Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
June 21, 2007 at 06:12:39

View Ratings | Rate It

New Study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 Hit the Pentagon

submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg

Tell A Friend

By James Fetzer (about the author)     Page 1 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

For OpEdNews: Jim Fetzer - Writer

A study of the black box data provided by the government to Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon on 9/11. "We have had four lines of proof that no Boeing 757 hit the building," said James Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. "This new study by Pilots drives another nail into a coffin of lies told the American people by The 9/11 Commission".

The new society, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained its 2002 report on American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757 that, according to the official account, hit the ground floor of the Pentagon after it skimmed over the lawn at 500 mph plus, taking out a series of lamp posts in the process. The pilots not only obtained the flight data but created a computer animation to demonstrate what it told them.

According to the report issued by Pilots for 9/11 Truth (http://pilotsfor911truth.org/), there are major differences between the official account and the flight data:

a. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events.

b. All altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles.

c. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense "5 Frames" video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn.

d. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time.

e. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon.

As Robert Balsamo, co-founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, observes, "The information in the NSTB 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." The study was signed by fifteen professional pilots with extensive military and commercial carrier experience. They have made their animation, "Pandora's Box: Chapter 2," available to the public at http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Pandora's+Black+Box%3A+Chapter+2 .

According to James H. Fetzer, founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (http://911scholars.org), this result fits into the broader picture of what happened at the Pentagon that day. "We have developed four lines of argument that prove--conclusively, in my judgment--that no Boeing 757 hit the building. The most important evidence to the contrary has been the numerous eyewitness reports of a large commercial carrier coming toward the building. If the NTSB data is correct, then the Pilot's study shows that a large aircraft headed toward the building but did not impact with it. It swerved off and flew above the Pentagon."

Fetzer, who retired last June after 35 years of teaching courses in logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, expressed pleasure over the Pilot's results, which, he said, has neatly resolved the most pressing issue that remained about the Pentagon. He added, "We have previously developed several lines of argument, each of which proves that no Boeing 757 hit the building," including these four:

(1) The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44 feet above the ground; the kind and quantity of debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: there were no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, and they are practically indestructible.

(2) Of an estimate 84 videotapes of the crash, the three that have been released by the Pentagon do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O'Reilly admitted when one was shown on "The Factor". At 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been visible. There are indications of a much smaller plane, but not a Boeing 757.

(3) Indeed, the aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory--flying more than 500 mph barely above ground level--physically impossible, because of the accumulation of a massive pocket of compressed gas (air) beneath the fuselage; and if it had come it at an angle instead, it would have created a massive crater; but there is no crater and the official trajectory is impossible.

(4) Flying low enough to impact with the ground floor would have meant that the enormous engines were plowing the ground and creating massive furrows; but there are no massive furrows. The smooth, unblemished surface of the Pentagon lawn thus stands as a "smoking gun" proving the official trajectory cannot be sustained.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/

McKnight Professor Emeritus, University of Minnesota, Duluth; Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth; Editor, Assassination Research.

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Book Recommendations for "9 11 Coverups"
The New Pearl Harbor Revisited: 9/11, the Cover-Up, and the Exposé
by David Ray Griffin

$20.00
Lowest New Price $12.91

Number of pages: 358
Publisher: Olive Branch Press

Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11
by Barrie Zwicker

$24.95
Lowest New Price $11.75

Number of pages: 416
Publisher: New Society Publishers

Blowback, 9/11, and Cover-Ups
by Rodney Stich

$25.00
Lowest New Price $21.48

Number of pages: 354
Publisher: Silverpeak Enterprises, Inc.

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
22 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

Other information some may find useful by CB Brooklyn on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 9:00:23 AM
Judy Wood's Site and Web Browser Problems by CB Brooklyn on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 9:53:47 AM
Thanks CB by Tony Forest on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 11:41:59 AM
Re: Pentagon Strike by Joe Plummer on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 2:34:49 PM
If No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, then by Alessandro Machi on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 2:39:53 PM
When the stonewall around you falls, no need to jump ... by meremark on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 3:45:53 PM
Meremark, IGotta Agree With Pretty Much Everytthing You Said by RCG on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 5:00:04 PM
Jon Stewart IS terrific, IMHO by meremark on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 8:00:23 PM
Just saying ... by meremark on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 8:02:41 PM
bravo, 911 pilots for truth by k kelly on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 5:50:02 PM
Where Did It Go? by Dom Jermano on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 6:11:24 PM
Join in, make your mark, do what you can, push, push ... by meremark on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 8:43:14 PM
Well...When You Put It Like That... by RCG on Thursday, Jun 21, 2007 at 10:57:10 PM
I looked around at Woods site for a while by Blue Pilgrim on Friday, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:52:48 AM
Dr Wood says not to get distracted by calculations by CB Brooklyn on Friday, Jun 22, 2007 at 3:25:46 AM
Yes, by richard on Friday, Jun 22, 2007 at 6:14:45 AM
What are calculations supposed to prove? by CB Brooklyn on Friday, Jun 22, 2007 at 11:22:24 PM
if that's what she says by Blue Pilgrim on Friday, Jun 22, 2007 at 6:16:09 PM
that's a poor attempt by CB Brooklyn on Saturday, Jun 23, 2007 at 12:27:07 AM
CHENEY by Professor Emeritus Peter Bagnolo on Friday, Jun 22, 2007 at 9:22:12 AM
New Study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757... by syed mahdi on Friday, Jun 22, 2007 at 12:48:47 PM
Huh, by Sasha on Monday, Jun 25, 2007 at 11:20:50 AM

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum