What Didn’t Happen at the Pentagon
What Didn’t Happen at the Pentagon
Jim Fetzer
In “More On What Really Happened at the Pentagon” (30 May 2009),
not only does Dick Eastman not spell out what he takes my position
or that of others to be but it is difficult to figure out what his own take
on what happened at the Pentagon is supposed to be. His essay is
not a model of clarity of exposition. It is very weak in structure and in
reasoning. If I were grading it, I'd mark it a generous "C-". He also
provides a highly biased and inaccurate history of Scholars for 9/11
Truth. For years, a report of what happened involving Steve Jones
and me has been archived on 911scholars.org at “Founder’s Corner".
So much of what he is saying here is mistaken even though he could
have consulted the history that I find his lack of research inexcusable.
If anyone wanted to know my take on the Pentagon, they could find it
in "Thinking about 'Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK", where the
reasons why I believe no 757 hit the Pentagon but a smaller plane,
such as an A-3 Skywarrior, apparently did. My purpose here is not to
defend that hypothesis, however, but to explain how we know what
didn’t happen at the Pentagon and to refute the unfounded criticisms
that Eastman has published here. One of his more bizarre complaints
is that “Fetzer treats all theories as equally good and offered not (sic)
methodological criteria for discrimination among theories”. No one
who has read the first few sections of this paper—which discusses
the nature of theories and their testability employing measures of
likelihood and probability—would make that claim. He does not
appear to have exerted any effort at all to determine my actual views.
This is at least as perverse as my friend Rolf Lindgren’s complaint
that I am a “9/11 activist” rather than a “9/11 researcher and scholar”.
He acknowledges that I have academic qualifications—which include
28 books and around 150 articles and reviews, the majority in peerreviewed
journals—but has his own conception of what is involved in
9/11 research. As a point of clarification, I have explained to him,
with no apparent affect, that my research is devoted both to noncontroversial
aspects of 9/11—see, for example, “Why doubt 9/11?”
—and to the controversial questions, such as how the WTC was
2
destroyed and whether there was video fakery on 9/11, which are not
resolved by prior research. The books he cites are not “the last word”.
MORE:
http://api.ning.com/files/hHUg2B7OtTQhm0l3NhSa*Dg0VYGOxP0SJB...
RESPONSE TO:
9-11 - More On What Really
Happened At The Pentagon
By Dick Eastman
5-30-9
http://www.rense.com/general86/911.htm
Updated link with live hyper-links:
Updated link with live hyper-links:
http://api.ning.com/files/iaqdDRZnDFsaz4PECcJl5FDjE0YgN2Zi5g...
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for James Madison.
I don't adhere to ANY theory but...
Where are all the people??
Mass grave? Camps?
Man, that's some heavy duty doodoo.
It's too bad there are evidently bad feelings out there on
this subject, but that's not altogether a surprise given humans are involved! Be that as it may, no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon...
Jim Fetzer says
"believe no 757 hit the Pentagon but a smaller plane, such as an A-3 Skywarrior, apparently did."
Jim is wrong.
Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) has interviewed dozens and dozens of witnesses, and NO ONE saw an A-3 Skywarrior (nor a missile for that matter).
EVERYONE saw a large commercial airliner. ALL witnesses who were in a position to judge the plane's location in relation to the Navy Annex and Citgo gas station across the street from the Pentagon -- the two last major landmarks on the flight path before the Pentagon -- unanimously, independently, and definitively place the plane on OVER the Navy Annex and slowly BANKING to its right on the NORTH side of the Citgo gas station.
The official story requires the plane to be on the SOUTH side of both of these landmarks at all times flying in a straight line. This is the only way it can hit the light poles and cause the directional damage to the Pentagon outlined in the ASCE Building performance report.
The plane flew over the building timed while the damage was implemented with preplanted explosives, just like at the WTC.
Ironically Jim cites CIT's work in his paper. Apparently he hasn't even bothered to study the research that he is citing.
Please visit http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com and watch their new video "National Security Alert" and you will see exactly what I am talking about. (This is the video that the cab driver's virtual confession clip was taken from, if anyone remembers that.)
my take:*CIT has confirmed
my take:
*CIT has confirmed the plane came in on the north side of the Citco, contradicting the official conspiracy theory.
* It was a big plane, but maybe not as big as a Boeing 757.
* It was a military plane painted up, not FL77.
* Only a military plane can approach the Pentagon.
* The alleged hijackers did not have the skill to fly the plane as alleged.
* A Boeing 757 is not designed to make acrobatic flights as alleged.
* The damage at the Pentagon does not jive with a real plane crash.
* The hole in the C-ring cannot be explained by FL77.
* A bomb went off in Naval Intelligence, killing 42 employees there.
(Naval intelligence was in direct copntact with the cockpits of the jet intercept fighters that were attempting to protect America.)
* The plane may have flown over the Pentagon.
* The exact time of the crash is uncertain, but between about 9:30 and 9:45.
* The plane hit the only spot just reinforced for a plane impact.
* The plane hit the location that resulted in the fewest number of deaths.
* The Pentagon lied about DNA matches of alleged bodies found.
* The light poles were not knocked down by the plane, as it came in from another angle.
* There is no video of the plane impact.
* The Pentagon does not use slow shutter speed surveillance video like at your local tavern.
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for James Madison.
You say...
"CIT has confirmed the plane came in on the north side of the Citco, contradicting the official conspiracy theory."
But then you say...
"The plane may have flown over the Pentagon."
There's no may. If you accept that the plane flew on the north side of the Citgo -- which of course anyone would be a fool not to considering that every single eyewitness on record who was in a position to judge it's flight path in relation to that landmark insists that's where it was) -- you MUST accept that it flew over the building. A plane on the north side flight path cannot hit the building.
Officer Roosevelt Roberts Jr. saw the plane still in flight seconds after the explosion, banking away from the scene at roughly 50 feet altitude.
Please watch NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT.
(I don't mean this combatively at all. I applaud you for seeking the truth and you're right with the majority of what you say.)
My biggest question is where did the plane (FL77) go and where
are the people from that flight. And I completely agree that no 757 hit that building.
"Since 1789 the only government on Earth that has the power to crush the American people`s liberties across the board is the government of the United States"
Robert Higgs
I'd like to know that too
because I want justice for them. Unfortunately we cannot prove what happened to them so it is a rather grim and pointless thing to speculate about. This is why we need to force a real investigation with subpoena power which will uncover the answer to this question.
What we DO have proof for now is that they did NOT die in a plane crash into the Pentagon.
Flight 77 disappeared from radar hundreds of miles from the Pentagon before 9:00. The plane that showed up over DC and Arlington around 9:30 was never positively identified as Flight 77, and indeed the eyewitnesses in the area report that this plane did NOT look like a silver AA jet. Most describe it as being white or off-white. (See "Flight 77": The White Plane in the Supplemental Presentations section of the site I posted above citizeninvestigationteam.com)
And of couse that plane -- even if it was Flight 77, which it wasn't -- did not hit the building but rather flew away (see the video "National Security Alert" linked to above for the proof).
Question: If the plane came
Question:
If the plane came in on the north side of the Citco, why is it then impossible for it to have hit the Pentagon?
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for James Madison.
Click the links
The damage to the Pentagon outlined in the ASCE Building Performance Report is directional, and compatible ONLY with a south side approach from the same trajectory which would have taken it through the light poles. If the plane hit the Pentagon from the north side the damage would have been completely different (i.e. at a different angle).
That's a good point. I am
That's a good point. I am familiar with the directional damage.
A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for James Madison.
OK...
My take....
Fetzer has a compelling argument.
Eastman may as well, although I'll never know because I just could not get past his whining, crying and flaming.
I'll go with Fetzer on this one.
~Live life to its fullest, with an open heart, open arms and most important... an open mind~
bump for further
study after supper.
Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.