911 Major Problem with Pentagon Investigations.

sorry,i copied a different link than the witness statement.
the original is here....

 http://tinyurl.com/43pb3
"He had just left the project trailer (that exploded) when he heard a loud noise."

I am curious as to why it is different?

The second plane looked similar to a C- 130 transport plane, [Keith Wheelhouse] said. He believes it flew directly above the American Airlines jet, as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar - while at the same time - guiding the jet toward the Pentagon.
Daily Press, September 14, 2001

77 & 93 - & Steve

Maybe you'll see something here I missed.

I've always wanted a decent version of the image on the left - thanks.

FWIW - my take on the convergent evidence is that a 757 -- flight 77 -- packed with explosives in the cargo hold (because dead people don't need their luggage)-- was flown into the Pentagon by remote control....

....perhaps by smoking gunman Lt. Col Steve O'Brien and his crew.

I haven't found any evidence yet, including the above photos, that appears to be incompatible with this theory.

"It seems impossible that a plane could plow through that trailor and still create a large hole in the bottom floor of the Pentagon."

Are you kidding? Take something going around 400 mph in your right hand that punctured the Pentagon's three rings of steel-reinforced concrete. Take a flimsy Hurricane-prone trailer in the other, and attempt to defend the Pentagon with it. Combine.

Whatever it was looks like it flew right across the top of that without even flinching.

I honestly think that time can be spent on other intersting features of the Pentagon crime scene--like that generator fire, exactly when and where did Rummy come out of his office to look at the fire and then disappear for 45 minutes [as photographed, despite his 'alibi'], or the odd car/minivan that seemed to have exploded by itself AFTER the hit according to photographs, the potential of planted evidence to make it "look good," why the hell they covered over the green Pentagon lawn with several feet of gravel and dirt, why a "line walk" of about 20 FBI people were picking up everything in the Penta-lawn minutes afterwards (as shown live from a helicopter--you can see it in Eric Hufschmid's DVD.), why they were on the scene ready to confiscate the gas station film at the Pentagon--and then they lied they were "without any video of the hit" (until of course they released those five frames ANONYMOUSLY with what hit edited out, showing something unlike a jet fuel fire--oops!), why they let the Pentagon rage for days and days, who are those two guys in white shirts happily heaving around scrap metal like they are either clearing it up with their bare hands or setting a stage for a photo op later with "exciting scrap" everywhere, why they kept rescue helicopters from actually resucing people (no witnesses wanted alive), why people smelled cordite explosives, why a C-130 was on the scene--and why the ANG declared the thing a "classified" issue when asked by the media about it originally, why someone else said another helicopter was moving around the Pentagon immediately beforehand, etc.

"my take on the convergent evidence is that a 757 -- flight 77 -- packed with explosives in the cargo hold (because dead people don't need their luggage)-- was flown into the Pentagon by remote control....

....perhaps by smoking gunman Lt. Col Steve O'Brien and his crew.

I haven't found any evidence yet, including the above photos, that appears to be incompatible with this theory."


--Cause you got your eyes closed! Hole much smaller. Radiation issue. Whatever it was was pulverized and disappears into the hole--through at least 6 steel reinforced walls, and still solid enough to puncture through the. 757 nosecone is without that kind of stability. No one ever found any 757 pieces. Do we have to rehash this day in and out? Or that small size of the hole on the end of the trip.

definitely C130, sure, plenty of witnesses to that. Though they were guiding something else into the Pentagon, something like a UAV--an armed one--that seemed to have fired a missile as it struck causing a different kind of explosion than simply jet fuel.

To...
stand up 9-11 comic
I agree with your comments about the other stuff being important, i just think this has been overlooked.
part of the problem with the trailer is that the witnesses said they saw the plane hit the pentagon, not a trailer.
I should have made that point clearer. If you were really close enough to see the plane hit, you would see WHAT it hit, which was a large trailer.
I emailed Riskus, one of the wintesses and after i asked him in detail about this, he said he didnt know anything about a trailer... very short reply.
updated....
 http://analysis.batcave.net/trailer.html

about the wandering cars in the yard, i have a page here...
 http://car.batcave.net/

the cab that was struck by the light pole is very interesting as well.
supposedly the pole stuck into the cab, the driver pulled it out after coming to a stop.
He said the pole hit his cab 100 yards north of the area the pole was originally.
but the glass breakage pattern is right where the pole was to begin with?
The cab was photographed in 2 different locations. they moved the crime scene for some reason?
(trajectory / path angle?)
 http://pentagoncab.multiservers.com/index.html
 http://web.archive.org/web/20040206153136/cab.batcave.net/pent-pole.html

Lee Evey manager of the pentagon renovation project said that there was a trailer there.
Just in case i didt make it clear, its not the idea that the trailer would have stopped the plane, its the idea that

1) there was a large piece of it left over, and in the way so to speak of a large craft doing damage to the bottom floor at ground level, with a 10ft tall it of debris in its wake.

2) the witnesses.
The more i think about this, the more it tells me there were no witnesses that could have seen the plane hit the pentagon, if there was a 30ft long and 15ft tall trailer it demolished, would not the witness in fact say...
"i saw the plane hit a triler in front of the pentagon"
instead of i saw the plane hit the building.
The photos of the traier are white. a white elephant, if you will,
in the way, that only one person even mentioned.

IMHO this brings all witness testimony into question that said they saw the plane hit the pentagon.
In my opinion, many were in question before, like the guy who saw it hit a helicoter fisrt, or the guy who saw it cartwheel, leaving no marks on the ground.

Brad

"The plane approached the Pentagon about six feet off the ground, clipping a
light pole, a car antenna, a construction trailer and an emergency generator
before slicing into the building, said Lee Evey, the manager of the
Pentagon's ongoing billion-dollar renovation."
 http://www.detnews.com/2001/nation/0110/06/nation-312016.htm ( By Jennifer Loven / Associated Press Writer )

 http://investigate911.bravehost.com/trailer.html

why is it some pen pusher never wants to release the trueth can it be the yank,s have a right bit of egg on their face,s that for all the so called security in place at this sensetive address they were caught with their pants down!!!! once again feel real sorry for the realatives ,how is it the admin lies so it is so obvious that it was not a 747 they try to treat every one like fool,s again and again

Common people you are in denial! It was a cruise missle period! The helicopters that were witnessed flying around before the impact were making sure the missle hit its intended target! Remember Rumsfield was at the opposite end! And he predicted the pentagon would be next and it was, what a coincidence! If you still believe it was a plane you are wacked! No engines? a 4 ton engine does not disinegrate! Where are the engines? Why were their unbroken windows on the second floor? I mean the building did not even colapse until 45 minutes after the impact! The bottom lilne is no debri, no airplane period. dont even try to explain why there is no plane parts, its because it was not a plane.
Lets get real. FDA