an explosion and saw the smoke first rise from the Pentagon. He immediately looked at his watch, which read 9:32 am. He gave radio interviews in Denmark the next morning in which he stated that the Pentagon had been attacked at 9:32.4

On August 27, 2002, then White House Counsel and now Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave the Secretary of the Navy lecture at the Naval Postgraduate School in which Gonzales explicitly and clearly states that "The Pentagon was attacked at 9:32". A tape of this segment of his talk was played at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence at American University in Washington, D.C. in July 2005, and is on the public record...


...In the Air Force's own account of the events of 9/11, Air War Over America, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) general who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled on 9/11, although too late, Gen. Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack there that morning, and that this pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building. This fighter jet−not Flight 77−is almost certainly the plane seen on the Dulles airport Air Traffic Controller's screen making a steep, high−speed 270−degree descent before disappearing from the radar. [When a plane flies low enough to go undetected, it is said to be "under the radar."] Military pilots−like the one sent by Gen. Arnold on 9/11 to reporton the Pentagon's damage−are trained to fly 500 feet above ground in order to evade radar detection. In fact, when the Air Traffic Controller responsible for the plane and her colleagues watched the extremely difficult 270−degree maneuver on her screen, they were certain that the plane whose blip they were watching perform this extremely difficult feat was a US military aircraft, and said so at the time. It almost certainly was.

Thus, the likely reason the Pentagon has refused to lower the current official time for "Flight 77" impact, 9:37, to 9:32 am−the actual time of the first explosions there−is that they decided to pretend the blip represented by Arnold's surveillance jet approaching just before 9:37 was "Flight 77." As the official cover story claims that the alleged 9:37 impact was the only Pentagon attack that morning, yet by the time Arnold's surveillance jet arrived on the scene the violent event had already happened, the Pentagon cannot acknowledge the earlier 9:32 time without revealing an attack on the building prior to the alleged impact.