What hit the Pentagon? A Boeing 757 loaded with passengers and fuel right? Well perhaps that has now become a serious question of debate. Over the past year I have been collect information on the crash and making an attempt to piece together what actually happened. Believe me it hasn't been easy and I still don't have all the answers. However as time goes on I learn more and get more view points to work with. Much of this speculation can be put to rest perhaps by having the FBI release a video the took from a Gas Station surveillance cameras shortly after the Pentagon was hit.
Here is a link to another article about the Gas Station being there.
Who was on Flight 77? According to the Flight Information there were No Arabs on it. That makes me wonder if Flight 77 actually existed at all? Please don't get me wrong here I mean absolutely no disrespect in bringing forward the names of the people on Flight 77. Here is the list of names that are unverified by myself. It is horrible to have to analyze the Pentagon crash when real people were killed and families must still miss them terribly but, there are a number of problems with the Official Story that do need to be brought to light. What pisses me off is there are no Government agencies anywhere in the world analyzing this information and bringing it forward to the public, nothing other than a few Members of Parliament or Government Whistle Blowers. It is disgusting!
Item one up for discussion are the obvious two pictures I have collect on the CAD models placed in front of the Pentagon as the models crash into the Pentagon.
We are talking about a 269,434 lb plane, hitting the pentagon wall at around 400 MPH.
Now that we have seen the plane lets look at the Pentagon 4 days before September 11th.
In this Image we can see an Ariel path marker in the grass. It is not easily seen on the ground but I am still looking for some ground pictures to back up this satellite picture. However it is a very compelling picture as the Masonic all seeing eye is visible here. The actual bottom part of the eye points at the impact point on the pentagon wall and in the approximate flight path that the object that hit the Pentagon took.
What does this mean, well in Illuminati Symbology terms it is like a calling card I would say. Further if what we are seeing here is real then it gives credibility to the fact that the so called Terrorists were Patsies and this Ariel marking pattern may have been used to mark the impact point from the air where the pilot or object was suppose to hit the Pentagon.
Those who do not know who and what the Illuminati are, I suggest that you download and watch David Icke's Lecture on the Illuminati.
For two years I have been searching for a picture that would confirm the Satalite image and today a nice fellow found one and sent it too me. I find it amazing how blurred out the pics were. You can see the path marker and the outline of the eye as well, if you look closely enough! See part of the problem was that they covered up the grass with dirt and stones so fast that there were so few pictures available of the Grass as shown bellow.
Here is one image of the lawn that shows some of the Ariel Path Marker.
The Approximate Flight Path:
Now this is important as we will see later there were some light poles knocked down and there is some discussion about the credibility aspects of the poles being knocked down. For now just realize that flight path matches the Ariel path marker, the All Seeing Eye embedded on the lawn.
Hollywood-like Fake Smoke Made 9/11
What is interesting about this article is that it shows evidence that the plane blew up just as it impacted the wall, indicating explosives were used to blow the plane. Further down I talk about the light poles which were supposidly knocked down by the jet, but it looks more like explosives were used to blow apart the bases of the light poles to create a path for the plane to travel too. The light poles would have destroyed the wings on any 757 Boeing Aircraft to my estimation.
Here we have an Apartment Building in Amsterdam taken out by a 600,000 lb 747.
Much Larger Hole don't you think?
Picture taken on Sep 15th
I was a bit confused at first as to if the Punchout Hole was created by the object striking the Pentagon Wall or if the Rescue workers did it, in order to gain access to the damaged areas. It would seem that based on the debris and the heat/smoke damage done to the top part of the hole and the debris that it was indeed caused by the object hitting the wall. It is speculated that this was where one of the engines came through or a missile impact.
The same hole but a more further
away picture of it. Much
more debris here now. Rescure workers found no evidence of plane debris in this area.
It seems like the hole is in line with the impact path and does support the fact that a missile may have hit the pentagon. However it would seem that this hole was actually done by a Backhole for the workers to gain access.http://www.patriotresource.com/wtc/federal/0915/DoD.html
Mystery Aircraft in video taped in Pentagon Area when all flights were suppose to be down
Now what we see here is debris being pushed away from the hole. The steel columns near the impact are not pushed in but pushed sideways, like what would happen if a bomb went off, not like what would happen if a plane hit it. You can see a hole big enough for the fuselage possibly on the left, However there hole the claimed hole it made is to the right, which clearly could not possibly fit the fuselage of a 757 through it. It is also important to note that there is no wing damage to the building at all. By all rights if the wings could take out Light Poles, beams shouldn't even be there, wouldn't you think? The smoke covers up the arching hole, so it is difficult to get a clear understanding of what the damage really is. It also makes me wonder if perhaps we are seeing 2 impact points, not one. The damage to right side of the picture looks like it could have been a explosion that occurred in the building, while to the left, that arching aspect looks like it may have been an impact point.
Take a look at this hole and notice that the I beams are gone, they are not there at all! Thus why then are the beems still there in the Pentagon Crash. The WTC was designed to take a hit from a 747 and yet the beams are gone! Thus it does support that a small aircraft or missile hit the Pentagon and not a AA 757.
Click picture for a closer view
Have a look at this business jet that hit a warehouse after skidding off a runway in New Jersey on Feburary 2, 2005. See that the wing has folded back, however that strong cinder block construction still got knocked out by the one wing that hit the building. Interesting that the same was not shown on the Pentagon. More examples of this will probably come in over time. Just note that wings damage walls, but not Pentagon walls, right? Also the plane is intact like, it didn't go poof! Hmmm...
Now take a look at this picture. Notice that the smoke to the right of the impact point is black versus the white smoke coming from the building. What is going on here? Now Crude oil when it burns gives off black smoke, so the question is what is burning over there to the right behind the fence that is giving off black smoke? Now I agree it just could be the lighting in the photo that makes it appear dark, but it is a separate fire. Because the Pentagon has a Helicopter Pad and is by a reason a heliport, it may also store fuel on that side of the pentagon. This may explain the contents being fuel stored behind the fenced area we see in this picture. If it was fuel, then the fireball we see from the security camera, might be actually the fuel exploding and not the plane. It is only a hypothesis at the moment, but just keep it in mind. As more information becomes available I or we can look into this further.
There also appears to be a line in the grass much like what we see in the Satellite photo up top, although it is still unclear that it is the same line, it is a line in the grass pointing at the impact site. Clearly the line in the grass points towards the crash site. It is one of the few pics that does show the line or rather All Seeing Eye.
This picture and the previous one show that something took out the fenced in area to some degree. The fenced area was probably damaged from the impact blast. The height of the stubs on the fence are lower than the spools of wire sitting on the lawn, so that doesn't support a wing impact at all. The spools shouldn't even be in this condition after a 757 hit the building. They would have been crushed. The hole in the pentagon is far to small for the fuselage of the plane to fit in so it is looking more and more like a missile hit than anything else.
I do find it interesting that with a 260,000 lb plane you don't see much of any aircraft debris, if at all. Another obvious question is, What are spools of heavy gauge wire doing on the west lawn of the Pentagon?
The Picture bellow even shows it more clearly that although some of the space has been blown out, the pylons remaining with stood the force of a 269,434 lb plane doing about 400 MPH, ploughing into it?
Now for the aftermath pic. If the plane did hit the Pentagon on an angle, why is it then that the damage done is not consistent with that angle? The Pentagon wall just collapsed straight down onto itself, but there is no angular damage is there?
Examining the Possibility of Planted Evidence (Like that never happens right?)
It was reported that both black boxes were recovered from the Pentagon Crash. Okay then, where is it? Surely a picture of it would be nice as they seem to want to show the public and with all the media around shouldn't be a problem right? Well perhaps they lied... I know hard to believe as it may sound, perhaps they lied. Here is the news article about the recovery of the black box.
Further I find it hard to believe that a black box would survive when there is apparently nothing of the plane that did...
Lets take a walk through to the crash site. Click on the link bellow to load a video taken on September 11th at the Pentagon. Watch for debris. You will see a piece of debris in the video that looks like a piece of landing gear. However the gear itself is not burnt, twisted or damaged in any way. Odd don't you think? The wheel is still inflated and not burnt off. I was shown a picture that alleged wheel in the picture was indeed a welders cart, which holds tanks. It could very well be, but the placement of it and to the casual observer it would register I believe as landing gear wreckage. Intentional or not, that's how I looked at it when I first saw it.
A Smoking Gun:
You can clearly see from this video that there was never a huge gapping hole created in the Pentagon wall. The hole is only one story high, first floor and all the other floors collapsed down on top of it. There is no way a Boeing 757 could ever have gone through there. This leaves us with two questions:
What did hit the pentagon and the other relates to who was involved in 9/11 that created this massive lie? It is easy to point fingers at the administration as they most certainly are suspects in my mind, however they couldn't do it alone. How many others were involved in this cover-up and treason?
Here is the comparison of the welders cart to the landing gear. Again similar to the landing gear in this fuzzy picture. I originally took this pic as being a possibly the part of the landing gear but later found out it was a welders cart. If the picture was higher resolution I may have realized it earlier. So lets continue...
A rim alledgely photographed inside the Pentagon. It does not match any rim found on the Global Hawk, but does resemble a 757 rim fairly closely but not 100%. The Color is not silvery and there is a missing indent that circles the rim near the outer edge that is missing. It may have been torn off. Until I can verify the origin of the picture I can only speculate. It could be a rim off of Flight 93 which was also a 757. Conisdering the nature of doctored pictures and cover up of video evidence, it is difficult to believe what pictures are real and what ones are manufactured. If you recognized this wheel on as being on other aircraft please email me and let me know or even better send me a picture of the aircraft and the related wheel rim.
Close up of the wheel on the Global Hawk. You can clearly see the rear wheels do not match, however the front wheel may, but the picture isn't quite clear enough to see for sure.
Click Picture for a Larger Picture
This is pictuer makes it obvious that the front and rear landing rims do of the Global Hawk do not match the wheel found in the Pentagon Wreckage.
Here we have what I am told is a picture of the rear landing gear of an American Airlines Boeing 757 up close. The problem is that although this is being toughted as being the same wheel as that of one found in the wreckage, there are some problems with it. The color is wrong to begin with, should be silvery in color and there is a missing indent that circles the rim. The angle of the inner structure is also differnt and comparing the wheel found in the wreckage to the front Gear of the Global Hawk it is a possible match with the Global Hawk, just need a better picture to confirm this.
Compare the landing gear with a 757. The wheel in the wreckage doesn't look at all like the one found on the 757 and does look a lot closer to the wheel found on the Global Hawk.
To further this Global Hawk angle lets look at this engine part found in the wreckage
It would seem that Jon Carlson feels that the landing gear photographed in the wreckage matches that of a Boeing 737. I am not sure if I have seen the pictures on a FEMA site or not, but the debris seems consistent with the Pentagon site. Take a look at the article and pictures.For further analysis of the engine parts go here
Pentagon Survivor Claims it was a 737 that hit the Pentagon
Here we have another piece of wreckage. The color seems to be a lighter blue than that used by American Airlines. However the piece is also too small to correspond with the lettering on the 757 paint job according to other analysis work done on this web page. Just scroll down a ways to see it.
Clearly the blue part of the color is wrong and it supports the theory that something made to look like an American Airlines 757 is what actually hit the Pentagon. Also the granularity of the paint is different the AA 757 has a more metallic look to it.
A model of the Painted Missile created by a French Artist. Click the Picture for the video.
No one Keeps a secret in this Country, No one...
Mike Walter - A USA Today Reporter - An apparent Witness to Pentagon Crash?
Downed Light Poles:
The thing I find so interesting about this picture is the glass on the pavement in proximity of the pole. A jet going roughly 400 MPH hitting the pole and the glass from the light lands near where the pole is. The glass should have shattered the instant the plane hit the pole and land in a totally different area. This pole looks like it was just tossed into this position. What is also interesting in all the pole pictures is that the poles seem to have snapped off at the base. The mid section of the pole isn't even bent or dented, which is where the maximum stress would be as the pole bends.
Safe Breakaway Light Poles:
Pole 1 may have been a Breakaway type light pole, but the other 3 poles we have pictures of don't appear to have this kind of technology designed into the them.
Note there is no pic I can find of Pole 2. So for now we will analyze these pictures.
In all the pictures I saw of these down poles I did not see any pictures of the where they poles were ripped out or broken. Another explanation of why the poles were knocked down is that C4 explosives could have been used to take out the poles. If you notice the pictures the clean cuts. It may be difficult to prove, but it is an idea that may have creedance. I need to investigate this area of thought further.
Witnesses claim that the poles were taken down by the wings of the 757. In every case where a pole was hit no aircraft metal or objects seemed to have come off where the poles were.
A piece of Airplane Debris Found by a downed lamp post. Yup it's a real smoking gun right? Well please explaining where on the American Airlines Boeing 757 wing is there paint that is white? There is some white on the nose cone and on the upper sides of the plane. Now the Global Hawk however does have some versions that are painted white. To further this if this is all that was found after hitting 5 poles I am truly amazed! I don't believe that this would be off any plane that hit 5 poles as I discuss bellow.
Considering the sheer strength of the poles I find it hard to imagine that wing wasn't severely damaged. The other thing about the light poles is that the plane was traveling very fast, about 400 MPH. If the plane hit the poles going that speed the poles wouldn't be close the road or on the road, rather they would be thrown a long way from the road, providing they didn't sheer the wings off.
If you examine the area where the poles are lying down you will not see any damage to the grass and the one on the road the glass is
Considering the sheer strength of the poles I find it hard to imagine that wing wasn't severely damaged. The other thing about the light poles is that the plane was traveling very fast, about 400 MPH. If the plane hit the poles going that speed the poles wouldn't be close the road or on the road, rather they would be thrown a long way from the road, providing they didn't sheer the wings off. Hence we are talking about 5 poles here not one!
Here is what a wooden pole does to a car:
Photo: Gian Luiso
To further this example, think about all the radio towers perched up on all the buildings and around town. They all have aircraft warning lights on them right? What would happen to a plane if it hit just one of those towers, not least to say Five!
Bottom line is we have all seen accident pictures of cars crashing into light poles and know the kind of damage that can be done to car. So what about an airplane wing? The Plane would be a fireball before it even hit the pentagon and probably would have crashed into the lawn first as it would be pulled down by hitting the poles and rupturing fuel tanks in the wings. The Light Poles are planted and a detraction. With a little Photoshop Pro work anything can be manufactured wouldn't you say? However if the poles were down I suspect they wouldn't have been brought down by Flight 77.
A Boeing 757 can carry up to 11,489 Gallons of Fuel. Tanks are located in the under-belly and sometimes in the wings. The fire was limited to outer section and roof areas. The section of the Pentagon hit was only 5 days from completion of some very heavy fortified renovations. Heavy steel beams etc put into the building. Interesting that they were only 5 days away from the renovations when they got hit don't you think? It was interesting how all the fuel spewed out the World Trade Center but nothing spewed out of the Pentagon into the other sections. Odd thing, however if you check on the WTC page you will see that a 767 was fitted with some kind of fuel bomb to increase the drama I guess. The Fuel still burns at around 875 degrees and steel melts at 2800 degrees.
One final point about the poles. The so called terrorists had only about 10 hours simulator flight time a little bit of actual Cessna training and probably some played around with a flight simulator on a home computer from what I have heard on documentaries. The It is odd don't you think that the plan would swing around and hit the side of the Pentagon where the aerial marker was in the lawn. Also to steer a plane perfectly through 5 lamp poles just skimming the ground is pretty tough for a real pilot let alone armatures under a great deal of stress and chaos. There is no way in my mind that they could have flown the course they did and the course they did fly makes no logical sense. When you are determined to hit something like the pentagon, you don't aim for a particular wall you come in from above and you dive at it. To hit the pentagon the way they did is way beyond their skills and abilities. It is so much easier to just dive in at the Pentagon then to be slamming into Light Poles etc. With the total lack of airplane wreckage, bodies and luggage etc. it makes no sense that a 757 hit the Pentagon at all. There are a number of other supporting websites and theories that support this argument. Just a comment for now. I'll keep working on it.
Just as a side note, put yourself in the terrorists shoes for a moment. If you had a choice of hitting the Pentagon or the west wing of the White House, which target would you pick? I'll leave it at that.It is still difficult to explain away why the Pentagon wall did not have any marks on it in terms of wing impact. The limestone would surely have been damaged by the wings. The block used to smash the F4 was designed to resist the impact of the F4, but I don't think the Pentagon wall was designed to take a hit by a Boeing 757, even with the upgrades that they were just completing, proof of that is the hole and damage created by the aircraft that hit the Pentagon, the block that stopped the F4 has no hole in it. I'll Leave this one for you to decide.
Video 1 of the F4 hitting the wall
Video 2 of the F4 hitting the wall Just a side note concerning Sandia the company that did these F4 tests. There are accusations that this company does illegeal and unethical work. Here is an article written by J. Orlin Grabbe, How Secure is America's Nuclear Arsenal? This Article should cause you great concern as it shows how the US Nuclear Weapons and Plants have wide open access for private interests not just than Govenment or military to have access to them.
In the second video you can clearly see debris being blown back away from the wall. The F4 was completely shattered but parts were blown off and the wings stayed intact. The other factor is the F4 was just about out of fuel as it hit the wall. A missile or a plane would have additional energy in the fuel and/or payload it carried with it.
Considering that the damage to the building pushes the steel columns to the side and not in is very odd. You think that if a wing could take out a light pole a simple steel column would be Swiss cheese as well? Again it would seem odd that the building would collapse the way it did based on fire alone. Steel melts at 2800 degrees and the fuel from an aircraft burns at around 875 degrees. The other thing that is very odd is that you can see lots and lots of building debris, but I have yet to find one picture that shows any aircraft debris inside the building at all!
What hit the Pentagon? A Global Hawk Drone, Cruise Missile or a drone made to look like a AA 757?
Something slammed into the Pentagon, but it wasn't a 757. Rumsfeld stated it was a Missile that hit the building during a slip of the ol'tounge. Take a look a this analysis on the missile theory...
Here is a video of the Pentagon Collapsing
What I find interesting about the collapse is that it didn't collapse in a free fall like we saw at the World Trade Center Demolition. The other thing I found interesting was that the fire fighters were not hosing it down during this particular period, why? Perhaps they wanted it to collapse? If there was a chance that someone was still alive but hurt in the upper floors wouldn't you want to rescue them?
The gif video shows the plane impacting the Pentagon. The only problem with this video footage is that it has been altered and can not be fully trusted. The other odd thing I find about this is that the explosion flame has two colors. It almost looks like in the first part of the explosion like it was pasted into the picture or it is the real explosion. The first part of the explosion on the Pentagon wall is most likely a high explosive fast burning fuel, meaning explosive device of some sort. There was a report about steel oil drums placed near the construction area, but of course I have no way of proving that.
A Tomahawk Cruise Missile Explosion against a wall.
The fireball is very similar in color although the size is smaller in this video. Here is a picture which shows the fireball after a little more time is allowed to transpire.
For more Pictures, Video and Information on Cruise Missiles Go Here
Take note of the time posted in the white area. Why does it say Sep. 12, 2001, 17:37:19
When we all know the plane hit on the morning of September 11th? Further take note difference in the shadow angle of the building versus the shadow angle of the Light Box casting it's shadow on the ground in the fore view.
Since when do shadows look like this?
Take notice of the white smoke vapour trail behind the plane
Here you can still see the white smoke vapour trail:
My point is that Cruise Missiles make vapour trails like this, but not always. Another explanation could be that an engine was damaged if and when it hit the light poles. Land and sea based cruise missiles have a solid rocket propellant that gives off white smoke like this, the Space Shuttle is a good example of that. So it opens a possibility that perhaps whatever did hit the Pentagon may have had a missile launched or active as hit or the object itself was a missile. The first part of the explosion could be the remaining solid rocket propellant or an actual explosive. The fact that there is an absence of black smoke which comes from a jet fuel fire at this point is more evidence that the plane was not on fire prior to hitting the Pentagon wall. Also take note that vapour trail is nearly on the ground, the plane should be skidding on the ground at this point.
There is some object flying up over the roof but I can't make it out.
Click for larger view
Perhaps this image of a small military aircraft would fit these doctored pictures.
Here is a link that goes into this avenue of thought much deeper, one of which based on the level of damage done to the Pentagon, is the most realistic.
In terms of an A3 and Missle hitting the Pentagon there seems to be a large body of evidence now supporting this. Jon Carlson has done some externsive work on this aspect. I am providing links here to his Analysis.
EXCLUSIVE 9/11 Pentagon A3 Skywarrior Wreckage Photos
A CLOSE LOOK: The 9/11 Pentagon TARGET WALL
CNN, Pentagon Videos Expose 9/11 White Jet & Helicopter
FBI Hides 911 Pentagon Hoax A3 Skywarrior Fuselage, Engine, & 9/11 Truth
Now for some mathematical Analysis of the Flight Speed:
Taken from here: Math Analysis of the flight speed of the object that hit the Pentagon
Date: 3/15/02 9:44:49 AM Pacific Standard Time
I've completed a more accurate and detailed analysis of the photographs. My initial estimate was that the tail of the plane was 465' from the impact point. Upon further examination it appears it could have been closer to 450' from the impact point, based on the following photo analysis.
The Pentagon measures 921.6 feet along each external face, half of this distance, marked on the diagram between the central corridor and the upper-left corner of the Pentagon (cyan) is 460.8' Take this base measurement as a scale and measure the distance from the rear of the plane in the photo (red dot), along the approximate path of the jet (dark-green line) to the impact point. The distance the tail traveled between frames (heavy red line) is approx. 450', which is just short of the originally estimated 465' or 3 lengths of a 757, which is 155'.
So, 450 feet traveled in 1/30th of a second = 13500 feet/sec. = 2.55 miles/sec. = 153.4 miles/min. = 9204.54 mph = 7997 kts. = Mach 12.11
Even if you alter the path of the jet to a direct (90 degree) impact trajectory, (which introduces other unexplainable issues such as intact light-posts and trees, clearing the embankment, not to mention those anomalous hydro spools) you still end up with a final velocity exceeding Mach 6!
These crash photos shown here clearly have been doctored and don't even match the physics of what happened. So where is the real video? It leaves many questions. I would think that some missiles could go Mach 6 in speed, so is this a missile? It is a real puzzle. It is a puzzle only if you take account that what you are indeed seeing is a missile not a plane. The Plane could not possibly fit behind the box presented in the Photo when it is scaled out and the vapour trail would not be white smoke. The vapour trail would be several yards back from the engine, not on the plane as the ice crystals need to form. However the ground temperatures that morning were quite warm as it was summer. Nice Clear sky yet no one saw this, no video captured this?
The Sound Whoosh:
"'I was right underneath the plane,' said Kirk Milburn, a construction supervisor for Atlantis Co., who was on the Arlington National Cemetery exit of Interstate 395 when he said he saw the plane heading for the Pentagon. I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles, said Milburn. 'It was like a WHOOSH WHOOSH then there was fire and smoke, then I heard a second explosion.'" (Washington Post)
At least this statement is consistent with what we might expect if the plane hit the light poles. As I was saying earlier if the plane did hit the light poles it would do serious damage to the wing sections affected and would be a fire for sure. Some 757 have tanks in their wings and some don't. I suspect that this plane didn't have tanks or it would have been a fireball for sure. But the double whoosh sound is interesting in that it corresponds to some kind of an explosion perhaps before the plane hit the Pentagon. The witness statement above states that he didn't see the plane hit the light poles, just that there was debris flying. I'll keep digging. Anyway have a listen to this.
My point here is that a whoosh sound is made by explosions not by a plane engine. I guess it depends on the Whoosh type sound, perhaps it might also be a missile launching as well. Dick Eastman seems to think that the plane flew over the Pentagon and landed at a nearby base. Perhaps, it fired off two missiles at the Pentagon and flew over, but if it was being covered by a holographic projection from the C130 that was near by, then who really knows. It is all speculation right now. The other aspect to all this is that the Pentagon Defence System may have shot missiles at the incoming plane, which very likely was a Global Hawk painted to look like an AA 757. The other aspect was that the plane would have been flying mere few feet above the ground and few people saw it before it hit. Global Hawks make little noise and from what I understand it would have been descending from an altitude of about 60,000 feet.
A side note. The wire spools are telecomunication wire that contractors were using to install new cable into Pentagon. Mostly undamaged when comapared against the wall of the Pentaon. Originally I thought they were steel wire cable used to reinforce the building construction but thanks to a reader I was corrected on ths. Rob... Keep the info coming we are getting closer to the truth every day.
The only thing we really know is that there is no way a 757 can clip of 5 lamp poles with crashing and exploding into flames and there is no way that it could fit into the hole it made without some massive amounts of wreckage. There are lots of parts on the aircraft that don't burn at 875 degrees, where are they? Just add this to the puzzle for now.
Would it be possible to mask a 757 over-top of a missile? Well yes it is possible. Have a look at these links.
When Seeing isn't Believing
Here is one Witness Statement:
"A huge jet. Then it was gone. Buildings don't eat planes. That plane, it just vanished. There should have been parts on the ground. It should have rained parts on my car. The airplane didn't crash. Where are the parts? There was a plane. It didn't go over the building. It went into the building. I want them to find it whole, wedged between floors or something. I want to make it make sense. I want to know why there's this gap in my memory, this gap that makes it seem as though the plane simply became invisible and banked up at the very last minute"
Wreckage inside the Pentagon:
Now here we have a possible piece of wreckage. Although it looks like it may be off the airplane, I have a few questions about it. It can't be an external part of Flight 77 because there is no painted parts that are white in color on American Airlines color scheme. The second thing is the flag. When was the last time you ever saw a flag painted on a Commercial Jet interior like this? However one thing that we all know is that Military Aircraft have flags painted on them and possibly panted on the inside as well! Another explanation is that it might be an internal door or wall in the pentagon itself. Perhaps a lab or something like that. I thought I bring it forward in case someone recognizes it.
Take note of the internal architecture here. Not much for steel beams and further there is no aircraft debris.
Walking back in time:
PENTAGON WAS PREPARING FOR CRASH SCENARIO IN NOVEMBER 2000
Amalgam Virgo Exercise + Co.
Bush to Arrive at the Pentagon 2 Hours After the Crash:
A Fire Truck was taken out and placed near the helipad just prior to the crash into the Pentagon. Reason was that 2 hours after the crash George W. Bush was suppose to arrive there on a scheduled stop.
Question: When does anyone put a fire truck beside a helipad 2 hours before anyone is suppose to be there?
Photo by Jon Culberson
To Perhaps help answer this question, here is an unconfirmed witness report by Wallace.
"As I said, we were expecting President Bush about Noon, which would be a Code One Stand-By. In such situations, one of the problems I see at the heliport is that there are too many people there. Plus, there are many vehicles, including Secret Service, Pentagon SWAT, U.S. Park Police, D.C. Cops on motorcycles, and the two Presidential Limousines. And, some of these vehicles even park in front of the fire station apparatus door, blocking the fire truck from exiting the building! That is why I wanted the crash truck out of the station and parked in a good location, for easy access to the heliport in case of an emergency."
This unconfirmed statement from Alan Wallace now states that the President was to arrive at 12:00 PM and the first flight in to the heliport wasn't until 10:00 AM and the Crash Truck a brand new Titan 3000, Number 161 or 61 was parked by the Helipad.
There is some confusion about the 161 versus a 61 fire engine. It is an irrelivant detail, but this link explains that 161 is a type of truck not an fire engine number. http://www.freewebs.com/engine61/apparatus.htm
Remote Control System Patent for a Ground Controler to fly any Aircraft:
For those who wonder if a 757 can be flown by remote control or not, take a look at this Patent from the US Patent Office:
Control system for air vehicle and corresponding method
Also you might like to review what technology was available 20 years ago for flying planes remotely:Popular Mechanics Missed NASA 911-Type Airliner Crash 20 Years Ago
Theory on What Happened to the bodies of the Passengers and Crew:
This is only speculation and I do not want to upset the families or friends of the victims of Flight 77 by speculating on what may have happened to them if ineed it was not Flight 77. It is anyone's guess as to what that scenario could be and I don't want to comment on it, unless there is some evidence that comes forward to confirm or deny the Official Story.
Pentagon Building Defence Analysis: The Pentagon is one of the most heavily guarded and watched site on the Planet, with some exceptions to perhaps Area 51 and NORAD. With Radar systems capable of tracking objects right down to sea level, Friend or Foe System and Satellite systems it amazes me that flight that a rogue Boeing 757 could hit the Pentagon with out warning after 2 planes already had hit the World Trade Center. The Pentagon is equipped with the latest State of the Art technology in the War Room. Stand down orders had to be issued in order to keep the military from intercepting these planes and you all know who can give that order...
Some background facts:
Many people were evacuated from this section of the Pentagon prior to the crash, I have two sources of information on this now. If the 757 did go into the Pentagon and disintegrated, you still would be left with about 100,000 tonnes of carbonized aluminium, resembling sand. There is nothing there. The fact that the plane was flying inches above the ground without causing damage to the lawn is amazing. It is near impossible to fly a commercial jet inches off the ground into the side of a building. You need to go slow with the flaps down etc. Try flying a flight simulator like that and see what happens. The supposed hijackers had minimal training on these jets and simply wouldn't have the skill. The fact that no Arabs were listed on the manifest is also interesting. Victims Families are being told to shut up and take a small compensation package. NORAD was made to stand down for nearly an hour, yet we have reports of a C130 doing manoeuvres near the Pentagon and a probable Jet fighter that went vertical and out of site just after the crash. The Pentagon is the most highly survailed and protected building on the planet and all they can do is come up with four doctored snap shots of what happened?