GOOD LUCK. Pentagon Hunt the Boeing! And test your perceptions! As everyone knows, on 11 September, less than an hour after the attack on the World Trade Centre, an airplane collided with the Pentagon. The Associated Press first reported that a booby-trapped truck had caused the explosion. The Pentagon quickly denied this. The official US government version of events still holds. Here's a little game for you: Take a look at these photographs and try to find evidence to corroborate the official version. It's up to you to Hunt the Boeing! (Go HERE to see the photos and, judge for yourself): http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm The first satellite image shows the section of the building that was hit by the Boeing. In the image below, the second ring of the building is also visible. It is clear that the aircraft only hit the first ring. The four interior rings remain intact. They were only fire-damaged after the initial explosion. Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour* only damaged the outside of the Pentagon? *250 mph when landing, 600 mph in flight. The two photographs in question 2 show the building just after the attack. We may observe that the aircraft only hit the ground floor. The four upper floors collapsed towards 10.10 am. The building is 26 yards high. Can you explain how a Boeing 14.9 yards high, 51.7 yards long, with a wingspan of 41.6 yards and a cockpit 3.8 yards high, could crash into just the ground floor of this building? The photograph above shows the lawn in front of the damaged building. You'll remember that the aircraft only hit the ground floor of the Pentagon's first ring. Can you find debris of a Boeing 757-200 in this photograph? The photograph in question 4 shows a truck pouring sand over the lawn of the Pentagon. Behind it a bulldozer is seen spreading gravel over the turf. Can you explain why the Defence Secretary deemed it necessary to sand over the lawn, which was otherwise undamaged after the attack? SURE. They're hiding something Image : Space Imaging Image : U.S. Department of Defense, Sgt. Rudisill The photographs in Question 5 show representations of a Boeing 757-200 superimposed on the section of the building that was hit. Can you explain what happened to the wings of the aircraft and why they caused no damage? When asked by a journalist: "Is there anything left of the aircraft at all?" "First of all, the question about the aircraft, there are some small pieces of aircraft visible from the interior during this fire-fighting operation I'm talking about, but not large sections. In other words, there's no fuselage sections and that sort of thing." " You know, I'd rather not comment on that. We have a lot of eyewitnesses that can give you better information about what actually happened with the aircraft as it approached. So we don't know. I don't know." When asked by a journalist: "Where is the jet fuel?" "We have what we believe is a puddle right there that the -- what we believe is to be the nose of the aircraft. So -" The quotations in Question 6 correspond to statements made by Arlington County Fire Chief, Ed Plaugher, at a press conference held by Assistant Defence Secretary, Victoria Clarke, on 12 September 2001, at the Pentagon. Can you explain why the County Fire Chief could not tell reporters where the aircraft was? Images : U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Jason Ingersoll 1 et 2 The two photographs in question 7 were taken just after the attack. They show the precise spot on the outer ring where the Boeing struck. Can you find the aircraft's point of impact? (To view the photos in detail, download these enlargements: 1 and 2) Did you find the Boeing? Can you still defend the official version of events? > Well done! Remember to get in touch with master of illusion, David Copperfield. He'll be glad to hear from you! You found the official version lacking in something (like a Boeing, for example): > If you begin to question whether a Boeing really did crash on the Pentagon then, no doubt, you'll be wondering what happened to the aircraft that disappeared. You will probably ask yourself why the US government even told you this story in the first place and you'll start asking yourself lots of other questions besides. Don't worry! This is perfectly normal! Source: www.reseauvoltaire.net - The photographs are official images and available on US army sites. See also the larger collection of photographs in our "Pièces à conviction" gallery - Translation: Mr Sly - NB: Appearing on bookshelves end of March, the investigation by the Chair of the Réseau Voltaire into the September 11 attacks, examining the Bin Laden networks and American secret service involvement. http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm http://www.wiolawapress.com/pentagon.htm "What initially struck me was that if a plane that large would have hit the building... the erupting fireball would be directed more to the right of the picture than it was... meaning that the FORCE of the plane hitting would have caused a huge amount of debris and fire with an equal and opposite FORCE( aka the laws of Kepler-Newton) coming out of the building from the huge Boeing 757... the pix proved that was NOT SO!.... so what caused the FIREBALL? i spent all day in discussion with various posters and blowing up segments of the blast.... which also produced some note worthy findings thanx to Agent Fascado....... however, it wasn't until the evening that i simply decided to blow up the object that i at first thought was debris from the plane or building....and the simplicity of the EVENT was evident to me..... "