Comment

Comment by Central Scrutinizer on October 14, 2010 at 12:09pm

i think it was a drone painted up like an AA plane...probably this one

Comment by fireguy on October 14, 2010 at 11:44am

Why would they waste a perfectly good F-16? It was probably just a Hellfire of Cruise.

Comment by Central Scrutinizer on October 14, 2010 at 11:29am

dang...my reply got cut short...dang the limits....lol
like i was saying before i was rudely cut off...lol....

In the photo below, you see that when you match the image size of the jet's tail fin and that of the tail fin of a Boeing 757 and then overlay the Boeing so that tail fins are aligned you find, as Richard Stanley and Jerry Russell demonstrate below, that the overlaid image of the Boeing fuselage sticks out past the obstruction which completely conceals the image of the actual jet in the original picture. The jet, therefore, has to be shorter and differently proportioned than the Boeing 757. This alone tells us Flight 77 was not a jet.


But wait. We are not finished yet. We had no right to make the Boeing 757 tail fin the same size as the killer jet's tail fin. A Boeing 757 is over twice as long (155 ft.) as the Pentagon is high (71 ft.)! But, as seen by direct inspection, the killer jet in the picture is not even as long as the height of the building, much less twice its height. Thus the matched-tail-size Boeing overlay shown above is scaled far too small for a real Boeing 757. An actual Boeing 757 in the same position as the killer jet in the picture would present a much bigger image. What Stanley and Russel have done is scale down a lion until its tail is the same size as a cat, resulting in a puss-sized lion. Thus even their overlay demonstrating that if the tail fin belonged to a Boeing 757 the plane's fuselage would have had to stick from behind the obstruction, understates the case because the tail fin shown is too small for a Boeing 757 given its location with respect to the Pentagon.

Here is someone's simulation showing roughly what a Boeing 757 would have looked like positioned where the actual killer object was located in the first picture of the security camera series. Clearly this is not what was going on.


But this information is only one piece of a picture that fits in with other pieces of evidence proving the false-flag black op.

Comment by Central Scrutinizer on October 14, 2010 at 10:51am

the same exact little bitty pieces on the PentaCon lawn have been photographed in 2 other mysterious crashes elsewhere in the US couple years before. We all know no plane hit Pentacon, and the 2 in NY were remote controlled, the one in PA was ez, they just blew that one out the air. 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.

The security camera pictures released in March of 2002 and officially released in May of 2006 establish that the aircraft or missile that attacked the Pentagon was no more than half the length of a Boeing 757.

I. 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 fule 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 plane or missile to be at most just half the length of a 757


But as an elephant cannot hide behind a teacup, so a Boeing 757 cannot be behind that box. To convince yourself of this look at the size of a Boeing 757 in relation to the Pentagon in this graphic put out by Purdue University engineers.
The Boeing 757 is 155' long. The Pentagon is 71' high.


But by direct inspection of the photo the plane behind the yellow pass reader box cannot be even as long as the Pentagon is high, i.e., not even half the length of a 757.



In the photo below, you see that when you match the image size of the jet's tail fin and that

Comment by fireguy on October 13, 2010 at 2:56pm

No one, not even a fighter pilot could fly a 757 through the manuvers needed to hit a 5 story building at the lower level. A hellfire or cruise missle however can be flown down your chimney like Santa Clause.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html

Comment by Central Scrutinizer on October 13, 2010 at 7:13am

of course it was a missile.....see how it followed the ground pattern to a precise height?
thats how a laser guided missile works. Its NOT the story because the MSM doesn't want you to see this stuff ;)

Comment by paricia on October 13, 2010 at 4:37am

where did that helicopter footage come from...that I have not seen before and that looked like a missle...why is that not the story?