06 May 2006

9/11 Pentagon Strike

I have very vivid memories of 11 September 2001. I remember I was very much in love and planning my wedding set for 6 October 2001. It was going to be a Greek Orthodox wedding in Huntington, West Virginia.

I got up early in the morning on September 11th and got ready for work. My husband (then fiance) drove me to Hardee's Restaurant where I worked. I was being trained in the kitchen that day. I was there the entire day. I remember one of the trainers from Pennsylvania coming in saying something about a plane crash in Pennsylvania, and she was concerned about her boyfriend and her son. No one told me anything else. I was kept in the kitchen, and I just worked making breakfasts, and then switching over to lunches. Finally, at about 5:30 p.m. E.S.T., my husband (then fiance) was there to pick me up waiting for me at one of the tables that customers eat at. When I went over to him, he told me the towers in New York were attacked. I thought he was kidding. He told me he was serious. When I got home, I saw the news, and I had a lot of questions then. It did not feel or seem right.

Why was the president on vacation then?

Why didn't the president come immediately off vacation?

Why did they attack the towers on the morning of an election when many people stop to vote before going into work?

Why did the plane(supposedly) that hit the Pentagon hit the part of the Pentagon that was the most sparcely populated, and that was under construction?

Why did the FBI let Bin Laden's family fly out of Texas during closed air space?

How did the FBI get to all the crash sites so quickly, like they knew where each strike would be?

Right after 9/11, the president compared what happened to Pearl Harbor. During Pearl Harbor, our government knew the strike would happen and allowed it to happen to rile citizens into joining WWII. Was this the president's way of getting the American public to go to war with Iraq?

During the 9/11 investigation, why did the president and vice-president both give their statements to the commission in the White House together without being under oath?

There are many more questions I have...

This is the report that came out on 9/11/04:


Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11

by "CatHerder", Member,
AboveTopSecret.com/forum


September 11th, 2004

Did a 757 hit the Pentagon on 9-11

First let's start with the factual information available on hand.

The 757-200
As we can see from the freely available information for the Boeing 757 (from the Boeing website). The 757 is a midsized commercial airliner designed for short haul and medium haul routes (Medium Range Transport (MR-TR)), although since its release, and the subsequent discovery of the Wake Vortex it leaves behind the FAA has classified the 757 as a "Heavy" aircraft; the FAA places the 757 in the Geometric Design Classification IV, and an ATC Operation Class C. (source)

The 757-200 dimensions:
Tail Height: 44 ft 6 in (13.6m)
Length: 155 ft 3 in (47.32m)
Wingspan: 124 ft 10 in (38.05m)
Body Exterior Width: 12 ft 4 in (3.7m)
Fuel Capacity: 11,489 us gal (43,490l / 43,490kg)
Maximum Takeoff weight: 255,000lb (115,680kg)
Typical Cruise Speed: 0.80 Mach (573.6mph / 956kmh)
Engines used on a 757: Two 166.4kN (37,400lb) Rolls-Royce RB211-535C turbofans, or 178.8kN (40,200lb) RB211-535E4s, or 193.5kN (43,500lb) RB211-535E4-Bs, or 162.8kN (36,600lb) Pratt & Whitney PW2037s, or two 178.4kN (40,100lb) PW2040s, or 189.5kN (42,600lb) PW2043s. (source1) (source2)
Auxiliary Power Unit: Honeywell GTCP331-200
left portion: source1 right portion: source2 (height and width notation to graphic added by me)

Next, let's look at the Pentagon.


The Pentagon

The Pentagon was designed in the early 40's and was completed in only 16 months on Jan 14, 1943. The shortages of materials required for war production raised many design and construction problems. The use of reinforced concrete in lieu of formed steel for the building made possible a saving of 43,000 tons of steel, more than enough to build a battleship. The use of concrete ramps rather than elevators further reduced steel requirements. Drainage pipes were concrete; ducts were fiber, interior doors were wood. An unusual wall design - concrete spandrels carried to window sill level - eliminated many miles of through-wall copper flashing.(Source1) (Source2)

Recent renovations and upgrades to the building were nearing completion on the side hit on 9-11 and performed reasonably well considering they were not designed to withstand aircraft impact. On September 11, when an American Airlines Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon, home of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), about 20,000 people were at work in this, the largest office building in the world. Yet according to the DoD casualty update on October 1, only 125 Pentagon employees were killed along with the 64 from the fated airliner. (source - Architecture Week)

The exterior walls had been reinforced with steel beams and columns, bolted where they met at each floor. Some of these reinforced walls very near the point of impact remained in place for a half hour before collapsing, allowing uncounted hundreds to escape. "Had we not undertaken this effort," said Evey at a press briefing on September 15, "this could have been much, much worse."

Now, I'm sure everyone can agree that the above information is a matter of public record, and none of it is incorrect, altered, or misquoted in any way to support either side of the case. It is all merely factual information that we will refer to in the following sections.

[Note: I was unintentionally misleading in a previous post when I said the Pentagon didn't use a steel beam construction - while that is still true for the original design, it was reinforced in various areas during the upgrades to include steel beams and columns in some areas of the renovations.]

Quoted from ArchitectureWeek.com :
In addition to major overhauls of the mechanical and electrical systems, the Wedge One renovation included the fire sprinklers, automatic fire doors, and the steel which saved many lives on the day of the attack.

The blast-resistant windows were nearly two inches (5 centimeters) thick. Some of them remain remarkably intact and in place adjacent the point of impact. Some were popped out of their frames by the force of the exploding jet fuel, but they fell without breaking or splintering.

Also on the exterior walls, between the steel columns, the renovation crew had placed Kevlar cloth, similar to the material used for bullet-proof vests. This had the effect of holding together building materials so they wouldn't become deadly projectiles in an explosion.

Looking At the Big Picture

From facts contained above, we can all agree that:

· The length of the outside wall on any side of the pentagon is 921 feet.

· The wingspan of a 757 is 124 feet 10 inches.

· Now, everyone can agree that 921/125= roughly 7.4 right?

Given the size of the 757, and the size of the Pentagon, the damaged area fits in perfectly with the dimensions of both the aircraft and the building.


That was the official report. And I cannot dispute that, except for the last statement. As Joe Quin states:
The above "opening gambit" is very telling since it delivers hard facts, one after the other, all of which are accurate. It is in this last statement that the twisting begins. The fact that the length of the Pentagon is equivalent to 7.4 757's wing to wing, or that the width of one 757 equals 13.5% of the facade of the Pentagon has no bearing on the actual damage done. Indeed, given the weight and speed of the 757 that is alleged to have impacted the building, the actual damage done to the Pentagon is entirely inconsistent with an aircraft of the size, weight, and speed of a 757. In other words, the argument actually supports the "no-Boeing" theory better than it supports "Flight 77 hit the Pentagon."


Here is the official report to support the 757 hitting the pentagon:


Here is the hole in the building - it's been reported by at least a dozen different sources (including conspiracy theory sites) to be a 16 to 20 foot hole. That is really interesting when you take into account the fact that the 757 body is 12 ft 4in wide and 13 ft 6in high. (Here is where I was mistaken in the past, like so very many others I was led astray by the HEIGHT of the aircraft, which is actually the measurement from the wheels-down to the tip of the tail. That measurement is for aircraft hangar clearance, not the SIZE of the aircraft.) The 757 is basically a cylinder that is 13 feet across. It then should not be surprising that it would create something around a thirteen foot hole in the side of the building.

Joe Quinn shows us the flaw in the official argument:

Here is the next twist. The Boeing 757 is not simply a 13ft wide cylinder; if it were, then the damage to the Pentagon might be more plausible. The reality, however, is that a Boeing 757 is a 13ft wide, 155 ft long cylinder with a tail fin that extends 45 ft into the air. Add to that the fact that there are two 6 ton steel engines slung under each wing about 6 feet to each side of the cylinder body. The wings extend out on each side for 50ft + making for a total aircraft width of 125 feet, a total length of 155 ft and a maximum height of 45 ft. It comes as no surprise then that this large commercial aircraft weighs in at over 90 tons fully loaded. On take off from Washington Dulles airport, Flight 77 weighed approximately 82 tons.

The above nonsensical argument would have you believe that the only thing to consider is a "13 ft wide cylinder" that just magically lost everything else, or that everything else just "folded up" and flew inside the building plastered to the side of that 13 ft cylinder. Even if the wings could do that, we are still left with the two 6 ton engines that were NOT dropped off on the lawn, and which, together, are as wide as the cylinder body!



There is more evidence. The more I read on this, and the more evidence I see from both sides, the more I am convinced that the U.S. administration set this up to get Americans to go to war with Iraq. After all, it is not the first time America has done this. And it has always worked in the past. This time, we need to let the administration be accountable for their crimes.

2 comments:

  1. ...and what about witnesses relocated to canada? they got good living against mouth shut.

    ReplyDelete