The World Trade Center Demolition
and the So-Called War on Terrorism
3.  The Official Story: The Pentagon

According to the official story, AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757, took off from Dulles Airport in northern Virginia at 8:10 a.m bound for Los Angeles, with between 50 and 58 passengers. It flew west for about 45 minutes, making a curious detour to the north, west and south, before turning around and flying for another 45 minutes back to Washington. Why hijackers would allow a jet which they planned to crash into a target in Washington to fly for 45 minutes away from its target is not explained. Why did they not commandeer the plane ten minutes after takeoff when the plane was only ten minutes flying time from its intended target? The official story ignores this question, as it does all other questions.

As reported by the New York Times (International Herald Tribune, 2001-10-17, p.8), as AA 77 approached the Pentagon it executed a 270-degree 7,000-foot descent over Washington while flying at 500 mph.  It approached the Pentagon on a horizontal trajectory so low that it clipped the power lines across the street then (so the story goes) it smashed into an outer wall of the Pentagon.

We were told (and, of course, expected to believe without question) that this maneuver was executed by an Arab pilot, Hani Hanjour, who in August 2001 was judged by the chief flight instructor at Bowie's Maryland Freeway Airport as not having the piloting skills required to fly a Cessna 172 solo.  (Is there something fishy here?)

In contrast to the attention given to the collapse of the Twin Towers, the attack on the Pentagon received little attention until in February 2002 a French website (by Thierry Meyssan) appeared which reproduced images obtained from U.S. Army websites:

Hunt the Boeing!

These images cast doubt upon the official story that the Pentagon was hit by a Boeing 757 jetliner. For example, here is a picture of the Pentagon crash site taken about two hours after the impact, with the fire still burning. Can you see any remains of the approximately 100 tons of metal (including engines, wings and tail section) which makes up a Boeing 757?

Spot the Boeing 757 in this picture

And here's a nice one (at right, click on it for an enlargement). What happened to the wings of the Boeing? Presumably the wings, with their engines attached, would have sheared off when they hit the sections of the building (to the left and right of the hole in the side of the building) which are obviously still standing, with many wing and tail fragments ending up on the lawn in front of the Pentagon. See any remnants of wings in the picture above (or in any of the other pictures on the French website)? How about an engine or two?

No? Curious ...  Could it be that in fact no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon?

Note that the French website does not say that no aircraft hit the Pentagon. It could be taken to suggest that the damage was caused by a truck bomb, or that no aircraft struck the Pentagon, but a careful inspection will reveal that the website suggests only that the damage was not caused by a Boeing 757. What, then, caused the damage?

The picture below on the left is the impact site before the outer wall "collapsed" (click on it for the full picture). The picture on the right is a close-up of the impact site.


See the huge hole produced when the Boeing 757 (allegedly) smashed through and disappeared inside the building (leaving nothing of itself for investigators to find)?  ...  No?  ... Could it be that it was actually a missile which struck the Pentagon? A missile which penetrated the outer wall leaving only a small hole — which disappeared when the wall (conveniently) "collapsed" a couple of hours later (I guess they figured they couldn't just leave it as it was since hardly anyone would believe that a Boeing 757 jet could slip through a hole just 2 or 3 meters wide).

The photographic evidence suggests that it was indeed a missile which struck the Pentagon and which penetrated several rings, punching a missile-sized hole in each wall it went through, as the picture at right shows. Here is a close-up of the exit hole.

And another question:  AA Flight 77 had between 56 and 64 passengers and crew members aboard when it left Dulles airport. If it was flown into the Pentagon then what happened to the bodies? And the passengers' luggage? No trace of either has ever turned up. In every aircraft crash with people on board there are always corpses (however badly burned). Were any remains of passengers on AA Flight 77 ever returned to their relatives for burial?  No? Could that be because the passengers on AA Flight 77 did not die in the attack on the Pentagon? Did they, perhaps, die somewhere else, such as Pennsylvania?

The U.S. government claimed that the passengers were identified by DNA analysis. A hundred tons of metal was incinerated completely but the DNA of the alleged passengers was, like Mohammed Atta's passport at the WTC, miraculously preserved? Do they think we are complete idiots?

(For those who have a bit of a problem understanding what is being said here, here it is in its simplest form: If there were humans aboard whatever hit the Pentagon then their corpses would be found among the wreckage. No such corpses were found. Therefore there were no humans aboard. Therefore the official story is false.)

That the object which struck the Pentagon was not a Boeing 757 was conclusively demonstrated in some research by Gerard Holmgren (published October 2002) , who pointed out that each gallon of fuel aboard the plane when it hit the Pentagon would have had to incinerate about 18.5 lbs of aluminium in the plane — which is clearly impossible.

Holmgren concluded: "I can see only one reason to cling to the belief that [a Boeing 757] ... hit the Pentagon. The unshakable faith that the [U.S.] government would not — could not — lie to us. A faith so strong that the laws of physics and motion suspend themselves in order to maintain it."

Another intelligent examination of the question of whether a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon is available at Martin Doutré's Pentagon 9/11. This site has some excellent photos of the crash site (some are available on this site here). The author points out (among other anomalies) that:

In October 2003 yet another website appeared with an analysis of the Pentagon crash, this one by Jim Hoffman, The Pentagon Attack Frame-Up & Cover-Up (also here), whose conclusion is: Whatever Struck the Pentagon Was Not a 757.

In August 2004 Leonard Spencer published on this website his examination of the Pentagon evidence (The Attack on The Pentagon), concluding that what struck the Pentagon was not a Boeing 757 but perhaps was a missile surrounded by a superstructure giving the appearance of a large commercial airliner.

Sometime in 2004 there appeared a thorough analysis of the available evidence by Dave McGowan: September 11, 2001 Revisited: Act II (also here). Like everyone else who has honestly examined the available evidence he concludes that the offical story that a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon is entirely unbelievable.

Finally, here's a simulation of what a Boeing 757 would look like as it was being flown into the Pentagon:

A Boeing 757 weighs about 80 tons and this one was supposed to be flying at over 300 mph. Yet the damage to the facade of the Pentagon is minimal:

The evidence is overwhelming that whatever caused this damage to the Pentagon was not a Boeing 757. The official story is a lie.

Added 2012-03-21: Mark H. Gaffney: Black 9/11: A Walk on the Dark Side

[On] September 10, 2001, on the eve of the worst terrorist attack in US history ... Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld acknowledged during a press conference that the Department of Defense (DoD) could not account for $2.3 trillion of the massive Pentagon budget, a number so large as to be incomprehensible. Any remaining hope that the US military might still get its budgetary house in order were dashed at 9:38 am the next morning, when the west wing of the Pentagon exploded in flames and smoke, the target of a terrorist strike. Incredibly, the exact point of impact was the DoD’s accounting offices on the first floor. The surgical destruction of its records and staff, nearly all of whom died in the attack, raises important questions about who benefited from 9/11. Given the Pentagon’s vast size, the statistical odds against this being a coincidence prompted skeptics of the official story to read a dark design into the attack. As Deep Throat said: "Follow the money." Was the Pentagon accounting office destroyed because diabolical individuals planned it that way? No question, the west wing presented a much more challenging target than the east wing.

A copy of the Serendipity website is available on flash drive. Details here.

Previous section Contents Next section
The CIA Serendipity home page