Mike
Well-known member
hopalong said:
Tied up? You better stay out of those sleazy places. :lol:
IS ALEX JONES A ZIONIST SHILL?
- Thread starter hypocritexposer
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
Tied up? You better stay out of those sleazy places. :lol:
A
Anonymous
Guest
LB,
very good finds on the info.
the people on this site do not have the guts to read it as they are not ready to take the red pill. the truth requires courage and these morons are sheep not leaders...
they will do whatever it takes to avoid the facts...
very good finds on the info.
the people on this site do not have the guts to read it as they are not ready to take the red pill. the truth requires courage and these morons are sheep not leaders...
they will do whatever it takes to avoid the facts...
hypocritexposer
Well-known member
Faster horses said:
Right now. the Stampede, have you heard of it? :lol: :lol:
lightninboy
Well-known member
The Stampede is definitely one of the greatest rodeos there is.
hypocritexposer
Well-known member
It's been warm, with a couple of days with rain in the evenings so far. I'm pretty sure everybody got a little wet last night at the chucks/grand stand show.
lightninboy
Well-known member
I heard the British Prince and Princess were going to drop by the Stampede.
Mike
Well-known member
hopalong said:Mind your own business Mike :wink:
I think I'd rather mind yours. Yours sounds much more interesting. :wink:
lightninboy
Well-known member
Dick Eastman
June 2, 2009
I have collected sufficient conclusive evidence to convict the White House and Pentagon staffs for treason and the secret services of other nations for hostile acts.
Finally there are several pictures showing that the fire trucks for no apparent reason pointlessly created a continuous curtain of fire hose spray that covered the damage imprint so it could not be photographed from Washington Blvd. This misty barrier to vision was maintained for several long minutes and obviously was not being directed at any fire. And to top it off, this truck and curtain of water were only withdrawn when everyone was ordered to clear the area in front of the Pentagon because another plane was on its way (stop and think about the irrationality of that command) and that in the same minute -- at 10:15 a.m. that the fire truck pulled away and the curtain of water was gone the building suddenly and unexpectedlyh collapsed destroying the evidence imprint forever. Clearly someone did not want this wall imprint examined too closely. Clearly the fire truck and the crew were acting as cover-up agents and clearly they were withdrawn on an outrageously implausible pretext so that demolition could bring down the wall obliterating the imprint. Nevertheless -- photos were taken showing the imprint and here they are.
Again I remind you that I spend over six years attempting to get this to people's attention -- sending out these pictures daily -- only to be rejected and ridiculed.
In the end only a handful have been true to the truth -- Peter Wakefield Sault, Barbara Honegger, Carol Valentine.
The width of a Boeing 757 is such that if the nose hit at what the investigating engineers identify as pillar #14, then the starboard engine would have had to have hit at pillar #16. Pillar #16 seems to have been partially blasted away, but it is still standing. It was not hit by a 757 starboard wing engine.
According to civil engineers who inspected the wreckage two days later, the nose of the attacking plane hit at the location shown below, a column between two windows, designated in the engineer's report as column #14. This column marks the center of the crash imprint left by the killer plane.
If the fusleage and vertical stabilizer hit column #14, then we must ask where is there any evidence of a starboard engine hitting at columns #16 or #17? And why is there any damage at all on the second floor between columns #18 and #20?
Here is a diagram prepared by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) engineers who examined the structural condition of the the pillars in the damaged section of the Pentagon three days after the attack.
The engineers recorded the different levels of damage done to supporting pillars at the first-floor level of the crash region, including the exterior pillars between windows, using this system of catagorization:
Pink squares: In collapsed area. Presumed to have had significant impairment (these are guesswork)
Red squares: Missing, broken, disconnected, or otherwise without remaining function
Blue squares: Impacted with large deformation and significant impairment of function
Green squares: Heavy cracking and spalling with some impairment of function
Yellow squares: Cracking and spalling with no significant impairment of function.
(note: "Spalling" means chips have been knocked off the pillar.)
So let's test the Boeing thesis: Verify that no starboard wing engine (i.e., the engine hanging from the wing to the right of the seated pilot) penetrated anywhere on the first floor between columns 15 and 18.
No sign of engine penetration from pillar #16 to pillar #18. Pillar #15 is blasted away, especially near ground level -- yet had the killer jet been a Boeing 757 with engines hanging lower than the fuselage, the lowest part of pillar #14 would not have been touched by any part of the Boeing. Clearly, by looks of it, the pillar has been blasted away, not burned away.
There was a large trailer parked at column 14 at the time of the attack. The trailer, we may surmise, was blown to smithereens apparently by a bomb -- and may account for much of that confetti debris on the heliport landing pad. Possibly the bomb, was intended to enlarge the hole made by the small jet or missile that actually did hit the wall. Barbara Honegger has already established that bombs went off in the Pentagon before the alleged time of impact. This trailer bomb would be just one more of those.
While the perpendicular angle of approach in this diagram is wrong for the killer jet, the diagram does show the size of a Boeing 757 with respect to the spacing of Pentagon columns and the windows between them.
There were actually two explosions, one from some type of small aircraft that hit the building and the other from a truck bomb: you can see the back of the truck blown out with flames coming from it in other photos of the scene near the chain link fence to the right.
This picture shows column #14 location on the second floor. There appears to be a vestage of the column still hanging there. But the picture also shows, to the right, the other, unexplained, damage on the second floor at pillar #s 17, 18 and 19 -- not explained at all by the pillar #14 plane crash.
Note above that the damage caused by a vertical stabilizer does not reach above the second floor level. Yet a Boeing 757 tail fin should reach up to the middle of the fourth floor level, had the killer jet actually been a Boeing 757.
The hole in he fence indicates a plane or missile travelling very low. The damage to the second floor (between pillars 19 and 20 -- see diagram above) could not have been caused by what hit the fence. In fact this hole in the window between columns 19 and 20 and the damage to the facing to the left of it on the second floor cannot be explained by the wing of the plane.
Obviously the story of the banking plane was made up on the spot and put out by planted disinformationist witnesses to explain away the damage on the second floor so far south (to the right of) the crash centered at pillar 14. The claims that the plane's port engine dragged in the grass and that the plane pivoted on the dug-in wing, "cartwheeling into the building," or that the plane "bounced," are contradicted by pristine grass and by the fact that there is no damage where the engine would have had to have hit at or above the ceiling of the first level (the second-story floor) at column 16.
Witnesses who say they saw an engine go by them -- may have seen the killer jet (or missile) which would more or less approximate the size of a Boeing engine.
Thus we have no hole for the engine at column 16 and a hole that can only be explained by yet another object (missile) between columns 19 and 20 on the second floor.
One of the fire trucks positioned itself south of pillar 14 and proceeded to emit a spray of water towards the north covering with spray the features of the crash. There is not apparant reason for this action other than to conceal the damage from view. Within 20 minutes the wall of the Pentagon collapses destroying the evidence described above -- yet the part of the building that collapsed is to the right of where the "airliner" supposedly entered the building at a fifty degree angle headed northeast. The fire had been put out by this time. The collapse and the spraying of water by the fire truck to cover the damage appear to be instances of the concealment and destruction of evidence respectively.
It should also be noted that since the nose plane is determined to have struck pillar 14 and that the plane hit the west wall from the southwest, coming at a 50-degree angle, the interior damage must have been more extensive to the northeast of the crash point -- yet it is a section that is west and southwest of the crash hole that comes down -- where presumably less damage to support pillars was done. The wall, I am suggesting, should not have collapsed as it did.
http://newsconfuse.blogspot.com/2009/06/yet-more-pentagon-photo-evidence-damage.html
June 2, 2009
I have collected sufficient conclusive evidence to convict the White House and Pentagon staffs for treason and the secret services of other nations for hostile acts.
Finally there are several pictures showing that the fire trucks for no apparent reason pointlessly created a continuous curtain of fire hose spray that covered the damage imprint so it could not be photographed from Washington Blvd. This misty barrier to vision was maintained for several long minutes and obviously was not being directed at any fire. And to top it off, this truck and curtain of water were only withdrawn when everyone was ordered to clear the area in front of the Pentagon because another plane was on its way (stop and think about the irrationality of that command) and that in the same minute -- at 10:15 a.m. that the fire truck pulled away and the curtain of water was gone the building suddenly and unexpectedlyh collapsed destroying the evidence imprint forever. Clearly someone did not want this wall imprint examined too closely. Clearly the fire truck and the crew were acting as cover-up agents and clearly they were withdrawn on an outrageously implausible pretext so that demolition could bring down the wall obliterating the imprint. Nevertheless -- photos were taken showing the imprint and here they are.
Again I remind you that I spend over six years attempting to get this to people's attention -- sending out these pictures daily -- only to be rejected and ridiculed.
In the end only a handful have been true to the truth -- Peter Wakefield Sault, Barbara Honegger, Carol Valentine.
The width of a Boeing 757 is such that if the nose hit at what the investigating engineers identify as pillar #14, then the starboard engine would have had to have hit at pillar #16. Pillar #16 seems to have been partially blasted away, but it is still standing. It was not hit by a 757 starboard wing engine.
According to civil engineers who inspected the wreckage two days later, the nose of the attacking plane hit at the location shown below, a column between two windows, designated in the engineer's report as column #14. This column marks the center of the crash imprint left by the killer plane.
If the fusleage and vertical stabilizer hit column #14, then we must ask where is there any evidence of a starboard engine hitting at columns #16 or #17? And why is there any damage at all on the second floor between columns #18 and #20?
Here is a diagram prepared by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) engineers who examined the structural condition of the the pillars in the damaged section of the Pentagon three days after the attack.
The engineers recorded the different levels of damage done to supporting pillars at the first-floor level of the crash region, including the exterior pillars between windows, using this system of catagorization:
Pink squares: In collapsed area. Presumed to have had significant impairment (these are guesswork)
Red squares: Missing, broken, disconnected, or otherwise without remaining function
Blue squares: Impacted with large deformation and significant impairment of function
Green squares: Heavy cracking and spalling with some impairment of function
Yellow squares: Cracking and spalling with no significant impairment of function.
(note: "Spalling" means chips have been knocked off the pillar.)
So let's test the Boeing thesis: Verify that no starboard wing engine (i.e., the engine hanging from the wing to the right of the seated pilot) penetrated anywhere on the first floor between columns 15 and 18.
No sign of engine penetration from pillar #16 to pillar #18. Pillar #15 is blasted away, especially near ground level -- yet had the killer jet been a Boeing 757 with engines hanging lower than the fuselage, the lowest part of pillar #14 would not have been touched by any part of the Boeing. Clearly, by looks of it, the pillar has been blasted away, not burned away.
There was a large trailer parked at column 14 at the time of the attack. The trailer, we may surmise, was blown to smithereens apparently by a bomb -- and may account for much of that confetti debris on the heliport landing pad. Possibly the bomb, was intended to enlarge the hole made by the small jet or missile that actually did hit the wall. Barbara Honegger has already established that bombs went off in the Pentagon before the alleged time of impact. This trailer bomb would be just one more of those.
While the perpendicular angle of approach in this diagram is wrong for the killer jet, the diagram does show the size of a Boeing 757 with respect to the spacing of Pentagon columns and the windows between them.
There were actually two explosions, one from some type of small aircraft that hit the building and the other from a truck bomb: you can see the back of the truck blown out with flames coming from it in other photos of the scene near the chain link fence to the right.
This picture shows column #14 location on the second floor. There appears to be a vestage of the column still hanging there. But the picture also shows, to the right, the other, unexplained, damage on the second floor at pillar #s 17, 18 and 19 -- not explained at all by the pillar #14 plane crash.
Note above that the damage caused by a vertical stabilizer does not reach above the second floor level. Yet a Boeing 757 tail fin should reach up to the middle of the fourth floor level, had the killer jet actually been a Boeing 757.
The hole in he fence indicates a plane or missile travelling very low. The damage to the second floor (between pillars 19 and 20 -- see diagram above) could not have been caused by what hit the fence. In fact this hole in the window between columns 19 and 20 and the damage to the facing to the left of it on the second floor cannot be explained by the wing of the plane.
Obviously the story of the banking plane was made up on the spot and put out by planted disinformationist witnesses to explain away the damage on the second floor so far south (to the right of) the crash centered at pillar 14. The claims that the plane's port engine dragged in the grass and that the plane pivoted on the dug-in wing, "cartwheeling into the building," or that the plane "bounced," are contradicted by pristine grass and by the fact that there is no damage where the engine would have had to have hit at or above the ceiling of the first level (the second-story floor) at column 16.
Witnesses who say they saw an engine go by them -- may have seen the killer jet (or missile) which would more or less approximate the size of a Boeing engine.
Thus we have no hole for the engine at column 16 and a hole that can only be explained by yet another object (missile) between columns 19 and 20 on the second floor.
One of the fire trucks positioned itself south of pillar 14 and proceeded to emit a spray of water towards the north covering with spray the features of the crash. There is not apparant reason for this action other than to conceal the damage from view. Within 20 minutes the wall of the Pentagon collapses destroying the evidence described above -- yet the part of the building that collapsed is to the right of where the "airliner" supposedly entered the building at a fifty degree angle headed northeast. The fire had been put out by this time. The collapse and the spraying of water by the fire truck to cover the damage appear to be instances of the concealment and destruction of evidence respectively.
It should also be noted that since the nose plane is determined to have struck pillar 14 and that the plane hit the west wall from the southwest, coming at a 50-degree angle, the interior damage must have been more extensive to the northeast of the crash point -- yet it is a section that is west and southwest of the crash hole that comes down -- where presumably less damage to support pillars was done. The wall, I am suggesting, should not have collapsed as it did.
http://newsconfuse.blogspot.com/2009/06/yet-more-pentagon-photo-evidence-damage.html
lightninboy
Well-known member
It looks like Will and Kate enjoyed the Stampede.
hypocritexposer
Well-known member
hopalong said:
Yes, they were here and gone already. I drove by the Hospital when they were there. Huge crowd waiting to see them.
lightninboy
Well-known member
The Highest Treason Substantiated
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 1
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
We are looking east at the west wall of the Pentagon. North is to our left. The "taxi" lamppost stood to the right (south). Yet witnesses at the gas station at the time, Sgt. Lagasse for one, maintain in multiple interviews and correspondence that the plane passed north of him. Thus it was impossible for the Boeing to have been the killer object that brought down the lamppost.
The Army's own newspaper, the Stars and Stripes of September 12, 2001, presents this map diagram showing where the jetliner came from and the almost perpendicular angle at which it hit:
Witness Steve Riskus who was north of the crash headed south, saw the plane pass just 100 feet in front of him. He wrote that the plane appeared to him to have gone straight in, although he was not willing to argue with anyone about it. Only as after he returned to his car with his famous pictures and was driving further south did he see the downed lamppost.
Here is the witness-based illustration that appeared in the Times on September 12:
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight1.htm
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 1
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
We are looking east at the west wall of the Pentagon. North is to our left. The "taxi" lamppost stood to the right (south). Yet witnesses at the gas station at the time, Sgt. Lagasse for one, maintain in multiple interviews and correspondence that the plane passed north of him. Thus it was impossible for the Boeing to have been the killer object that brought down the lamppost.
The Army's own newspaper, the Stars and Stripes of September 12, 2001, presents this map diagram showing where the jetliner came from and the almost perpendicular angle at which it hit:
Witness Steve Riskus who was north of the crash headed south, saw the plane pass just 100 feet in front of him. He wrote that the plane appeared to him to have gone straight in, although he was not willing to argue with anyone about it. Only as after he returned to his car with his famous pictures and was driving further south did he see the downed lamppost.
Here is the witness-based illustration that appeared in the Times on September 12:
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight1.htm
lightninboy
Well-known member
I guess that means you live in Calgary.hypocritexposer said:
I've got to admit that Kate is a good-looking woman.
lightninboy
Well-known member
The Highest Treason Substantiated
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 2
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
The security camera video released in March 2002 shows five pictures, one just prior to the explosion and four of the explosion. The first picture shows the tail fin of the attacking object sticking up behind a parking-pass machine in the foreground. There is also a thick white smoke trail leading from the right edge of the picture to the parking-pass machine suggesting that the smoke trail is either coming from the object with the tail fin or else is the trail of a missile being fired from the object with the tail fin. 1) given the size of the tail fin that is showing and given the proportions of a Boeing 757 -- the ratio of tail fin height and width to fuselage length -- the front end of the 757 would have to be projecting from behind the parking-pass machine -- no front-end of the fuselage is visible; 2) given a true-to-scale simulation of the 155 foot Boeing 757 beside the 71 ft. high Pentagon it is immediately obvious that the plane hidden by the parking-pass machine is shorter than the Pentagon is tall -- i.e., the killer object is less than half the length of a Boeing 757.
Pentagon security camera pictures released March 7, 2002 reveal:
A. Too-short a plane
1. tail fin too large for amount of fuselage concealed (seven tail fins could fit along back of a Boeing 757)
2. picture shows killer jet must be shorter than the height of the Pentagon, whereas a Boeing 757 is over twice as long (155 ft.) as the 71 ft. height of the building.
3. The F-16 is 50 feet long -- that would be about right, it is one possibility. See pictures suggesting how a remote controlled F-16 could have fired a missile at the target ahead of its own crash.
B. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
1. Too thick for off-wing condensation
2. Exactly matches air-to-ground missile trails
C. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
1. Aluminum airliner with kerosene jet fuel hitting concrete office building would not produce 120 ft. white flash
2. Trail of missile still seen in flash picture
3. Photos of large flash-burn stain on the wall confirm the flash picture
Security cam video pictures released March 7, 2002, were used as Federal evidence, then officially re-released in 2006 under FIA -- establishes killer plane or missile to be at most just half the length of a 757.
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight2.htm
The Highest Treason Substantiated
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 4
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
Barbara Honegger has proven the false-flag, inside-job, provocateur, and false-victimhood establishing nature of the attack on the Pentagon. Her findings are as conclusive -- if not more so -- than my own -- yet she is one of the investigators that "Big Truth" investigators avoid interviewing or featuring in documentaries, books or organized public forums.
The best people in any field -- detective work, government, social science, history -- are always the ones that the big-mouths and the Big Truth organizers are directing you away from. May I point out that the real leader of the 9-11 truth movement is not Fetzer -- who blackballs Honegger and Eastman -- but David Ray Griffin -- who features Honegger's findings in his latest book: The New Pearl Harbor Revisited.
The bottom line of my work is that the real story of 9/11 is inside explosives at both the WTC and the Pentagon, with planes merely the pre-planned cover stories to match the pre-scripted Official Lie. It not only serves as the core of David Ray Griffin's 'Reports of Bombs' in Ch. 2 of his latest book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, but is also the Appendix in Jim Marrs' 9/11 expose book The Terror Conspiracy.
The piece of an American Airlines Boeing 757 has been definitely identified as coming from the starboard side (starboard is the side to your right if you are seated in the plane facing forward.) But the piece was photographed on the lawn north of the crash. This section of the lawn was portside (on the left) of whatever flying object hit the building. Did the wind carry it to the wrong side of the plane? That would be impossible. Check the smoke. The wind was blowing from the northwest. This object is not aerodynamic enough to have flown this distance, through the explosion and against the wind. This piece of placed at this location to be photographed. The photographer, Mark Faram, writes that he did not arrive on the scene until ten minutes after the crash-bombing event. This piece was on the cover of Newsweek magazine and was shown in newspapers and magazines around the world. This piece of debris is what "convinced" the world that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Now, however, we know this evidence was planted. Rather than proving that Flight 77 crashed at the Pentagon, we have here rather evidence of someone at the Pentagon falsifying evidence at the crime scene.
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight4.htm
The Highest Treason Substantiated
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 5
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
Here is part of a posting of mine from 2003:
The Distraction Planes
The use of three aircraft at once over Arlington and D.C. to distract from the ground-level stealth attack of the killer jet tells it all.
1. The C-130 that followed the Boeing in overflying the crash
2. The four engine jet over the Capitol and White House
3. The Boeing itself, before it "disappeared into the exposion," only to begin its landing at Reagan National within a minute of overflying the crash.
Some say the killer object was a missle, but I say the evidence taken in its entirety points to an single-engine jet, guided by remote control and under 70 feet long. The logical choice would be a remote-controlled, or pre-programed F-16, since F-16's are the usual plane seen guarding Washington and the Israelis know them well. The F-16 may not have been the killer object -- it is a demonstrated certainty that it was not a Boeing 757! -- but nothing fits the evidence and the needs of the perpetrators better than the F-16. So here is my prime suspect, identified in 2003:
The F-16 Falcon - Probable Murder Weapon - equipped for remote-control warfare
Span: 32 ft. 10 in.
Length: 49 ft. 6 in.
Height: 16 ft. 6 in.
Weight: 29,896 lbs. loaded
Armament: One air-to-ground missile and electronic countermeasure pods
Ground Control: Structural provisions and "power by wire" systems architecture expanding multi-role performance to include precision strike, night attack and beyond-visual-range
interception missions utilizing touch-sensitive remote virtual cockpit displays.
Targeting: Remote targeting lasers and computers, and new autopilot and ground-avoidance systems allowing faster remote controlled flight while seeking and attacking targets.
Maneuvering: digital flight controls, a voice- activated maneuvering system allowing the pilot to "point" the aircraft in unusual flight attitudes.
Engine: One Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200 of 23,830 lbs. thrust.
Crew: None (remote controlled)
Maximum speed: 1,345 mph.
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 37,500 pounds (16,875 kilograms)
Cruising speed: 577 mph.
Range: 1,407 miles
Remote Control: System Planning Corporation's Command Transmitter Systems (CTS)
Rabbi Zakheim left his position at SPC in early 2001 when President George W. Bush appointed him Under Secretary of Defense and Chief Financial Officer at the Pentagon. Thus, as Comptroller, Rabbi Zakheim had command of the Department of Defense's labyrinthine, bottomless accounts for six full months before the attacks of 11 September 2001. As a Zionist, Rabbi Zakheim had an interest in putting American muscle on Mesopotamian patrol. As signatory to a document including a psycho suggestion that "a new Pearl Harbor" would quicken Zionist-Neo-Conservative designs for global military dominance, Rabbi Zakheim had a motive to bring these plans to fruition by finding or even creating such a pretext for war. As a former corporate executive with a background in technologies for remote control of aerial vehicles, Rabbi Zakheim had a way - remote control of aircraft to create "a New Pearl Harbor" which would launch the USA into invasion and occupation under false pretext.
I am not Jim Fetzer or Morgan Reynolds who say that no planes hit the WTC. I am not Karl Schwartz and Jon Carlson who with no evidence and showing pictures that contain nothing that he claims for them insists for no reason at all that a ancient A3 crashed at the Pentagon or "Agent Smiley and Webfairy" in 2002 insisted that the killer jet in the security camera photo was an ancient Bell X15 from the 1950's (the only one of which hangs in the Smithsonian). So don't think because you have followed the blogs and lists and saw the documentaries that you have seen the real evidence about the Pentagon event. I have seen more deliberate acts of sabotage by phoney truth seekers than I could ever begin to describe -- so I instead focus on the evidence that refutes the "official" raghead's-with-box-cutters" conspiracy theory of the crime-controlled government and media.
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight5.htm
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 2
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
The security camera video released in March 2002 shows five pictures, one just prior to the explosion and four of the explosion. The first picture shows the tail fin of the attacking object sticking up behind a parking-pass machine in the foreground. There is also a thick white smoke trail leading from the right edge of the picture to the parking-pass machine suggesting that the smoke trail is either coming from the object with the tail fin or else is the trail of a missile being fired from the object with the tail fin. 1) given the size of the tail fin that is showing and given the proportions of a Boeing 757 -- the ratio of tail fin height and width to fuselage length -- the front end of the 757 would have to be projecting from behind the parking-pass machine -- no front-end of the fuselage is visible; 2) given a true-to-scale simulation of the 155 foot Boeing 757 beside the 71 ft. high Pentagon it is immediately obvious that the plane hidden by the parking-pass machine is shorter than the Pentagon is tall -- i.e., the killer object is less than half the length of a Boeing 757.
Pentagon security camera pictures released March 7, 2002 reveal:
A. Too-short a plane
1. tail fin too large for amount of fuselage concealed (seven tail fins could fit along back of a Boeing 757)
2. picture shows killer jet must be shorter than the height of the Pentagon, whereas a Boeing 757 is over twice as long (155 ft.) as the 71 ft. height of the building.
3. The F-16 is 50 feet long -- that would be about right, it is one possibility. See pictures suggesting how a remote controlled F-16 could have fired a missile at the target ahead of its own crash.
B. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
1. Too thick for off-wing condensation
2. Exactly matches air-to-ground missile trails
C. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
1. Aluminum airliner with kerosene jet fuel hitting concrete office building would not produce 120 ft. white flash
2. Trail of missile still seen in flash picture
3. Photos of large flash-burn stain on the wall confirm the flash picture
Security cam video pictures released March 7, 2002, were used as Federal evidence, then officially re-released in 2006 under FIA -- establishes killer plane or missile to be at most just half the length of a 757.
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight2.htm
The Highest Treason Substantiated
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 4
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
Barbara Honegger has proven the false-flag, inside-job, provocateur, and false-victimhood establishing nature of the attack on the Pentagon. Her findings are as conclusive -- if not more so -- than my own -- yet she is one of the investigators that "Big Truth" investigators avoid interviewing or featuring in documentaries, books or organized public forums.
The best people in any field -- detective work, government, social science, history -- are always the ones that the big-mouths and the Big Truth organizers are directing you away from. May I point out that the real leader of the 9-11 truth movement is not Fetzer -- who blackballs Honegger and Eastman -- but David Ray Griffin -- who features Honegger's findings in his latest book: The New Pearl Harbor Revisited.
The bottom line of my work is that the real story of 9/11 is inside explosives at both the WTC and the Pentagon, with planes merely the pre-planned cover stories to match the pre-scripted Official Lie. It not only serves as the core of David Ray Griffin's 'Reports of Bombs' in Ch. 2 of his latest book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, but is also the Appendix in Jim Marrs' 9/11 expose book The Terror Conspiracy.
The piece of an American Airlines Boeing 757 has been definitely identified as coming from the starboard side (starboard is the side to your right if you are seated in the plane facing forward.) But the piece was photographed on the lawn north of the crash. This section of the lawn was portside (on the left) of whatever flying object hit the building. Did the wind carry it to the wrong side of the plane? That would be impossible. Check the smoke. The wind was blowing from the northwest. This object is not aerodynamic enough to have flown this distance, through the explosion and against the wind. This piece of placed at this location to be photographed. The photographer, Mark Faram, writes that he did not arrive on the scene until ten minutes after the crash-bombing event. This piece was on the cover of Newsweek magazine and was shown in newspapers and magazines around the world. This piece of debris is what "convinced" the world that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Now, however, we know this evidence was planted. Rather than proving that Flight 77 crashed at the Pentagon, we have here rather evidence of someone at the Pentagon falsifying evidence at the crime scene.
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight4.htm
The Highest Treason Substantiated
Conclusions drawn from the evidence in the September 11, 2001 killings at the Pentagon
Part 5
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
6-25-2009
Here is part of a posting of mine from 2003:
The Distraction Planes
The use of three aircraft at once over Arlington and D.C. to distract from the ground-level stealth attack of the killer jet tells it all.
1. The C-130 that followed the Boeing in overflying the crash
2. The four engine jet over the Capitol and White House
3. The Boeing itself, before it "disappeared into the exposion," only to begin its landing at Reagan National within a minute of overflying the crash.
Some say the killer object was a missle, but I say the evidence taken in its entirety points to an single-engine jet, guided by remote control and under 70 feet long. The logical choice would be a remote-controlled, or pre-programed F-16, since F-16's are the usual plane seen guarding Washington and the Israelis know them well. The F-16 may not have been the killer object -- it is a demonstrated certainty that it was not a Boeing 757! -- but nothing fits the evidence and the needs of the perpetrators better than the F-16. So here is my prime suspect, identified in 2003:
The F-16 Falcon - Probable Murder Weapon - equipped for remote-control warfare
Span: 32 ft. 10 in.
Length: 49 ft. 6 in.
Height: 16 ft. 6 in.
Weight: 29,896 lbs. loaded
Armament: One air-to-ground missile and electronic countermeasure pods
Ground Control: Structural provisions and "power by wire" systems architecture expanding multi-role performance to include precision strike, night attack and beyond-visual-range
interception missions utilizing touch-sensitive remote virtual cockpit displays.
Targeting: Remote targeting lasers and computers, and new autopilot and ground-avoidance systems allowing faster remote controlled flight while seeking and attacking targets.
Maneuvering: digital flight controls, a voice- activated maneuvering system allowing the pilot to "point" the aircraft in unusual flight attitudes.
Engine: One Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-200 of 23,830 lbs. thrust.
Crew: None (remote controlled)
Maximum speed: 1,345 mph.
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 37,500 pounds (16,875 kilograms)
Cruising speed: 577 mph.
Range: 1,407 miles
Remote Control: System Planning Corporation's Command Transmitter Systems (CTS)
Rabbi Zakheim left his position at SPC in early 2001 when President George W. Bush appointed him Under Secretary of Defense and Chief Financial Officer at the Pentagon. Thus, as Comptroller, Rabbi Zakheim had command of the Department of Defense's labyrinthine, bottomless accounts for six full months before the attacks of 11 September 2001. As a Zionist, Rabbi Zakheim had an interest in putting American muscle on Mesopotamian patrol. As signatory to a document including a psycho suggestion that "a new Pearl Harbor" would quicken Zionist-Neo-Conservative designs for global military dominance, Rabbi Zakheim had a motive to bring these plans to fruition by finding or even creating such a pretext for war. As a former corporate executive with a background in technologies for remote control of aerial vehicles, Rabbi Zakheim had a way - remote control of aircraft to create "a New Pearl Harbor" which would launch the USA into invasion and occupation under false pretext.
I am not Jim Fetzer or Morgan Reynolds who say that no planes hit the WTC. I am not Karl Schwartz and Jon Carlson who with no evidence and showing pictures that contain nothing that he claims for them insists for no reason at all that a ancient A3 crashed at the Pentagon or "Agent Smiley and Webfairy" in 2002 insisted that the killer jet in the security camera photo was an ancient Bell X15 from the 1950's (the only one of which hangs in the Smithsonian). So don't think because you have followed the blogs and lists and saw the documentaries that you have seen the real evidence about the Pentagon event. I have seen more deliberate acts of sabotage by phoney truth seekers than I could ever begin to describe -- so I instead focus on the evidence that refutes the "official" raghead's-with-box-cutters" conspiracy theory of the crime-controlled government and media.
http://www.rense.com/general86/hight5.htm
lightninboy
Well-known member
There Was No Missile At the Pentagon - But the Plane Did Not Hit
(an open letter to the 9/11 truth movement)
by: Craig Ranke
Citizen Investigation Team
www.ThePentaCon.com
February 26, 2009
Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) has made it our mission to provide independent verifiable evidence revealing what truly happened at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001.
As it turns out we have been extremely successful in obtaining quite a large body of evidence that fatally contradicts the official story specifically proving how the attack jet that flew tree-top level over Arlington timed perfectly with the explosion did not hit the building as reported. Naturally such a scenario proves a complex conspiracy on 9/11 every bit as much as controlled demolition of the World Trade Center.
When considering a world-wide psychological black operation on this level we must also consider the counter measures that go along with it. Specifically counter-intelligence efforts otherwise known as disinformation that have been deliberately implemented to throw truth seekers off course.
As far as the Pentagon attack is concerned, the evidence we have uncovered reveals beyond a reasonable doubt that the missile theory was the result of a very calculated, deliberate, and extremely effective counter-intelligence effort.
The primary results of this complex effort have been to throw us off course, cause a split in the movement (divide & conquer), and create factions that have launched furious campaigns to accept some sort of a plane impact or else avoid the Pentagon attack all together because it's too "divisive".
So in essence it has been wildly successful until CIT came along with a purely skeptical approach and refused all of it while uncovering independent evidence exposing the truth.
We refused to accept the official story, we refused to accept all previous theories, and we insisted on physically going to the area to find out what people on the street really saw. We intended on reporting our findings regardless of the results.
In addition to contacting as many of the previously published witnesses we could get a hold of we canvassed the neighborhood on foot to find previously unknown witnesses who have never spoken with the media or authorities.
No other evidence could possibly be any more independent than first-hand accounts from random witnesses that we could find on the street.
As it turned out, time and time again we heard the same story from absolutely everyone we could find. They all saw a very large low flying twin-engine commercial aircraft timed perfectly with a big explosion at the Pentagon.
Due to the complex topography and landscape most could not see the alleged impact point of the Pentagon and simply saw the plane and heard or saw the explosion in the distance and therefore assumed the plane must have hit as we were all told by the media and authorities.
But absolutely nobody we spoke with saw 2 planes, nobody saw a small plane or drone, and nobody saw anything remotely resembling a missile.
Imagine what your impression of the truth movement would be if you were a witness in the neighborhood who saw the plane but later heard about missile conspiracy theories.
Those aware of our work understand how we have uncovered that the real smoking gun is the true flight path of the plane which is entirely irreconcilable with all official data, reports, and the physical damage proving the plane people saw did not hit the building. The entire body of evidence we provide is available for free on this website.
So the independent witnesses who were in the critical area right in front of the alleged impact side of the Pentagon all reported a single jet at the time of the attack however in the wrong place to hit the light poles or cause the damage to the building. But nothing at all was reported to have been witnessed on the necessary flight path to cause the physical damage. Because we have been unable to find a single piece of independent evidence for anything on the south side flight path we have logically concluded that the damage to the building was covertly implemented with pre-planted explosives similar to how they brought down the three WTC towers.
For years the truth movement has sat back and theorized primarily based off the available images of the event. No comprehensive independent effort to talk with the witnesses first-hand (and provide recorded accounts) had been undertaken by the media, authorities, or the official story skeptics.
People have been aware of a cover-up when considering the confiscation of all the surrounding security video tapes and they have longed for a release of this information despite the fact that it has been completely controlled by the suspect and therefore subject to manipulation. Many have considered rumors that certain unnamed alleged hotel employees had supposedly watched one of the tapes "in horror". People have hoped that these alleged individuals would reveal the truth if they could be found. For years the movement has demanded a release of these government controlled videos and lamented about getting a hold of these supposed hotel employees to find out what they saw.
CIT did much better than that by providing first-hand, on-location, video-taped interviews from actual witnesses to the event in real life! Not merely people who supposedly saw a grainy security video. So now we know what people really saw. Now we know there was a plane and we know that it could not have hit the building. This is exactly what we needed to end the speculation. The witnesses were there and their stories match! They saw what happened and they prove a deception. We removed the need for guess-work, speculation, and theorizing. We went right to the source and reported it direct for you. There isn't a reason on earth for any logical skeptic to reject definitive corroborated first-hand witness accounts proving the official story false.
So why has the truth movement for the most part insisted on continuing with speculation about missiles and/or remote guided 757 impact theories to counter the missile theories?
Because the counter-intelligence operation worked exactly as intended.
Obviously this endless debate about a false claim has served their purposes perfectly causing people to chase their tails while over-looking the hard evidence that has been uncovered in the mean time.
This situation already had most people frustrated with the Pentagon attack to the point that many had abandoned researching it all together before CIT even existed. Or else it has made people who are firmly in the missile camp reluctant to entertain anything that doesn't prove a missile. The psychological operation runs so deep that some in the movement have actually chosen to attack CIT personally instead of accepting the fact that the witnesses we spoke with prove a deception.
We refused to be dismissive or dogmatic and it led to the incredible amount of evidence we have obtained revealing an outcome that most didn't expect. As a result we have been forced to overcome this already convoluted and very heated debate just to get people to even look at the definitive evidence that we provide. The reality is that there is an equal amount of independent evidence for a missile as there is for a 757 impact. Zero.
Considering all that we have uncovered it's clear to us how effective this missile theory counter-intelligence effort has been. Think about the source. The missile was first mentioned by Donald Rumsfeld himself in what was written off as a slip of the tongue but then it was made famous by French conspiracy author Thierry Meyssan within the first months after the event.
But the most effective catalyst for this disinformation came in early 2002 with the unofficial leak of the blatantly doctored 5 frames from the Pentagon security gate camera. This incredibly effective psychological manipulation tool has been the single most over-analyzed piece of invalid government supplied "evidence" to date. It has caused the movement to be fixated on what could be discerned from the grainy ambiguous video frames as allegedly "hitting the building" while completely diverting us from the true smoking gun - the actual flight path of the plane.
From then on the missile theory phenomenon took on a life of its own as the entire notion of a missile attack on the Pentagon pretty much defined the early stages of the truth movement. Naturally an eventual revolt within the movement itself would be easily predicted setting the stage for us to emerge divided.
As it stands, we are headed towards the 8th anniversary of the attack and there still remains absolutely zero independent evidence for a missile and discussing the Pentagon attack at all is considered taboo in some corners.
The missile theory has remained popular and the divisiveness it has nurtured caused many to shy away from the hard evidence CIT presents proving a deception in a much different way.
Consider this a plea. We are asking you to remove yourself from your previous biases and look at this situation objectively. Familiarize yourself with the full body of information we provide and accept nothing less than 100% independent verifiable evidence moving forward.
The 9/11 operation can no longer be considered a conspiracy theory so we should not reduce it to such by continuing to focus on speculation over evidence.
Nothing that has been controlled and provided for by the government can fairly be accepted as valid evidence in any way shape or form. They aren't going to hand us a video tape proving what really happened and they certainly didn't do this when they deliberately leaked the doctored 5 frames in 2002. Obviously this was part of the plan.
It's imperative that we abandon speculation in light of the fact that we most certainly do have hard evidence proving a deception. CIT will be providing an additional free resource very soon to help everyone get the most pertinent information to the media and authorities in an efficient and professional package so stay tuned for that.
Please help us hyper-focus on the information that reveals this heinous crime as opposed to concentrating on distractions that cause the simple notion of 9/11 being an inside job to remain in the category of "outrageous conspiracy theories" for the masses.
The north side approach is real. It has been proven. It can not be neutralized or spun. No speculation required.
We have provided the evidence but we can only do so much. We need your help bringing it to light.
Thanks and peace.
http://www.thepentacon.com/nomissile.htm
(an open letter to the 9/11 truth movement)
by: Craig Ranke
Citizen Investigation Team
www.ThePentaCon.com
February 26, 2009
Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) has made it our mission to provide independent verifiable evidence revealing what truly happened at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001.
As it turns out we have been extremely successful in obtaining quite a large body of evidence that fatally contradicts the official story specifically proving how the attack jet that flew tree-top level over Arlington timed perfectly with the explosion did not hit the building as reported. Naturally such a scenario proves a complex conspiracy on 9/11 every bit as much as controlled demolition of the World Trade Center.
When considering a world-wide psychological black operation on this level we must also consider the counter measures that go along with it. Specifically counter-intelligence efforts otherwise known as disinformation that have been deliberately implemented to throw truth seekers off course.
As far as the Pentagon attack is concerned, the evidence we have uncovered reveals beyond a reasonable doubt that the missile theory was the result of a very calculated, deliberate, and extremely effective counter-intelligence effort.
The primary results of this complex effort have been to throw us off course, cause a split in the movement (divide & conquer), and create factions that have launched furious campaigns to accept some sort of a plane impact or else avoid the Pentagon attack all together because it's too "divisive".
So in essence it has been wildly successful until CIT came along with a purely skeptical approach and refused all of it while uncovering independent evidence exposing the truth.
We refused to accept the official story, we refused to accept all previous theories, and we insisted on physically going to the area to find out what people on the street really saw. We intended on reporting our findings regardless of the results.
In addition to contacting as many of the previously published witnesses we could get a hold of we canvassed the neighborhood on foot to find previously unknown witnesses who have never spoken with the media or authorities.
No other evidence could possibly be any more independent than first-hand accounts from random witnesses that we could find on the street.
As it turned out, time and time again we heard the same story from absolutely everyone we could find. They all saw a very large low flying twin-engine commercial aircraft timed perfectly with a big explosion at the Pentagon.
Due to the complex topography and landscape most could not see the alleged impact point of the Pentagon and simply saw the plane and heard or saw the explosion in the distance and therefore assumed the plane must have hit as we were all told by the media and authorities.
But absolutely nobody we spoke with saw 2 planes, nobody saw a small plane or drone, and nobody saw anything remotely resembling a missile.
Imagine what your impression of the truth movement would be if you were a witness in the neighborhood who saw the plane but later heard about missile conspiracy theories.
Those aware of our work understand how we have uncovered that the real smoking gun is the true flight path of the plane which is entirely irreconcilable with all official data, reports, and the physical damage proving the plane people saw did not hit the building. The entire body of evidence we provide is available for free on this website.
So the independent witnesses who were in the critical area right in front of the alleged impact side of the Pentagon all reported a single jet at the time of the attack however in the wrong place to hit the light poles or cause the damage to the building. But nothing at all was reported to have been witnessed on the necessary flight path to cause the physical damage. Because we have been unable to find a single piece of independent evidence for anything on the south side flight path we have logically concluded that the damage to the building was covertly implemented with pre-planted explosives similar to how they brought down the three WTC towers.
For years the truth movement has sat back and theorized primarily based off the available images of the event. No comprehensive independent effort to talk with the witnesses first-hand (and provide recorded accounts) had been undertaken by the media, authorities, or the official story skeptics.
People have been aware of a cover-up when considering the confiscation of all the surrounding security video tapes and they have longed for a release of this information despite the fact that it has been completely controlled by the suspect and therefore subject to manipulation. Many have considered rumors that certain unnamed alleged hotel employees had supposedly watched one of the tapes "in horror". People have hoped that these alleged individuals would reveal the truth if they could be found. For years the movement has demanded a release of these government controlled videos and lamented about getting a hold of these supposed hotel employees to find out what they saw.
CIT did much better than that by providing first-hand, on-location, video-taped interviews from actual witnesses to the event in real life! Not merely people who supposedly saw a grainy security video. So now we know what people really saw. Now we know there was a plane and we know that it could not have hit the building. This is exactly what we needed to end the speculation. The witnesses were there and their stories match! They saw what happened and they prove a deception. We removed the need for guess-work, speculation, and theorizing. We went right to the source and reported it direct for you. There isn't a reason on earth for any logical skeptic to reject definitive corroborated first-hand witness accounts proving the official story false.
So why has the truth movement for the most part insisted on continuing with speculation about missiles and/or remote guided 757 impact theories to counter the missile theories?
Because the counter-intelligence operation worked exactly as intended.
Obviously this endless debate about a false claim has served their purposes perfectly causing people to chase their tails while over-looking the hard evidence that has been uncovered in the mean time.
This situation already had most people frustrated with the Pentagon attack to the point that many had abandoned researching it all together before CIT even existed. Or else it has made people who are firmly in the missile camp reluctant to entertain anything that doesn't prove a missile. The psychological operation runs so deep that some in the movement have actually chosen to attack CIT personally instead of accepting the fact that the witnesses we spoke with prove a deception.
We refused to be dismissive or dogmatic and it led to the incredible amount of evidence we have obtained revealing an outcome that most didn't expect. As a result we have been forced to overcome this already convoluted and very heated debate just to get people to even look at the definitive evidence that we provide. The reality is that there is an equal amount of independent evidence for a missile as there is for a 757 impact. Zero.
Considering all that we have uncovered it's clear to us how effective this missile theory counter-intelligence effort has been. Think about the source. The missile was first mentioned by Donald Rumsfeld himself in what was written off as a slip of the tongue but then it was made famous by French conspiracy author Thierry Meyssan within the first months after the event.
But the most effective catalyst for this disinformation came in early 2002 with the unofficial leak of the blatantly doctored 5 frames from the Pentagon security gate camera. This incredibly effective psychological manipulation tool has been the single most over-analyzed piece of invalid government supplied "evidence" to date. It has caused the movement to be fixated on what could be discerned from the grainy ambiguous video frames as allegedly "hitting the building" while completely diverting us from the true smoking gun - the actual flight path of the plane.
From then on the missile theory phenomenon took on a life of its own as the entire notion of a missile attack on the Pentagon pretty much defined the early stages of the truth movement. Naturally an eventual revolt within the movement itself would be easily predicted setting the stage for us to emerge divided.
As it stands, we are headed towards the 8th anniversary of the attack and there still remains absolutely zero independent evidence for a missile and discussing the Pentagon attack at all is considered taboo in some corners.
The missile theory has remained popular and the divisiveness it has nurtured caused many to shy away from the hard evidence CIT presents proving a deception in a much different way.
Consider this a plea. We are asking you to remove yourself from your previous biases and look at this situation objectively. Familiarize yourself with the full body of information we provide and accept nothing less than 100% independent verifiable evidence moving forward.
The 9/11 operation can no longer be considered a conspiracy theory so we should not reduce it to such by continuing to focus on speculation over evidence.
Nothing that has been controlled and provided for by the government can fairly be accepted as valid evidence in any way shape or form. They aren't going to hand us a video tape proving what really happened and they certainly didn't do this when they deliberately leaked the doctored 5 frames in 2002. Obviously this was part of the plan.
It's imperative that we abandon speculation in light of the fact that we most certainly do have hard evidence proving a deception. CIT will be providing an additional free resource very soon to help everyone get the most pertinent information to the media and authorities in an efficient and professional package so stay tuned for that.
Please help us hyper-focus on the information that reveals this heinous crime as opposed to concentrating on distractions that cause the simple notion of 9/11 being an inside job to remain in the category of "outrageous conspiracy theories" for the masses.
The north side approach is real. It has been proven. It can not be neutralized or spun. No speculation required.
We have provided the evidence but we can only do so much. We need your help bringing it to light.
Thanks and peace.
http://www.thepentacon.com/nomissile.htm
hypocritexposer
Well-known member
hopalong said:
for sure. 2 cool stories out of Calgary last week:
the one was about the little girl (cancer) who's "children's wish" was to meet a Princess and the other was about the older lady who was supposed to meet Queen Elizabeth I, years ago as a child, but never got the chance.
They both got to meet Kate, while she was in Calgary.
lightninboy
Well-known member
Pentagon Video Security Gate Cam September 11th
CCTV Frames
Does this seem edited?
The square looking object at the middle-bottom of this photo is the security gate
This gate is very close to the video camera.
The (supposed) plane is several dozen yards behind it,
or so it would appear, at first.....
The problem being, when you zoom in on the photo, the smoke trail from the "plane"
is in FRONT of the gate!
+ the "plane" seems to have a very boxy outline to it...
Is this a plane? Boeing or F-16?
Now, its possible the boxy look, is an effect from zooming in so much,
but the "plane" could not have been in front of the gate.
the smoke also could not have been.
Mentioned by Dick Eastman and others, this could have been an F-16?
I threw in a Mirage-2000 below, for kicks.
I've have had some suspicions about the times some of the Pentagon photos were taken These gate video stills are no exception. What I see are anomalies in the shadows. The gate ticket booths, (this is what I suppose they are?) seem to be casting a shadow at a different length and angle than other shadows in this frame.
If you put a stick in the ground and measure the shadow, and it is twice the length of the stick, the 2x number should stay consistent with any length stick. In other words, it will be double the length, no matter how tall the stick is.
The booth, which first of all seems to have a square appearance, has a non-square shadow. There is the appearance of something on the top of the booth, though it seems to be in the shadows. There is no reason for this, the whole area was in the sun. This top part does cast a very clear shadow.
Now, what's amazing, is that the huge explosion, that changes the luminosity of this video,
doesn't create a shadow on the ground?
Also, the line on the ground that is created by the building's shadow should be minimized.
This explosion does not do that.
It looks more to me like someone turned up that gamma on the photo,
and then added some red...
Speaking of shadows, this brings up the time this photo was taken?
The black line shows the apparent angle of the sun, Donny seems to be well in the sunlight, while he is about to step into the shadows.
This is the same time the "shadow government" was installed
If you look closely at the smoke near the towerhouse and Pentagon roofline, it appears as though the sun should be just skimming the top of the towerhouse, though, we do not really see it. If this is correct, the shadow should fall further than the black line near Rummy's shoes.
About 10:00?
Now if we go by Rummy's shoes, it would be more like 11:00 as a guess.
(you can take your own clock and paste it into the photo with paint or photoshop)
There are fire trucks and smoke, so I am guessing that this is taken on Sept 11th, though we can not be sure?
From maps, we know that the photo above is pointed almost due South.
The blue line shows what seems to be sunlight on the ground where there should not be any?
http://911review.org/brad.com/pentagonvideo_cctv_cam.html
CCTV Frames
Does this seem edited?
The square looking object at the middle-bottom of this photo is the security gate
This gate is very close to the video camera.
The (supposed) plane is several dozen yards behind it,
or so it would appear, at first.....
The problem being, when you zoom in on the photo, the smoke trail from the "plane"
is in FRONT of the gate!
+ the "plane" seems to have a very boxy outline to it...
Is this a plane? Boeing or F-16?
Now, its possible the boxy look, is an effect from zooming in so much,
but the "plane" could not have been in front of the gate.
the smoke also could not have been.
Mentioned by Dick Eastman and others, this could have been an F-16?
I threw in a Mirage-2000 below, for kicks.
I've have had some suspicions about the times some of the Pentagon photos were taken These gate video stills are no exception. What I see are anomalies in the shadows. The gate ticket booths, (this is what I suppose they are?) seem to be casting a shadow at a different length and angle than other shadows in this frame.
If you put a stick in the ground and measure the shadow, and it is twice the length of the stick, the 2x number should stay consistent with any length stick. In other words, it will be double the length, no matter how tall the stick is.
The booth, which first of all seems to have a square appearance, has a non-square shadow. There is the appearance of something on the top of the booth, though it seems to be in the shadows. There is no reason for this, the whole area was in the sun. This top part does cast a very clear shadow.
Now, what's amazing, is that the huge explosion, that changes the luminosity of this video,
doesn't create a shadow on the ground?
Also, the line on the ground that is created by the building's shadow should be minimized.
This explosion does not do that.
It looks more to me like someone turned up that gamma on the photo,
and then added some red...
Speaking of shadows, this brings up the time this photo was taken?
The black line shows the apparent angle of the sun, Donny seems to be well in the sunlight, while he is about to step into the shadows.
This is the same time the "shadow government" was installed
If you look closely at the smoke near the towerhouse and Pentagon roofline, it appears as though the sun should be just skimming the top of the towerhouse, though, we do not really see it. If this is correct, the shadow should fall further than the black line near Rummy's shoes.
About 10:00?
Now if we go by Rummy's shoes, it would be more like 11:00 as a guess.
(you can take your own clock and paste it into the photo with paint or photoshop)
There are fire trucks and smoke, so I am guessing that this is taken on Sept 11th, though we can not be sure?
From maps, we know that the photo above is pointed almost due South.
The blue line shows what seems to be sunlight on the ground where there should not be any?
http://911review.org/brad.com/pentagonvideo_cctv_cam.html