Did Flight 77 really crash into the Pentagon?

intro • official claim • timeline • undamaged lawn • generator oddity • building damage • inside damage • suspicious debris • crash videos
 alleged hijackers • unusual passengers • pentagon fatalities • conflicting witnesses • debunking sites • theories • performance report • links

Theories of what really happened...

(To link this page, please use the following address:

Last updated:  03/02/2007

So if Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon, then what really happened there?

A couple obvious questions automatically arise if Flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon.  Namely the following:

1. What happened to Flight 77 and it's passengers?
2. What caused the explosion at the Pentagon?

3. What about all the witnesses who saw the plane?

4. What about the phone calls from the plane?
5. What would be the motives to fake a plane crash at the Pentagon?

Now all of these are important questions which even I have asked myself and thought about a lot, however the main question that needs to be answered is did Flight 77 really crash into the Pentagon or not?  If it did not, then obviously Flight 77 had to be flown somewhere else and something else had to have caused the explosion at Pentagon.  Also, it would become pretty clear that elements of the U.S. Government would be behind this conspiracy.  Why the conspirators would do something like this is not as important as if they did in fact do it -- such as if someone was murdered, it really doesn't matter why they were murdered as long as there is sufficient evidence at hand to prove it was a murder and to prove who the murderer was.

Now of course one can only theorize about what really happened at the Pentagon since there is no way to know for sure what exactly happened (unless you are psychic, privy to some information that no one else has or were part of the conspiracy).  So for the sake of curiosity, we will explore some theories as to what might of really happened.



1. What happened to Flight 77 and it's passengers?


Flight 77 was the only hijacked plane that could not be tracked by radar the whole way as it lost radar contact near the Ohio/Kentucky border.  So by this fact, Flight 77 could have gone anywhere since it's transponder was turned off and as some people claim only the military could track it and thereby staying perfectly hidden from all radar of the civil authorities.

Some people might think that it's absurd that a large aircraft such as a Boeing 757 could be flown somewhere else without anybody noticing.  However, this is exactly what happened to a similar Boeing aircraft in Africa...

"A senior U.S. official confirms that the government of Angola has reported a missing Boeing 727 aircraft.
The plane apparently departed from Angola several days ago on a flight to Burkina Faso, in northwestern Africa, but it never made it to its destination, and its whereabouts are unknown, this official said." -CNN (05/30/03)


It's been theorized that Flight 77 (along with some/all of the other hijacked planes on 9/11) was flown via remote control to it's real destination.  That is why some believe the Boeing 757's and 767's were used because they both have the same flight controls.  Although, there were at least two passengers on Flight 77, retired Navy Admiral Wilson Flagg and retired Navy Capt. John Yamnicky, who had extensive flight experience to have possibly flown this plane and both of these individuals also had extensive military backgrounds in the navy no less.  Also, remember that the Captain of Flight 77, Charles Burlingame, was a retired Navy fighter pilot and worked as a liaison in the Pentagon (on anti-terrorism strategies no less) for most of his 17 years as a Naval Reserve officer and who was quoted as being "unabashedly patriotic" and who "embraced military life even after he retired".  A prime suspect in a conspiracy such as this one.





Retired Navy Admiral Wilson Flagg (left), retired Navy Capt John Yamnicky (middle), and Navy Reserve officer Charles Burlingame (right).

Several theories as to what could have happened to Flight 77 are:

1.  It was flown either by a conspirator on the plane or via remote control to a military base (perhaps a secret base) or other remote location.

2.  It was flown via remote control and crashed out at sea.

3.  It was flown via remote control and crashed in some remote spot inland like Flight 93 reportedly was.

If Flight 77 was crashed somewhere with all the passengers on board, then it's obvious everyone perished in the crash along with the plane.  If Flight 77 was flown to a secret location, then the innocent passengers or all of the passengers could have been murdered there.  It's also been theorized that the passengers could have been gassed while the plane was still in the air.

Some theorize that Flight 77 was taken to a remote location where the conspirator passengers, if any, were taken off the plane and then Flight 77 with the innocent passengers was flown via remote control somewhere else and crashed or that the innocent passengers where boarded on another 9/11 hijacked plane who rendezvoused at the same point (such as Flight 93 which had 194 empty seats on it's flight) and then was flown via remote control and crashed it somewhere else (such as the remote spot Flight 93 crashed).

(Be sure to review the passengers who were supposedly on Flight 77 and their interesting backgrounds.)



2. What caused the explosion at the Pentagon?


There have been many theories proposed as to what crashed into the Pentagon or caused the explosion either used alone or in combination.  Note that this website doesn't necessarily agree with all or any of these theories. 

(If you have a website which offers a theory as to what caused the explosion at the Pentagon other than the official story that I have not listed here, please contact me and I'd be happy to post it.)


"PSYOPS, as the military calls it, seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations to pursue national and battlefield objectives." -Washington Post

1.  A missile.  (Possibly painted to look like a American Airlines plane or cloaked to be hidden from site before it hits)

"CALCM (AGM-86C) Specifications - Speed:  About 500 mph" -Boeing

"At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour." -9/11 Commission

This ALCM AGM-86B missile is ironically made by Boeing which is the maker of all the planes that were hijacked on 9/11 (two 757's and two 767's).

See Thierry Meyssan's "Boeing 757 or military craft?" and The 7th Fire's "A Missile, not Flight 77 hit Pentagon" for this theory.

2.  Bombs planted inside.





(Click photos for source.)


See Henrik Melvang's "Bombs Inside WTC" for this theory.

3.  Truck power generator diversion (purposely exploding the generator by flying something into it or by planting bombs in it to create more explosion, distraction, and smoke).

(See also:  The power generator oddity)

"Lawrence Tangel and his crew at Enercon Engineering Inc. in East Peoria got the word just days after the plane slammed into the Pentagon.
A friend working at the Pentagon sent them an e-mail photo of a generator unit engulfed in flames after the hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the west side of the building.
"I asked him, 'That's not my generator is it? And he said, 'Yeah it is, you might as well start now on a new one,'" said Tom Bessler, account executive at Enercon.
The men shake their heads in wonder at the odds of a generating unit they designed hundreds of miles away being lost in the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil.
"It was just a fluke that one was there," Bessler said.
Much of Enercon's equipment is used for military projects,'s the "Pentagon project" as he calls it, that causes Tangel to pause and think.
"It's amazing they hit that part of the building," Tangel said of the area that was being renovated at the Pentagon. "If they had hit any other part of the Pentagon, they would've killed a lot more people and done a lot more damage." -PJStar (09/10/02)

"There were two vehicles burning, along with a construction trailer — we didn't know at the time, but that trailer was the main producer of smoke on the outside of the building — and the foam truck [Myer's helipad crash unit].

He said the foam units got there and concentrated on the area of the construction trailer, which was producing some severe fires and subsequent mini explosions due to highly flammable chemicals in it, then on the actual point of impact from the hijacked aircraft." -MDW (10/04/01)

"By that time I started hearing on my radio that they wanted medical support in the courtyard and they had burn victims. I said, “Do you know what happened?” So somebody mentioned, “Oh, there was a truck with explosives that hit the side of the Pentagon.” - Soldiers to the Rescue/Responding in the Pentagon [HTML]

(Click photo for source.  Click here for pic of an Enercon generator.)

4.  Unmanned military aircraft (UAV) -- (i.e. a Global Hawk possibly painted and or modified to look similar to an American Airlines plane).

"KING: Michael, the Pentagon was kind of lucky in a sense, wasn't it?
KING: The side they hit wasn't that populated and it didn't make a direct, full -- like top of the Pentagon hit, right?
FLOCCO: Correct. Also, the other contributing factors -- fewer engines..." -CNN (9/08/02)

Northrop Grumman's Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV).

See Steve's "Global Hawk hit the Pentagon?" for this theory.

5.  Laser weaponry*.




Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL). 

*Interesting to note that an article mentions the following about the THEL:  "Mobility considerations for the future mobile systems include system mobility and air transportability, including the type of transport aircraft it should fit on (C-130, C-17 or C-5)".  Remember that a C-130 airplane was seen flying over the Pentagon at the time of the crash that took off from Andrews Air Force Base 15 miles from the Pentagon.

C-130 Hercules.

6.  Cloaking technology. (Having an aircraft that is or looks like an American Airlines Boeing 757 fly by the scene for witnesses to see, then cloak it right before something else hits the Pentagon and then the cloaked plane flies over the building.  Also cloaking the real object that did crash into the Pentagon.)


"A scientist at Tokyo University has developed a coat which makes those who wear it appear invisible.
"We have a camera behind the person wearing the coat," Mr Tachi told the BBC.
The image from the camera is then projected onto the coat, so that the wearer appears virtually transparent when seen through a viewfinder.
Beforehand "it looks like a grey coat," Mr Tachi said. "But when we project the image onto it we can see a very clear picture of what is projected."
The real purpose of the new technology is not to make a person appear see-through, however, but to augment reality, Mr Tachi said.
"If we paint a wall, then we can see behind it," Mr Tachi said. "Even if there is no window in the room, we can see the scenery outside."
The technology may also be useful for pilots, to make the floors of their cockpits appear transparent for landing." -BBC (02/18/03)



"Harry Potter isn't the only academic with an invisibility cloak. A professor at the University of Tokyo has created an optical camouflage system that makes anyone wearing a special reflective material seem to disappear. Here's how: a video camera records the real-life scenery behind the subject, transmits that image to a front-mounted projector, which then displays the scene on the reflective material. The system has obvious military applications and could also be used in airplane cockpits to make landings easier for pilots." -TIME (2003)


"MiG Plasma Cloaking Device to Take Off Soon
A NEW Russian MiG fighter that uses a "Star Trek"-style plasma cloaking device to hide from enemy radar and missiles is due to make its first flight any day.
The stealth device weighs under 100kg and can be fitted to any aircraft. It surrounds the plane with a cloud of plasma or electrically charged gas, rendering it invisible to enemy radar, say its makers. " -Telegraph (10/06/99) [Reprinted at: Top Secret Projects]


"Sensor-and-display systems would create illusions of transparency.
Lightweight optoelectronic systems built around advanced image sensors and display panels have been proposed for making selected objects appear nearly transparent and thus effectively invisible. These systems are denoted "adaptive camouflage" because unlike traditional camouflage, they would generate displays that would change in response to changing scenes and lighting conditions." -NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (08/00)


"Active camouflage (or adaptive camouflage) is a group of camouflage technologies which would allow an object (usually military in nature) to blend into its surroundings by use of panels or coatings capable of changing color or luminosity. Active camouflage can be seen as having the potential to become the perfection of the art of camouflaging things from visual detection.

Theoretically, active camouflage should differ from more conventional means of concealment in two important ways. First but less importantly it should replace the appearance of what is being masked with an appearance that is not simply similar to the surroundings (like in conventional camouflage) but with an exact representation of what is behind the masked object. Second and more importantly, active camouflage should also do so in real time. Ideally active camoflage would not only mimic nearby objects but also distant ones, potentially as far as the horizon, creating perfect visual concealment. In principle, the effect should be similar to looking through a pane of glass making that which is hidden perfectly invisible.

This technology is poised to develop at a rapid pace, with the development of organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) and other technologies which allow for images to be projected from oddly-shaped surfaces. With the addition of a camera, while not allowing an object to be made completely invisible, theoretically the object might project enough of the background to fool the ability of the human eye or other optical sensors to detect a specific location."


Now you see it, now you won't: Boeing lifts the veil on stealthy Bird of Prey

"Boeing's Bird of Prey technology demonstrator, unveiled in St Louis on 18 October after spending a decade in the world of 'black' or classified programs, is a very important step in stealth technology, combining a very low radar cross-section (RCS) with a renewed focus on visual and even acoustic signatures. The overall goal, confirmed by officials at the event, is to achieve daylight stealth.

On the record, officials said only that the program's purpose was to test 'specific' and 'breakthrough' stealth technologies, along with the rapid-prototyping techniques developed by the Phantom Works. The pilots who carried out the unusually slow-paced flight test program – 38 missions between late 1996 and 1999, barely more than a sortie per month – were identified, but the engineers who ran the program were not."


"United States Patent: 5,307,162
Cloaking system using optoelectronically controlled camouflage
The Cloaking System is designed to operate in the visible light spectrum, utilizes optoelectronics and/or photonic components to conceal an object within it, and employs analog or digital control feedback resulting in camouflage adaptable to a changing background. The system effectively conceals either a still or moving object from view by the interposing of a shield between an observer and the object and recreating a full color synthetic image of the background on the shield for viewing by observer, thus creating the illusion of transparency of both the object and the Cloaking System. This system consists of four major elements: a sensor; a signal processor; a shield; and a means of interconnecting, supporting, and safely enclosing the aforementioned elements along with the concealed object.
Appl. No.: 977192
Filed: November 16, 1992" -United States Patent and Trademark Office


"United States Patent: 6,333,726
Orthogonal projection concealment apparatus
A pixel array-based orthogonal projection concealment apparatus applicable for continuously matching a mobile platform to its changing background integrates power means, sensing and inputting means for observer and background data, programmed computational means, and pixel array display means in a single apparatus. In its preferred embodiment the concealment projection image is displayed through a liquid crystal array.
Appl. No.: 451721
Filed: December 1, 1999" -United States Patent and Trademark Office


'United States Patent Application: 20,020,090,131

Multi-perspective background simulation cloaking process and apparatus

The invention described herein represents a significant improvement for the concealment of objects and people. Thousands of light receiving segmented pixels and sending segmented pixels are affixed to the surface of the object to be concealed. Each receiving segmented pixel receives colored light from the background of the object. Each receiving segmented pixel has a lens such that the light incident upon it is segmented to form focal points along a focal curve (or plane) according to the light's incident trajectory. In a first embodiment, this incident light is channeled by fiber optics to the side of the object which is opposite to each respective incident light segment. The light which was incident on a first side of the object traveling at a series of respective trajectories is thus redirected and exits on at least one second side of the object according to its original incident trajectory. In a second embodiment, this incident light is segmented according to trajectory, and detected electronically by photo diodes. It is then electronically reproduced on at least one second side of the object by arrayed LEDs. In this manor, incident light is reproduced as exiting light which mimics trajectory, color, and intensity such that an observer can "see through" the object to the background. In both embodiments, this process is repeated many times, in segmented pixel arrays, such that an observer looking at the object from any perspective actually "sees the background" of the object corresponding to the observer's perspective. The object having thus been rendered "invisible" to the observer.

Filed: October 2, 2001" -United States Patent and Trademark Office


Future Stealth

"Finally, stealth aircraft were limited to nighttime flying as they could be spotted at ease during the day. This leads to the subsequent task in future stealth aircraft development…the creation of a plane invisible to the eye. Lockheed’s legendary ‘Skunk Works’ experimental arm is known to be developing new electro-chromic materials. Their aim is to create camouflage panels which can change color or tint when subjected to an electrical charge. Other engineers like Boeing and Northrop, are also working on similar stealth technologies.

One of these systems is the "electrochromic polymer" that is being developed at the University of Florida. These thin sheets cover the aircraft’s skin and sense the hue, color and brightness of the surrounding sky and ground. The image received is then projected onto the aircraft’s opposite side. When charged to a certain voltage, these panels undergo color change. Another similar "skin" is being tested at the top-secret Groom Lake facility at Area 51 in Nevada. It is reputed to be composed of an "electro-magnetically conductive polyaniline-based radar-absorbent composite material." The system also utilizes photo-sensitive receptors all over the plane that scan the surrounding area, subsequently the data is interpreted by an onboard computer which outputs it much like a computer screen making the aircraft virtually invisible to site." - Stealth; Low Observable Technology





- See also:  Optical Camouflage; Project Chameleo; Top Secret Projects; View Zone; 60 Tons of Tank Will Be Invisible

See Morgan Reynolds':  How They Did the Plane Trick at WTC2


7Hologram technology (such as projected over a missile or other aircraft, or maybe projected flying into the Pentagon while bombs inside blew up).


5.6 Airborne Holographic Projector

Brief Description

The holographic projector displays a three-dimensional visual image in a desired location, removed from the display generator. The projector can be used for psychological operations and strategic perception management. It is also useful for optical deception and cloaking, providing a momentary distraction when engaging an unsophisticated adversary.
-Precision projection of 3-D visual images into a selected area
-Supports PSYOP and strategic deception management
-Provides deception and cloaking against optical sensors -Air Force/Wayback Machine



When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing
"Most Americans were introduced to the tricks of the digital age in the movie Forrest Gump, when the character played by Tom Hanks appeared to shake hands with President Kennedy.
For Hollywood, it is special effects. For covert operators in the U.S. military and intelligence agencies, it is a weapon of the future.
"Once you can take any kind of information and reduce it into ones and zeros, you can do some pretty interesting things," says Daniel T. Kuehl, chairman of the Information Operations department of the National Defense University in Washington, the military's school for information warfare.
Digital morphing — voice, video, and photo — has come of age, available for use in psychological operations. PSYOPS, as the military calls it, seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations to pursue national and battlefield objectives.
To some, PSYOPS is a backwater military discipline of leaflet dropping and radio propaganda. To a growing group of information war technologists, it is the nexus of fantasy and reality. Being able to manufacture convincing audio or video, they say, might be the difference in a successful military operation or coup.
Allah on the Holodeck

Pentagon planners started to discuss digital morphing after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Covert operators kicked around the idea of creating a computer-faked videotape of Saddam Hussein crying or showing other such manly weaknesses, or in some sexually compromising situation. The nascent plan was for the tapes to be flooded into Iraq and the Arab world.
The tape war never proceeded, killed, participants say, by bureaucratic fights over jurisdiction, skepticism over the technology, and concerns raised by Arab coalition partners.
But the "strategic" PSYOPS scheming didn't die. What if the U.S. projected a holographic image of Allah floating over Baghdad urging the Iraqi people and Army to rise up against Saddam, a senior Air Force officer asked in 1990?
According to a military physicist given the task of looking into the hologram idea, the feasibility had been established of projecting large, three-dimensional objects that appeared to float in the air.
The Gulf War hologram story might be dismissed were it not the case that has learned that a super secret program was established in 1994 to pursue the very technology for PSYOPS application. The "Holographic Projector" is described in a classified Air Force document as a system to "project information power from space ... for special operations deception missions." -Washington Post (02/01/99)


"Making Three-Dimensional Holograms Visible From All Sides
A technique for projecting holographic images to make both still and moving three-dimensional displays is undergoing development. Unlike older techniques based on stereoscopy to give the appearance of three-dimensionality, the developmental technique would not involve the use of polarizing goggles, goggles equipped with miniature video cameras, or other visual aids. Unlike in holographic display as practiced until now, visibility of the image would not be restricted to a narrow range of directions about a specified line of sight to a holographic projection plate. Instead, the image would be visible from any side or from the top; that is, from any position with a clear line of sight to the projection apparatus. In other words, the display could be viewed as though it were an ordinary three-dimensional object. The technique has obvious potential value for the entertainment industry, and for military uses like displaying battlefield scenes overlaid on three-dimensional terrain maps." -NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (04/02)


"Computer-generated characters are common in movies and video games and on the Internet. But imagine walking into a store and seeing a virtual model hovering in front of you, even welcoming you and selling you the latest makeup or clothing styles.
Cameron has been turning heads at Hugo Boss in New York.
He's a digital model projected into free space. Star Wars fans will recall R2D2 beaming Princess Leah into free space. But Cameron is in a real environment, not on a movie screen.
Cameron's highly realistic three-dimensional presence is completely computer-generated. He's the product of Virtual Characters of New York City.
"We can beam characters into your living room," says Lloyd Nathan, CEO of Virtual Characters.
"We have a series of optics that we've designed that can take a computer-generated image and project it onto a point in space where your eye is trained to focus," Nathan." -CBS (12/23/00)


"Holographic Real Image Targets and Countermeasures
This Phase II program resulted in an entirely new process for producing uniform and virtually defect free large Photoresist Holographic Coatings (PHC) for applications ranging from military decoys and countermeasure systems to large scale 2-D and 3-D commercial displays. This process allows for holographic recording and mass-replication of various surface microstructures, and has been a gateway for Physical Optics Corporation (POC) entry into a large display arena.
This technology can produce unique 2-D and 3-D decoys and countermeasures that operate in the spectral range from UV to near IR.
Military decoys, camouflage systems, cockpit displays, head-mounted displays, advanced countermeasures, invisible lidars, range finders, and military optics." -Navy SBIR/STTR Bulletin Board


- See also: The Nessie Files; Hologrammetrics; Covert Technology; Top Secret Projects/Blue Beam


8 Jetfighter aircraft flown via remote control.





See Dick Eastman's "Elementary 9-11" for this theory.


9.  A modified Douglas A-3 Sky Warrior.


"Two civilian defense contractor employees--told to remain silent--say other workers quietly retro-fitted missile and remote control systems onto A-3 jets at Colorado public airport prior to September 11 when similar A-3 parts much smaller than a Boeing 757 were found at Pentagon
Presidential candidate says scores of retired and active military and intelligence officials would testify before current grand jury probing government involvement in 9/11 attacks" -

A-3 Skywarrior Specs: cruise speed = 520 mph

"At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour." -9/11 Commission

(Photo source:

See also "A-3 Hit Pentagon, Not Boeing 757" by Conspiracy Planet.


10.  A drone Boeing 757.  (Rigged with explosives and flown into the Pentagon via remote control.)



(Photo source:

See Eric Bart's "it was a plane bomb" for this theory.


11.  A rigged Flight 77.  (Rigged with explosives and flown into the Pentagon via remote control.)

See Jean-Pierre Desmoulins' "Pentagon 9/11/01: the fraud!" and Russell Pickering's "Pentagon Research" for this theory.



3. What about all the witnesses who saw the plane?


First of all, ask any investigator and they'll probably tell you that eyewitness accounts are their least favorite types of evidence...


"Criminal investigators know that it often takes many pieces of converging evidence to solve a complex case. Freshly-schooled recruits and veteran investigators alike are trained to search for, detect, collect, and preserve “obvious” physical evidence such as weapons and stolen property, as well as trace physical evidence such as fibres, hairs, fingerprints, blood, and semen... Eyewitness evidence (i.e., the testimony of victims, witnesses...), however, presents some unique problems to investigators, which in turn can lead to especially serious consequences in court.
An analysis of actual cases in the U.S. reveals that the mistaken identification of the wrong person by victims and witnesses to a crime is the single most common error leading to the arrest and conviction of innocent people (U.S. National Institute of Justice, 1996)." -Iowa St Univ

How Reliable Is Eyewitness Testimony?

"...numerous psychological studies have shown that human beings are not very good at identifying people they saw only once for a relatively short period of time. The studies reveal error rates of as high as fifty percent — a frightening statistic given that many convictions may be based largely or solely on such testimony.
These studies show further that the ability to identify a stranger is diminished by stress (and what crime situation is not intensely stressful?), that cross-racial identifications are especially unreliable, and that contrary to what one might think, those witnesses who claim to be "certain" of their identifications are no better at it than everyone else, just more confident." -FindLaw (05/16/01)



"Is seeing really believing? Eyewitness testimony can be a decisive factor in a courtroom, but what a witness sees - or more precisely, remembers seeing - is not always what really happened. 

In "Eyewitness," CBS News 48 Hours examines how faded memories can jam the wheels of justice, convicting the innocent and allowing the guilty to go free."


Fulero: An Eyewitness Expert

"Solomon Fulero knows a lot about eyewitness identification and testimony. Dr. Fulero, who is a practicing lawyer, a practicing psychologist, and the chairman of the Sinclair College psychology department, has written extensively on the subject of witness reliability, and has served as an expert witness on the subject in more than 60 felony trials.
Here's what Dr. Fulero had to say about the eyewitnesses, memory and justice.
On Eyewitness Believability
"I would say that the real problem is that jurors tend to overbelieve a very confident eyewitness identification. They look at the wrong kinds of factors in making a judgment about whether an eyewitness is accurate or not."
"They look at things like whether the witness is confident....The problem is that eyewitnesses are often incorrect. You've got a person viewing somebody for a real short time under very stressful circumstances. Later on, being exposed to perhaps a photo spread or a lineup that's done under conditions that are not perhaps pristine."
"And they make an ID and they're real sure about it, because they're told that this is the suspect, and they get into court and they say, 'that's the guy, I'll never forget his face.'"
The Brain Is Not a VHS Player
"Memory doesn't really work like a video recorder, and so information that people get about an event after it occurs can actually get incorporated into their memory and then they remember it later as though it had already happened at the earlier time."
"In other words, if I question you after the event, I plant a piece of information by a leading question - 'What color was his moustache?' - when the guy didn't have a moustache. Then later on, the person may remember a moustache. That's called post-event information."
On the Subtle Steering of Witnesses
"I've seen [lineups] where the witness described the person who robbed them as someone who was short, you know 5'5", 5'6" in height, kind of thin and so on."
"What the police did was a photo spread where there were six pictures total, counting his picture. But the other five pictures were all full face, so the camera was right close up so it made the person look big, because they took up the whole frame."
"But the defendant - they had the camera back kind of far so that the way the picture looked - he looked short, because he only took up the bottom half of the frame. So if you put the six pictures across, he looked ike the short guy."
The Cost of Incorrect Eyewitness Identification
"The other thing that we know is that from several studies, including the government's own stuff, that a little bit over half of wrongful convictions are eyewitness-identification cases."
"So we guess that there are probably about four thousand wrongful convictions a year that are based on eyewitness testimony - felony convictions. That doesn't count misdemeanors and it doesn't count people who take pleas to lesser charges....The numbers are pretty staggering."
Stress Worsens Memory
"The other thing is that when you're under stress, time seems to slow down. Everything seems to take longer. And so, people, ou ask them, 'Well how long did you have to view the suspect?' And they'll say, 'jeez, one minute, two minutes.' When really it was 10 or 12 seconds."
"So there is the time overestimation thing. The truth is that people who were under stress are actually less accurate not more accurate. Stress causes people to make mistakes, but jurors believe that a person under stress is going to remember it better because it's burned into their memory."
-CBS (1999)


The Penta-Lawn 2000! clearly shows that nothing crashed on the lawn in front of the Pentagon even though many witnesses and news reports claimed it did, so this proves that some of the witness accounts were wrong and if they were wrong about that, what else were they wrong about? 

There are also a number of witnesses that claimed to see something else than a Boeing 757 and some that heard what sounded like a missile.

Also, most witnesses who claimed to see a plane fly towards the Pentagon, didn't actually see it crash into the building and some of those who did claim to see the plane crash into the building, couldn't recognize what type of plane it was. 

Now remember what the eyewitness expert said in the CBS article above...


Fulero: An Eyewitness Expert

"Memory doesn't really work like a video recorder, and so information that people get about an event after it occurs can actually get incorporated into their memory and then they remember it later as though it had already happened at the earlier time."
"In other words, if I question you after the event, I plant a piece of information by a leading question - 'What color was his moustache?' - when the guy didn't have a moustache. Then later on, the person may remember a moustache. That's called post-event information." -CBS (1999)


If the military was going to orchestrate a conspiracy like this, common sense tells us that they would also plan ways to make people think that what they saw was what the military wanted them to see (i.e. an American Airlines Boeing 757).  One way that the military could do this was to have their own witnesses planted near the crash site who would plant seeds in peoples heads nearby or to the media by saying they saw a "Boeing 757" crash there.  Now image the witnesses who saw an image of a plane fly very fast by them and crash into the building, but really couldn't recognize what type of plane it was.  After the immense shock of witnessing the crash, they are probably going to be wondering what type of aircraft it was that they actually saw.  If they hear people around them saying it was a "Boeing 757" that crashed there, they might be subtly steered into thinking that was the plane they actually saw and assumed it was indeed a 757.

These witnesses could have also been influenced by hearing what crashed into the Pentagon from the news afterwards on the TV, radio, internet, etc.

Here is one witness who could have been influenced by the media afterwards.  This witness, who also claims to have seen the 757 crash into the Pentagon, writes an article which goes on and on blasting how ridiculous Thierry Meyssan's claim is that Flight 77 didn't crash into the Pentagon.  But when you read his account closely, he seems to say that he really didn't recognize what he saw crash there...


James S. Robbins, a national-security analyst & NRO contributor

"Well, it did not take long for the ridiculous to find its way into print. In what is billed as the "first independent inquiry" into the events of Sept. 11, French left-wing activist Thierry Meyssan comes to the shocking conclusion that the Pentagon was not hit by American Airlines Flight 77... Meyssan, who had published his views as early as October 8 on his website, the Voltaire Network, (the philosophe must be spinning in his grave having his name appropriated by this imbecile)...

Today is Yom Hashoah, the Day of Remembrance of the Holocaust, and Meyssan's theory fits neatly with those of the Holocaust deniers.

 Where video is lacking, as in the case of Flight 77 (which is more proof of the plot, says Meyssan) it is up to the eyewitnesses to tell their stories.
So here's mine.

I went back to my office around 9:20... I was standing, looking out my large office window, which faces west and from six stories up has a commanding view of the Potomac and the Virginia heights. The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau.  I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, but at the time, I did not immediately comprehend what I was witnessing. There was a silvery flash, an explosion, and a dark, mushroom shaped cloud rose over the building.  I froze, gaping for a second until the sound of the detonation, a sharp pop at that distance, shook me out of it... The adrenaline of the initial shock had worn off a bit, and I was able to take in the enormity of the event.

So, of course, I take it personally when a half-wit like Meyssan comes along saying it did not happen. And he is so evidently at war with reality that one is tempted not to waste time with him. His ideas are obviously foolish, easily disproved, an affront to any reasoning person. It would be easy to ignore him. But that would be a mistake. This is another front in what President Bush called "the war to save civilization itself." The history of the 20th century should show that no idea is so absurd that it cannot take destructive hold and play havoc with societies, even to the point of sanctioning mass murder. Allowing the extremists to go unchallenged only encourages them. People like Lenin, Hitler, Pol Pot and other millennial criminals were just like Meyssan at one point in their careers. If they had been opposed more vigorously sooner, perhaps they never would have attained power. When such ideas are allowed to stand, they take root among the impressionable or those predisposed to think the worst. And especially now that communications technology has made it possible to give global reach to the bizarre and archive it forever, it is essential for men and women of reason resolutely to counter the delusions of the fringe element.
I was there. I saw it. That is my entire rebuttal."


So James Robbins seems to be saying that what he really saw crash there was not a Boeing 757, but a "silvery flash" and that silvery flash could have been the missile or other aircraft that the Military really flew into the Pentagon.  Did he only saw it was a 757 that he saw because that's what he heard on TV?

Evidence of seed planting from the conspirators is really clear from the accounts of people inside the Pentagon who didn't see the crash, but were told it was a plane that crashed by leading conspirator suspects...


"Secretary Clarke: The secretary [Donald Rumsfeld] was in his office, really not that far away from the side of the building that got hit by the plane. He and another person immediately ran down the hallway and went outside and helped some of the people, some of the casualties getting off the stretchers, etc. When he came back in the building about half an hour later, he was the first one that told us he was quite sure it was a plane. Based on the wreckage and based on the thousands and thousands of pieces of metal. He was the one that told us, the staff that was in the room. So he was really the first one who told us that it was most likely a plane." - DoD (09/15/04)


About the witnesses who say the saw an American Airlines Boeing 757, but didn't see it crash into the building.  Some people theorize that the military could have had an actual AA Boeing 757 flying nearby for witnesses to see, but diverted it away as the Pentagon exploded and witnesses nearby had their attention distracted by flinching from the explosion. 

Also, if the military was going to risk committing such a vast conspiracy, it's logical that they would use every secret weapon or technology in their arsenal to try to fool people's perception of what really happened along with every distraction technique available.  See hologram and cloaking technologies above.


4. What about the phone calls from the plane?


There were only two people who allegedly made phone calls from Flight 77, stewardess Renee Ann May supposedly made one call and Barbara Olson supposedly made two calls.  Both were reported to have called from cellphones and not airphones. 

It's important to note the even if they phone calls were real, it doesn't prove the Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.  It only proves that these two individuals were on the plane and made phone calls from it.  They could have made these calls on Flight 77 as it was being flown to some other destination as theorized above.

Regardless, these phone calls seem highly suspicious because there were supposedly 52 other non-hijacker adult passengers on the plane who could have easily made cellphone calls from Flight 77 too or even calls from an airphone if the plane had them.  Renee May allegedly made the first phone call at 9:12 am and Barbara Olson allegedly made hers two calls between 9:16 and 9:26 am.  Flight 77 supposedly crashed at approx. 9:38 am which means that supposedly only one other passenger made calls in the 26 minutes after the first alleged phone call and when Flight 77 supposedly crash.

It has been questioned if these alleged phone calls could have even been technically made because of the lack of reception cellphone get in airplanes when they are at cruising speeds and above a certain altitude.

Barbara Olson's phone calls are the most suspicious because she supposedly called twice and the person who we have to take their word for that she made these two phone calls is her husband, Ted Olson, who is the United States Solicitor General.  Ted was one of the lawyers who successfully represented George W. Bush at the Supreme Court in December 2000, stopping the Florida recounts and guaranteeing Bush the White House victory.  He also has admitted to the Supreme Court that the U.S. government lies!  So, one has to wonder if Ted Olson was part of the conspiracy and simply lied about her calling him.  Also, it was reported that Barbara called Ted collect even though it was reported that she called from a cellphone.  Ted Olson claimed that she said the hijackers used boxcutters, which is the only source that the hijackers used them.

There is very little that is know about Renee May's single phone call.  What's of interest is that she said that Flight 77 was being hijacked buy six individuals and a threatening email was sent to Killtown by her fiancι in which his email address showed him working for the Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Some have theorized that if these phone calls were received by Renee's Mom and Barbara's husband, that they could have been faked using voice morphing technology:


When Seeing and Hearing Isn't Believing

"Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government." So begins a statement being delivered by Gen. Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations Command.

At least the voice sounds amazingly like him.

But it is not Steiner. It is the result of voice "morphing" technology developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy of the tape.

Steiner was hardly the first or last victim to be spoofed by Papcun's team members. To refine their method, they took various high quality recordings of generals and experimented with creating fake statements. One of the most memorable is Colin Powell stating "I am being treated well by my captors."

"They chose to have him say something he would never otherwise have said," chuckled one of Papcun's colleagues.

Most Americans were introduced to the tricks of the digital age in the movie Forrest Gump, when the character played by Tom Hanks appeared to shake hands with President Kennedy.
For Hollywood, it is special effects. For covert operators in the U.S. military and intelligence agencies, it is a weapon of the future.
"Once you can take any kind of information and reduce it into ones and zeros, you can do some pretty interesting things," says Daniel T. Kuehl, chairman of the Information Operations department of the National Defense University in Washington, the military's school for information warfare.

Digital morphing — voice, video, and photo — has come of age, available for use in psychological operations. PSYOPS, as the military calls it, seek to exploit human vulnerabilities in enemy governments, militaries and populations to pursue national and battlefield objectives.
To some, PSYOPS is a backwater military discipline of leaflet dropping and radio propaganda. To a growing group of information war technologists, it is the nexus of fantasy and reality. Being able to manufacture convincing audio or video, they say, might be the difference in a successful military operation or coup.
Voice-morphing? Fake video? Holographic projection? They sound more like Mission Impossible and Star Trek gimmicks than weapons. Yet for each, there are corresponding and growing research efforts as the technologies improve and offensive information warfare expands.
Whereas early voice morphing required cutting and pasting speech to put letters or words together to make a composite, Papcun's software developed at Los Alamos can far more accurately replicate the way one actually speaks. Eliminated are the robotic intonations.
Video and photo manipulation has already raised profound questions of authenticity for the journalistic world. With audio joining the mix, it is not only journalists but also privacy advocates and the conspiracy-minded who will no doubt ponder the worrisome mischief that lurks in the not too distant future.
"We already know that seeing isn't necessarily believing," says Dan Kuehl, "now I guess hearing isn't either." " -Washington Post (02/01/99)


CUED Research Project: Voice Morphing

"Voice Morphing which is also referred to as voice transformation and voice conversion is a technique to modify a source speaker's speech utterance to sound as if it was spoken by a target speaker. There are many applications which may benefit from this sort of technology. For example, a TTS system with voice morphing technology integrated can produce many different voices. In cases where the speaker identity plays a key role, such as dubbing movies and TV-shows, the availability of high quality voice morphing technology will be very valuable allowing the appropriate voice to be generated (maybe in different languages) without the original actors being present.
Current work is focussed on extending the techniques to allow the conversion of an unknown speaker's voice to sound like that of a known target speaker." - Univ. of Cambridge, Dept. of Engineering


5. What would be the motives to fake a plane crash at the Pentagon?


By making the people think that terrorists crashed a plane into their military's defense headquarters, the conspirators could accomplish a couple of things:


1.  Furthering increase anger among it's people and the world to trick them into supported a war against the accused that they might not have supported without being attacked first.


"In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban ιmigrιs, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro." -ABC (05/01/01) (See the actual documents here.)

"President Bush announced the U.S. military has launched attacks on Al Qaeda training camps and military installations of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan." -DoD (10/07/01)

"President George W. Bush told the world Wednesday night that the United States and its allies had launched a campaign to oust Saddam Hussein from Iraq and "free its people."
Bush warned the nation that the conflict "could be longer and more difficult than some predict."
Bush's address marked the second time the president has faced the nation with news that the United States is at war.
The first came in October 2001 as Bush launched the war on terrorism and U.S. troops entered Afghanistan." -CNN (03/20/03)


2.  Furthering increase the fear of it's citizens to make it easier to pass reactionary (fascist) laws and agencies in the guise of helping to "protect" it's citizens, but in reality to help monitor and control them.


"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Establishment. I hereby establish within the Executive Office of the President an Office of Homeland Security (the "Office") to be headed by the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security.  GEORGE W. BUSH, THE WHITE HOUSE, October 8, 2001." -White House (10/08/01)

" gives intelligence operations and criminal operations the chance to operate not on separate tracks, but to share vital information so necessary to disrupt a terrorist attack before it occurs.
Surveillance of communications is another essential tool to pursue and stop terrorists. The existing law was written in the era of rotary telephones. This new law that I sign today will allow surveillance of all communications used by terrorists, including e-mails, the Internet, and cell phones.
It is now my honor to sign into law the USA Patriot Act of 2001." -White House (10/26/01) (Read Patriot Act here.)

3.  Make it easier to pass large increases to the military and intelligence budgets.

"To preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades, the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs.
Moreover, the Pentagon, constrained by limited budgets and pressing current missions, has seen funding for experimentation and transformation crowded out in recent years. Spending on military research and development has been reduced dramatically over the past decade.
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." - "Rebuilding America's Defenses" - PNAC [Pages 50-51] (Sept. 2000)

"The House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly Thursday to approve a 355.1 billion dollar defense budget for fiscal 2003, boosting US military spending...

The House voted 409-14 in favor of a bill that would increase defense spending by 37.5 billion dollars over 2002, lifting the military budget to 355.1 billion dollars.

Though the amounts are classified, spending on intelligence generally was another big winner in the budget sweepstakes.
President George W. Bush had requested the biggest one-year increase in more than two decades for his national foreign intelligence program. The House and Senate negotiators topped that by adding an undisclosed sum to the president's request.

The bill also approves a 17-percent increase in funding for the Defense Advanced Projects Agency, the Pentagon's cutting-edge weapons research arm." -SpaceWar (10/11/02)

"The bill reported by the Defense Subcommittee conferees provides a total of $368.2 billion in new discretionary spending authority for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2004. This amount is $3.8 billion more than was appropriated for fiscal year 2003..." (09/18/03)

"By a unanimous vote, the U.S. Senate on June 23 passed a defense budget for fiscal 2005 worth $447.2 billion.
The bill is 5.7 percent larger than the 2004 defense budget, excluding additional appropriations for Iraq, but falls 1.7 percent short of what President George W. Bush is asking.

The House of Representatives on June 22 passed a similar defense budget for 2005 403-17." (06/27/04)


4.  Destroy important information that the Pentagon doesn't want the public to find out about and kill certain personnel who would know or find out about it.

Rumsfeld: "According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions." -DoD (09/10/01)

"The impact area included both the Navy operations center and the office complex of the National Guard and Army Reserve. It was also the end of the fiscal year and important budget information was in the damaged area." -Arlington County After-Action Report

"Most of those killed in the office, called Resource Services Washington, were civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts. They were at their desks when American Airlines Flight 77 struck." - South Coast Today/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (12/20/01)

5.  Test out their new renovated section of the Pentagon (especially if they shot a missile into it) that they where making more "blast resistant".

"Luck — if it can be called that — had it that the terrorists aimed the Boeing 757 at the only part of the Pentagon that already had been renovated in an 11-year, $1.3 billion project meant to bolster it against attack. That significantly limited the damage and loss of life by slowing the plane as it tore through the building and reducing the explosion's reach." - USA Today (1/01/02)

"Schwartz explained that renovations on the Pentagon began several years earlier and were nearing completion, particularly the section called Wedge 1, when the crash occurred.
He said the plane struck the building almost in the middle of the space where the renovation had been completed. Personnel had not completely reoccupied this area of the building.
"This contributed to the relatively low number of casualties," Schwartz said. "The number could have been far greater had the plane struck another portion of the building not affected by the renovation." - Fort Meade/Army

6.  Commit insurance fraud against their insurers and/or the taxpayers to rebuild and retrofit an entire section of the Pentagon.

"Mitchell: And now Secretary Clarke, four days later as the efforts there continue, describe that for us.
Clarke: Well, as a matter of fact just a little while ago we were talking about, we had a briefing here in the Pentagon briefing room and we announced that we've already signed a contract with the folks who are going to begin to repair the damage that was done and start the repairs." - DoD (09/15/01)



To preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic.


Index • Smoking Guns • Coincidences & Oddities • Flight 77 • Flight 93 • WTC 7 • WTC 6 • Bush at Booker • Warren Buffett • Links

Lone Gunmen • Hijacking Chart • 9/11 Report • NIST WTC gallery • WTC crash videos • Penta-Lawn 2000! • Pentanium Cable Spools!


AIDS  •  Reagan Shooting Conspiracy  •  Aviation Oddities  •  Teter-Lawn!  •  George Bush: Unauthorized Bio


Blogs:  Killtown • Hoodwinked at Shanksville • Flight 93 Photo Fraud


MySpace • People for 9/11 Justice • Mirror 1 •  Mirror 2 •  Contact



Back to Killtown



For expired links, try using the WayBack Machine.