Click On This Text To View Pentagon Impact Fraud Exposed



 The Pentagon Infestation

To pull off 9/11 it was imperative that total control of
The Department of Defense (DOD) be established. The
offices of the DOD are located in the giant office
complex in Washington, D.C. known as the Pentagon
that was constructed during preparations for, and just
prior to, WWII.

To enable four drone airliners to
successfully reach their targets, the unfathomably
expensive United States Air Force had to be rendered
impotently inept. If you control the Department of
Defense you control the U.S. Air Force.
Not a single jetliner, not to mention three, would have reached their
targets without the USAF being castrated on 9/11. Throw
in the Dick Cheney shenanigans emanating from the
White House on 9/11/2001 and the United States Air
Force was indeed blinded, castrated and laughably
impotent at a critical morning in America’s history.

When Rabbi Dov Zakheim, as a member of the Project
for a New American Century, wrote about the need for a
“new Pearl Harbor,” he definitely got exactly what he needed.
Enter the “Wrecking Crew” who were all George W.
Bush appointees including:

PAUL WOLFOWITZ arrived on January 20, 2001 and
became the #2 ranked man at the Pentagon.

RABBI DOV ZAKHEIM arrived on April 4, 2001 as
Pentagon Comptroller.

DOUGLS FEITH arrived in July of 2001 and became
the #3 ranked man at the Pentagon.

RICHARD PERLE also arrived in 2001 in time for
9/11. Doug Feith appointed Perle as the chairman of the
Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee mainly to
distract and misdirect the already distracted and
misdirected Donald Rumsfeld who was the George W.
BUSH appointed Department of Defense Chairman
installed on January 20, 2001.

Zionist Jew ELLIOT ABRAMS was another Rumsfeld
distracter/handler who was appointed to the National
Security Council (NSC) on June 25, 2001.

Wolfowitz, Feith, Zakheim, Perle and Abrams are all
Jewish Zionists who are rabidly loyal to Israel first and
foremost. None have any military experience whatsoever.

...yet they assumed
absolute control of our military.
Donald Rumsfeld had prior military experience but from
1977 until his George W. Bush appointment to run the
DOD he was busy making big bucks at pharmaceutical
companies, Searle and Gilead, selling the health hazard
known as NutraSweet and the unnecessary, to the point of being a fraud,
bird flu antiviral drug, Tamiflu.

Remember... Wolfowitz, Feith and Perle had all been
investigated by the FBI years prior to 9/11for passing
classified documents to the Israelis.

Do not let the timing of the arrival of all these characters
escape your notice. All of these traitors arrived just
months before 9/11 with plenty of time to do extensive
damage to our military and our country. Now that those
introductions have been made, let’s get to know these
traitors starting with:

Paul Wolfowitz
Paul Wolfowitz was born in Brooklyn, New York in
1943. He grew up in Ithaca, N.Y. where his father, a
Polish Jewish immigrant, was a professor of statistical
theory at Cornell University.
Supposedly most of his
father’s family perished in the WWII Holocaust. Family
history rather than the jungles of Viet Nam or the
corridors of Congress forged Paul’s worldviews.

Wolfowitz did his graduate work at the University of
Chicago and completed his PhD dissertation, “Nuclear
Proliferation in the Middle East” under Albert Wohlsetter
who was a Senior Policy Analyst at the RAND
Corporation. Wohlsetter was much of the inspiration for
the Hollywood movie "Dr. Strangelove."

From ’70 to ‘72 Wolfowitz taught in the Political Science
Department at Yale where one of his students was Jewish
Zionist Lewis “Scooter” Libby (Liebowitz).
In ’72 Wolfowitz was
part of Nixon’s U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency (ACDA) team (but he really did not believe in
arms control or disarmament).
As Director of the CIA,
George H.W. Bush formed a committee of anti-
communist experts headed by Jewish Zionist Richard
Pipes to assess raw data. Based on the recommendation
of Richard Perle, Pipes picked Wolfowitz for the
committee that was later known as TEAM-B (that
included Douglas Feith).

It was later determined that all the intelligence gathered
by TEAM-B was greatly exaggerated, and its members
were actually war agitators rather than professional
intelligence experts.

In ’77, during the Carter Administration, Wolfowitz
moved to the Pentagon and became the U.S. Assistant
Deputy Secretary of Defense for Regional Programs for
the DOD. He then returned to academics in 1980 and
became a visiting professor at the Paul H. Nitze School of
Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University...
It seems to me that most people in government service
can’t hold a steady job!

There are plenty of convoluted stories, accusations,
investigations, and calls for grand jury actions against
Wolfowitz for spying on the U.S. for Israel, but somehow
no formal charges were ever brought against this traitor.

And what is friggin’ incredible is that Bush appointed
this traitorous spy to the #2 position at the Pentagon
during the months just prior to 9/11... Actually it is not
incredible at all that Bush appointed Wolfowitz as the
real boss at the Pentagon prior to 9/11
because it was all art of a well-orchestrated plan.

Wolfowitz was on board Richard V. Allen’s National
Security Advisory team in ’79 and ’80 but broke ranks
and denounced Saddam Hussein while at the same time
Rumsfeld was shaking Saddam Hussein’s hand and
selling him “weapons of mass destruction.”
Wolfowitz was also dead set against opening a dialog with the
Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), and thought
that selling Airborne Warning and Control System
(AWACS) aircraft to the Saudis was insane. Wolfowitz
was arguably THE strongest supporter of Israel in the
Reagan regime.

In ’82 Secretary of State George Schultz appointed
Wolfowitz as the Assistant Secretary of State for East
Asian and Pacific Affairs. Under his watch the opposition
leader to dictator Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines
was assassinated. Marcos fled the country aboard a
USAF plane or his countrymen would’ve torn him to
pieces. The U.S. government officially recognized the
rebel government in an attempt to hold onto our Air
Force and Naval bases in the Philippines, but lost them anyway.
Marcos lived happily ever after in his Hawaiian beach
house at U.S. taxpayer expense. Some people say that
upon Marcos’ death his wife, Imelda, moved to
downtown Manhattan Island, NY and rented two
apartments; one for her, and one for her shoes at tax
payer expense. But that is preposterous of course... or is it?

From ’86 to ’89, Wolfowitz was our U.S. Ambassador to
Indonesia where the military-backed dictatorship of
President Suharto was selling off the country’s oil for
pennies on the dollar while trying to get the blood stains
off of his clothes from the recent East Timor slaughter of
thousands. Some people say Paul would have loved to
finish the slaughter just to show those upstart Timorese
that they can’t build a Muslim democracy on his turf, but
too many people were watching.

So, he did a bunch of photo-op grandstanding to make
everybody think he had gone native and was actually
concerned about the people of Indonesia. He made a
pretense of doing good things that were well publicized locally.
After the 2002 Bali bombing Wolfowitz was quoted as
saying, “The reason the terrorists are now successful in
Indonesia is because the Suharto regime fell and the
methods that were used to suppress them are gone.”
Wolfowitz actually thought Suharto was a good guy,
which is very revealing.
Henry Kissinger and Gerald
Ford were major players in enabling the East Timor
massacre in 1975 by approving it. Kissinger personally
had Wolfowitz installed in Indonesia in the first place!

See The Trials of Henry Kissinger:
a documentary with gory details of what a
slime ball Kissinger was, and still is.
There is a book with
the same title as the documentary by Christopher
Hitchens that the documentary was based on. In this
documentary you will notice that the Kissinger/CIA
backed coup in Chile to overthrow Salvador Allende
decades ago commenced on 9/11/1973.

Speaking of the date 9/11, again I’ll mention the speech
by Charles Lindbergh (Yes, “Lucky Lindy”) given in Des
Moines, Iowa on September 11, 1941. Lindbergh tried to
keep us out of WWII and described the consequential
Jewish influence on American domestic and foreign
policy... but of course it didn’t work out for him.

Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Anna Lindh, was
stabbed and died the next day on 9/11/2003. Some people
say she was murdered for criticizing the U.S. war in Iraq
and for criticizing Israel’s many human rights violations.

Recently the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens,
was murdered on 9/11/2012 in a planned attack in
Benghazi. The attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi is
still an inconclusive event that has been largely swept
under the rug. Were any Mossad agents in the vicinity at
the time is the first question that I would ask.

So what’s up with the date 911? Is it a numerology thing,
or a repetitious coincidence, occultism, a post-mortem slap at
Lindbergh, or what?

Anyway... From 1994 to early 2001, Wolfowitz was an
academic again as Professor of International Relations,
and Dean of the Paul H. Nitz School of Advanced
International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University.
Sounds pretty hoity toity, but all he was
really doing was bad mouthing Saddam Hussein and the
Clintons while trying to get the ever bumbling Bob Dole
elected as president with the help of his pal
Donald Rumsfeld.
It must be admitted that Zionist
traitors like Wolfowitz know an easily manipulated dumb
ass when they see one and always support dumb asses in
a push for the presidency.

Through the Project for a New American Century
(PNAC) think tank, Wolfowitz advocated building
permanent military bases all over the world to establish a
New World Order, and of course, be one of the guys
running the world. This advocacy became known as the
“Wolfowitz Doctrine” and has indeed been created.
The 700 some odd military bases that we maintain worldwide
are bleeding America out economically and the only
place where real military concentration was supposedly
necessary, that place being Afghanistan, is STILL not
secured after ...what is it now... 12 or 13 years later...?

During the 2000 Presidential election campaign
Wolfowitz was the foreign policy advisor to George W.
Bush as part of a group led by ultra-lackey Condoleeza
Rice called The Vulcans. Vulcans is really just a tough
sounding name for a bunch of chicken hawks.

I have no doubt that the entirety of Wolfowitz’s advice
for Bush was, “Invade Iraq, then invade Iran, then invade
Syria, then Lebanon, then Afghanistan, then Jordan, then
Egypt,” and so forth. After 9/11 no one could get Paul to
shut the hell up about invading Iraq.
I think Bush probably capitulated just to get all the Israel Firsters to
shut the hell up; not to mention the war profit margins
would be stratospheric for the Bush family investments
in Carlyle Group companies!

It was Wolfowitz who told the House Appropriations
Committee on March 27, 2003 that Iraqi oil revenues
would pay for the mess we we’re making there.

Ultimately, Dutch Royal Shell and Petronas Oil of
Malaysia got most of the oil rights and even contracted
Dick Cheney’s Halliburton to drill more wells for them!

And don’t ever forget that Halliburton moved from
Houston to Dubai to avoid paying American taxes!

Wolfowitz, as part of the “wrecking crew,” did such a
terrific job of castrating the USAF on a critical morning,
wrecking the Pentagon, stealing trillions, igniting wars,
and “protecting” us from Osama Bin Laden, that George
W. Bush nominated him for the presidency of the World
Bank. Paul’s experience in banking was zilch, but who
cares, it was a trophy job for doing a good job on 9/11.

Wolfowitz then proceeded to appoint unqualified cronies
to quarter million dollar a year jobs at the World Bank.
He raised many eyebrows when he appointed his
Tunisian (or was it Libyan?)... err... naturalized British
girlfriend to a job that paid way more than company
policy prescribed, and had to resign before he was fired.
So after two years of doing nothing besides attending
Bilderberger G-8 meetings to "discuss climate change",
Wolfowitz quit before he got fired. It always looks good
on paper to quit before you’re fired.

Douglas Feith
Feith was a gofer for the likes of Richard Perle and
Cap Weinberger at the Department of Defense during the
Reagan years after being fired from the National Security
Council (NSC).
Feith was fired from his Reagan
Administration appointment at the NSC because the FBI
was investigating him for passing classified NSC
documents to the Israeli embassy in 1982. He then went
to work for Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle
at the Pentagon as Special Counsel.

Feith worked as a lawyer in the private sector during the
Clinton years, returned to government service for the
Bush II years, and evidently was appointed as the dirty
job guy for Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz at the Pentagon in
July of 2001. Feith at the Pentagon was ranked #3 in the
DOD power structure.

If I were a uniformed military officer, I’d have a real
hard time taking Feith and company seriously. Again...A
bunch of civilian ZIONIST Jewish American chicken
WHATSOEVER was running our military in the run
up to 9/11 and the Afghan-Iraq wars.

Doug Feith’s office at the Pentagon was in charge of
prisons in the war theaters. So we can deduce that the
repulsively embarrassing Abu Ghraib war crime
shenanigans were his idea. It was Feith who devised the
“legal” solution for getting around the Geneva
Conventions’ prohibition on physically or
psychologically coercing prisoners of war into talking...
as if they had something to tell.

Military Judge Advocate Lawyers (JAG lawyers) said
Feith had a dismissive, if not derisive, attitude toward the
Geneva Conventions. One JAG lawyer said, “Feith called
the Geneva Conventions, law in the service of terror.”
I see that as perfectly revealing.

Feith has no idea, or actually knows perfectly well, that it
is the very existence of documents such as The Geneva
Convention that separates the bad guys from the good
guys by the nature of their adherence to it, or non-adherence.

My USAF fighter-pilot father was a prisoner of war in a
Chinese POW camp for 22 months during the Korean
War. He was shot down during a combat mission,
parachuted safely, and was promptly captured by Chinese
troops. My father had very strong opinions regarding the
torturing of any helpless human being in the custody of
abusive captors.

During my Father’s last years on earth it became
increasingly apparent to him that we were dismantling
our manufacturing engine and shipping it to China to
save on domestic labor costs. China was a country he
considered the U.S. still technically at war with, and
China thinks the same thing. The Korean War truce is
still in place!

BTW: You don’t sign a truce if you’re winning a war.
China kicked America’s ass hard during the Korean War,
now known as the “forgotten war.”
My father wondered hat sorts of people were running the show in
Washington during his last days on earth. I wish I could
tell him. Had my father lived to see the Abu Ghraib
revelations he would have been the very first American
to fully understand the damage that we were doing to
ourselves! Several strong men would have been needed
to loosen his grip on Feith’s throat had the opportunity
presented itself for those two to meet.

These Jewish American chicken-hawk Pentagon
manipulators like Feith, Perle and Wolfowitz got their
torture methods directly from the Israeli Shin Bet School
of torture. Israel and America use sleep deprivation,
painfully loud music, hoods over heads for days, being
tied into very uncomfortable positions for hours at a time,
routine threats with firearms and dogs, disallowing toilet
use in cells, blunt force trauma, humiliating nudity ande etc.
The Israeli Supreme Court barred torture in 1999 if. Net search Israeli torture methods and see what
pops up.

The United States military was used by Israel to do their
dirty work. It was sickening dirty work and caused great
harm to our military and country. The United States of
America had no business whatsoever invading
Afghanistan or Iraq. I suppose if Israel and its agents
have their way we will be pouring money into Iraq’s
occupation for generations; or until we cannot afford to
be occupiers any longer. If Israel has its way the U.S.A.
will invade Iran and every other country in the Middle
East without even contributing a single Israeli soldier, or
shekel to the effort.

BTW: China is one of Iran’s main trading partner. Iran
supplies most of China’s natural gas. If the USA were to
demolish Iran like it did Iraq and take over the natural
gas flow, China would consider that an energy strangling
act of war, and would declare war on the U.S.A. Russia
and China are allies. Either one of them could strike a
mortal blow to America. The combined forces of Russia
and China would definitely strike a mortal blow.

There is a very good reason why America has not tangled
with China since the Korean War, and got its ass kicked
by the Chinese-backed Vietnamese.
America has never
tangled with Russia. America only attacks weak
countries where victory is assured, like Grenada,
Afghanistan, Iraq, Panama... or Viet Nam. It’s a bully
thing. Bullies never hit anyone who they think can hit back.

How insane is it to invade and eviscerate a country such
as Iraq, killing one million people by doing so, to save
the country and its people from one guy who allegedly
killed a couple of thousand Kurds? Not to dismiss the
humanity of the Kurds, nor the altruistic idea that we
should free the Iraqi’s from a ruthless leader, but “freeing
Iraq” was not the real reason we destroyed it. Besides,
was it up to us, or was it up to the Iraqi’s to dispose of
their “evil” leader? When it comes to “sovereign
countries,” some things are simply none of your business.

Could Saddam have allegedly poisoned his people, or
brutally ruled over them, if we hadn’t sold him the goods
to enable him? I’d say Saddam knew exactly how to
properly govern his own country, and did a vastly
superior job of it than we have. He didn’t have to destroy
his country to do it. I, for one, was repulsed by the horrid
slaughter of innocent Iraqis by Americans and ashamed
that America could be so easily manipulated by an Israeli
and domestic cabal of psychopathic criminals.

When I heard Rumsfeld, who personally brokered
weapons sales to Saddam Hussein during the 1980’s,
state that the U.S military knew exactly where the
WMD’s were I laughed in disbelief. Remember his
stupid-ass explanation: “They are north, south, east, and
west of Baghdad.” ...I understand there are those who
found his explanation assuring, but I thought it insulting
to me personally and to my country. Americans wanted
the justification for war to be found, but instead,
Rumsfeld fool heartedly justified the disrespect I feel for
him and all of the evil bastards involved in perpetrating
9/11 by mocking the perceived stupidity of all Americans.

There never was any justification for completely
demolishing Iraq. America was just the tool of Israeli
vengeance and regional dominance. It’s really that simple.
I’m also very uncomfortable about my country occupying
so many other countries around the world. Any country
that hosts U.S. military bases is at least somewhat
subjugated, if not totally subjugated. No matter if it’s
Japan, Germany, South Korea, Italy, Turkey, Samoa,
Singapore, Taiwan, Palau, the Nederland’s, and over 100
other countries worldwide.

We maintain over 700 bases employing nearly 2,000,000
uniformed service personnel, nearly 500,000 DOD civil
service personnel, and over 200,000 locals. Some
countries like us being there, like the Saudis, who would
be deposed by a very resentful populace if it weren’t for
us protecting them with our military. Other places, like
Okinawa, hate our military bases being there and are
perpetually trying to expedite our leaving.

You and I are paying for all of this military subjugation
without anything at all tangible coming back to us. And
don’t buy the “world domination is necessary for U.S.
security” crap. We are economically bleeding out and
find ourselves having to use high-priced mercenary
killers (recall Blackwater mercenary services) to do the
actual fighting in places like Afghanistan and Iraq
because our uniformed military is stretched too thin worldwide.
Any country that employs professional killers
(mercenaries) is the bad guy. The Hessian mercenaries
fighting for England against our Founding Fathers during
the Revolutionary War didn’t do so well. Anyone who
fights for money, instead of national protection or
personal principals, will cut and run if the going gets tuff.

Doug Feith should be at least exiled and I have no doubt
where he would go. He founded a group called One
Jerusalem to oppose the Oslo Peace Accords; he was a
board member at JINSA (Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs), and director of the Foundation for
Jewish Studies. I get the unshakable idea that guys like
Feith only enter “service” to the U.S. government to
exploit the U.S. government to facilitate the well-
being, global influence, and prosperity of Israel.
Go to Israel Doug! You are already a welcome citizen there!
You’ll live longer and get smarter too!

Israel has Universal Healthcare. Participation in a
medical insurance plan is compulsory. Health care
coverage is administered by a small number of
organizations by relatively few people with funding from
the government. All Israeli citizens are entitled to the
same uniform benefits package regardless of their
financial means. Israeli healthcare is of high quality and
is delivered in an efficient and effective manner. Israelis
enjoy the 4th longest lifespan on the planet at 82 years of
age. America has the 49 th longest life span at ...well, it
varies by race. African Americans die sooner than Anglo Americans.
If I were an African American I wouldn’t like hearing
that; if I were an African American there are a lot of
things I wouldn’t like hearing.

If I wanted to immigrate to Israel I’d have to convert to
Judaism first. Converting to Judaism is such a rigmarole
(I checked it out) that I’d die of old age before I could
pass the Judaism test. There is no separation of “church
and state” in Israel. Israel is admittedly a Jewish state.

The state of Israel is a hard-core hyper-racist,
religious, socialist, terrorist state subsidized and
protected by the U.S.A... Ironic isn’t it?

Furthermore, Israeli universities are subsidized by the
state and deliver low-cost high quality education. I
admire these things that are either directly or indirectly
subsidized by American tax dollars in the form of aid to
our “ally” Israel! These Israeli programs, like universal
healthcare and affordable universities, sound like what a
large segment of American Fox News watchers, and
many others, call “socialist” and they spit the word
“socialist” out like it’s a cat turd.
American propaganda
radio blowhards like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck all
but advocate shooting socialist and liberals.

BTW: On November 22 nd, 2011, Glenn Beck received the
very first Defender of Israel award presented by the
Zionist Organization of America.
During the past year I
made it a point to listen to rightwing radio to see what
they were up to.

Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Michael Savage (he changed
his name from Weiner to Savage), Mark Levin and etc.
are all about the same. I got to thinking that right wing
radio is very contrived, divisive, inflammatory, too often
factually incorrect, racist, sexist, seditious, childish, and
has no comic relief at all. It’s a tedious and irritating 24/7
propaganda machine. Amazingly, it does seem to have an audience.
Right-wing radio stooges mocked France whenever
possible. Leave France out of it! France fielded combat
troops in the Afghanistan war. They did not field troops
in Iraq, so we disrespect them for having done the right thing?
Leftwing talk radio stooges like Amy Goodman, Tom
Hartmann, David Pakman, and Stephanie Miller dance all
around the real issues too, and are nothing more or less
than gatekeepers to the basic truth. And the seemingly
incessant on-air pleas for public money support by left-
wing media outlets are somehow more irritating than the
noisy right wing ranting.

The problem is: Zionist Americans with an agenda based
on loyalty to Israel first and foremost. The problem is,
and has always been, the socio-political and economic
subjugation of the United States, and the further
evisceration that is now in progress. The United States is
being used on many levels, not the least of which is
military and economic exploitation.

Accusing anyone of being a “neo-Nazi” is actually a
control tool used by organizations like the Jewish Anti-
Defamation League or the terrorist Jewish Defense
League. They tag you with the “Nazi” word to get you to
shut up, or throw down the Nazi card to make you fear
speaking in the first place. The word Nazi has such
hideous connotations in Zionist controlled nations that
any person not wanting any trouble is very careful not to
be accused of being a Nazi.

Again NAZI is a word invented by the German Jew, Konrad Heiden,
to denigrate the Hitler's Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP)
that was a minority political party at that.
So calling every German during World War II a Nazi
is about as incorrect as calling every American
and every American soldier who had anything to do with
any of our imbecilic wars all Republicans or Democrats
(or all elephants or asses).

BTW: Sayanim is a word applied to any Jewish person
living outside of Israel who may be indeed more, or no
less, loyal to the Jewish state than even a Jewish person
living in Israel. These Jewish loyalists living abroad who
are overtly or covertly helpful to the State are called
Sayanim. The Pentagon Wrecking Crew was definitive Sayanim.
In General Tommy Franks’ memoirs titled, "American
Soldier," he described Doug Feith as, “the dumbest
fucking guy on the planet.”
In his book titled, "Plan of
Attack", Bob Woodward described Feith as, “the fucking
stupidest guy on the face of the earth.”
I can’t add anything to those assessments.
See for yourself:
Rabbi Dov Zakheim
In a document published in September of 2000 called,
Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and
Resources for a New Century, Dov Zakheim called for
“some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new
Pearl Harbor” being necessary to foster the frame of
mind needed for the American public to support a war in
the Middle East, a war that would politically and
culturally reshape the region. The document was
prepared by a so-called “think tank” lobbying group
known as The Project for a New American Century (PNAC).
You have to wonder what they think about in these think
tanks. Evidently they think about traitorous shenanigans.
A year after this game plan was published; it was carried
out on 9/11.

In his book, "A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen
Eighties," by Senior Israeli Foreign Policy Advisor, Oded
Yinon, he mapped out a 1982 Middle East
reconfiguration strategy for all to see that was the
template used for PNAC’s Middle East strategy.
The strategy being the break-down all Arab countries
into manageable units and to make imperial Israel into
THE premier world power. And use the United States
of America as the military and financial hammer to forge
a new Middle East... and a new world order.
Eviscerate Iraq first, then Syria and others leaving Iran to be dealt
with last in the Middle East.

Mr. Zakheim is indeed an ordained rabbi. He was born in
Brooklyn, New York in 1948. He graduated from
Columbia University in 1970, and post graduated from
Oxford in ’72. He attended the London School of Jewish
Studies from ‘72 to ’75. From ’75 to ’80 he was an
Adjunct Professor at the National War College, Yeshiva
University, Columbia University and Trinity College in
Hartford, Connecticut.
From ’81 to ’85 he served
President Reagan in a variety of senior Department of
Defense posts. He also became a member of the Council
on Foreign Relations during that period.
From ’85 to ’87 e was Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Planning.
From ’87 to ’97 Zakheim was vice-president of System
Planning Corporation (SPC) that specializes in many
areas of defense technology production and
manufacturing, and was CEO of Flight Termination
System (FTS).
FTS developed highly sophisticated
technology that can control several drones from a
remote location on varying frequencies with a range
of several hundred miles. This technology can be used
on many different aircraft, including large military
aircraft. and... passenger jets.

BTW: Israel is presently the leader in world-wide drone
technology, but in May of 2013 they had to ground their
fleet of Heron 1 drones because of the malfunction of a
Heron 1 necessitating its destruction by crashing it into
the Mediterranean. Palestinians have repeatedly accused
Israel of using drones to fire missiles at them; but of
course Israel has not confirmed that.

According to the SPC website, a customer during
Zakheim’s direction was Eglin Air Force Base located in
Florida. Eglin AFB is very near MacDill AFB where
Zakheim contracted to send at least 32 Boeing 767
aircraft as part of the Boeing/Pentagon tanker lease
agreement. The Boeing 767’s were to be modified to
become tankers to replace the aging KC-135 tankers for
air-to-air refueling duty.

From January to September of 2000, General
Norton A. Schwartz was assigned to MacDill AFB as
Deputy Commander in Chief of the USAF Special
Operations Command. Gen. Schwartz evidently was
the one who got hold of a few of the Boeing jets for
modification into the drones used on 9/11.
In 2004 General Schwartz was
awarded the Jewish Community Center’s Military
Leadership Award. He was also the first Jewish Chief of
Staff of the United States Air Force.

After Schwartz finished his role at Special Operations
Command, he became commander of Alaskan Command
(Alaskan North American Aerospace Defense Command
Region, and 11th Air Force) based at Elmendorf AFB,
Alaska from September 2000 until October 2002.

Schwartz was in command of the war game called
Operation Northern Vigilance that was ongoing on 911
that required the transfer of jet fighters assigned to the
North East Air Defense Sector (NEADS) to the Alaskan Command.
The horrors of 911 all occurred in the North
East Air Defense Sector that was then without its normal
compliment of fighter jets.

Dr. Lani Kass was born in Israel and rose to the
rank of Major in the Israeli Air Force. She is married to
Norman Kass who is a former Pentagon Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense.
In ’92 she was at the Pentagon as
Special Assistant to the Director of Strategic Plans and
Policy under Dick Cheney. She again was working at the
Pentagon in 2000 and 2001; at first under William Cohen
and then under Rumsfeld. Dr. Kass was the top civilian
advisor to General Norman A. Schwartz prior and
during 9/11 and the run-up to the Middle Eastern wars.
Back to Zakheim... Who was a respected and established
voice in the intelligence community. His views were
eagerly accepted by the Bush administrations’ war
mongers. Zakheim went from his position at SPC to
become Comptroller of the Pentagon on April of 2001.

Coincidently, it was a SPC subsidiary, Tridata
Corporation, which oversaw the investigation of the
alleged terrorist attack on the WTC in 1993, making
Tridata Corporation privy to limitless information
related the WTC.

As the events of 9/11 occurred, and thereafter, little was
mentioned about these strange connections or the
possible motives and proximity of Dov Zakheim and his group.
Since there was little evidence remaining after the
events of 9/11, investigators were left with only
photographic and anecdotal evidence.

Eyewitness accounts of the WTC Tower hit by Flight 175
claim that a cylindrical object was attached under the
fuselage and there were no windows on the military grey
painted plane. See for yourself:

Over two trillion dollars was unaccounted for and
missing from the Pentagon coffers when Zakheim arrived
and another trillion went missing on his watch.
The very day before 9/11, Donald Rumsfeld, in a Pentagon press
conference on September 10th, 2001, announced that two
trillion dollars was missing and declared his
determination to recover it. See:
To this day not a penny of your money has been
recovered and you are personally poorer because of it.

Extremely suspicious is the fact that the finance and
accounting offices on the first floor of the Pentagon were
hit dead center on 9/11 with thirty eight lives lost and all
computers and physical files destroyed. Also the first
plane to hit the WTC North Tower hit the computer room
of Marsh & McLennan, which had recently acquired
Jerome Hauers’ Kroll Associates WTC security company.
I’m thinking that either the alleged commercial passenger
jets were remotely controlled by Zakheims’ FTS
Systems, or those slip shod trained Saudi hijacker pilots
were somehow as good as USAF Thunderbird pilots and
could pinpoint desirable targets at will.

Another Zakheim shenanigan that requires examination
is the LAVI jet fighter rip-off of American taxpayers (lavi
means lion in Hebrew).
During Zakheim’s Pentagon
years as Undersecretary of Defense for Planning from
’85 to ’87, the Israeli Air Force intended to spend untold
billions to build their own fighter jet. In fact they actually
built two prototypes that reside in Israeli museums today.

Zakheim figured correctly that he could save Israel those
untold billions by selling them all the American F-16’s
they wanted at a bargain basement clearance price
including all the spare parts they would ever need.

The Israeli LAVI jet project was cancelled
in August of ’87 and as a result of the U.S. sale to Israel
many USAF F-16’s sat useless on flight lines for lack of parts.
After successfully completing his duties at the Pentagon,
that evidently included acquiring a trillion dollar
operating fund for perpetrating 9/11, destroying all
evidence of all Pentagon misappropriations, modernizing
Israel’s Air Force on the cheap, fanning the flames of war
with Afghanistan, and insuring that a war with Iraq was
in the bag, Rabbi Dov Zakheim quit. The Iraq war started
nine days later.

Two months later after quitting his Pentagon position,
Zakheim took a lucrative job at Booz Allen Hamilton
(BAH). BAH is supposedly a world-class government
strategy-consulting firm. It is presently owned by the
Carlyle Group (co-founded and managed by Jewish
Zionist David Rubinstein) and has U.S. Government
contracts to gather information about your internet
searches and monitors your emails looking for anyone
who may be getting wise to the globalist agenda; and has
nothing to do with intercepting terror plots by the Muslim
enemies of the U.S.

The actual enemy terrorists are our “ally” Israel and the
Jewish-American Sayanim operating here. Jewish Zionist
Ralph W. Schrader is CEO of Booz Allen Hamilton.
If you ask me, ISRAEL IS AL QAEDA! Osama Bin
Laden didn’t found Al Qaeda, the Zionist media did.

Recall that Rabbi Dov Zakheim and his son, Roger, were
on Presidential Candidate Willard “Mitt” Romney’s
Presidential Advisory board. Isn’t THAT a shocker?

In June of 2013 the National Security Agency (NSA) was
caught red-handed spying on Americans. The NSA
was/is collecting phone call data by users of service
providers such as Verizon and AT&T. This, of course, is
just the tip of the government spying iceberg and has
nothing to do with “National Security” but has
everything to do with monitoring American awareness of
the globalist agenda and it's mechanizations.

Jewish Zionist Senator Diane Feinstein, as head of the
Senate Intelligence Committee, had to do a lot of
explaining, or rather bold-face lying, related to the
NSA’s spying on Americans.
The brave whistle-blower
who caused the extreme embarrassment to the NSA was
a 29 year old former CIA technical assistant and a Booz
Allen Hamilton employee named Edward Snowden.

Snowden, of course, has been reduced to the status of a
traitorous high-school drop-out and Army boot-camp
washout by the Zionist American media and you were
told that he intended to harm America by compromising
our “national security.” Our national security is in the
hands of Zionist terrorists!

The Jewish Zionist controlled Obama administration has
been ruthless in its prosecution and persecution of
whistle-blowers such as Army Pvt. Bradley Manning,
and Wikileaks’ Julian Assange. Edward Snowden felt that
it was his duty to expose the sinister shenanigans of the
NSA and Booz Allen Hamilton because, and I quote, “I
can’t in good conscience allow the U.S. government to
destroy privacy, internet freedom, and basic liberties
for people around the world with this massive
surveillance machine they’re secretly building.”

If there were more REAL warriors like Snowden,
America would not presently find itself with its ass in a
sling, on a sinking barge, over-populated by dumb swine
whose only interest in geo-politics has been reduced to
who will be the odds-on favorite to win the “Dancing
With The Stars” TV competition.
You will even hear any Americans declare,
“I’m not interested in politics.”
Well, LIFE IS POLITICS! Get a life!

It’s sufficient to say that Richard Perle is more or less
like the previously mentioned Feith and Wolfowitz.

All of the non-Jewish Americans involved in 9/11 were
only sycophant stooges, lackeys, and gofers subservient
to the Jewish Americans and the Israelis.
Even the President and Vice President were working for the Zionists.
Especially the Vice President, Dick Cheney!

Cheney and Bush would receive riches beyond belief as
their reward for being servile traitors to America by
being part of the 9/11 operation.

Both Cheney and Bush had total control over which
contractors would be used as support for the military in
the war theaters. They used contractors such as
Halliburton and its sub-division, Brown & Root, to skim
huge profits off of the military contracted services by
providing such things as laundry service at $100 a wash
load and lobster dinners for the troops at outrageous prices.
Cheney was CEO of Halliburton prior to the Iraq
war but resigned (not really) to expedite the securing of
all the military contracts without incurring possible
charges of war-profiteering (which is blatantly obvious).

The Bush crime family’s association with Halliburton
goes back to Prescott Bush being a director of Dresser
Industries that was absorbed by Halliburton. The Bush
crime family also profited from owning lots of shares of
the Carlyle Group in a time of war; especially the profits
from the Carlyle sub-division and military contractor
United Defense (now part of BAE Systems: Land and Armaments).

The Carlyle Group was co-founded by Zionist Jew David
Rubenstein who is the CEO and may help to explain how
Israelis and Zionist American Jews presented and sold
the 9/11 plan to traitors like Bush and Cheney while
assuring them that riches beyond belief was waiting them.

I do not accuse the entire population of Israel, nor world-
wide Jewry, for the crimes of 9/11. I do accuse some
Israeli gangsters, some Jewish American gangsters, and
some domestic non-Jewish American gangsters for the
crimes of 9/11. And they all should be executed in public.

The hideous events of 911 and its aftermath will not just
go away... Or will it simply go the way of Pearl Harbor,
JFK’s murder, the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, and the
U.S.S. Liberty massacre; that is, we know we were
screwed by these events but there is not a goddam thing
to be done about it because America is a Zionist
occupied country and there is not a thing we can do
about THAT, so let’s just all go along to get along!

Let’s all drop our drawers, bend over, stick our heads in
the sand and bear whatever it is that will be stuck up our
collective ass. Perhaps the prevalence of anal sex in
mainstream American pornography is a device to prepare
us for what is and what’s to come...?





As a proud member of Pilots for 911 Truth I have been focusing especially on Flight data

recorder information of Flight 93 and 77 that was released by the NTSB after numerous

Freedom of Information Act requests. The other black boxes were supposedly all destroyed

and dustified on ground zero. Too bad they didn't wrap these black boxes in one of the

3 hijacker passports that were found. Going through the piles of (self contradicting) data

after quite some years I am again amazed that they got away with this crap in order to

start their fraudulent war on terror that actually increased state sponsored acts of terrorism

to indefinite proportions. The released flight data overwhelmingly confirms the flight

technical and operational impossibilities of the official narrative to the degree that it has

something of a mockery towards pilots that can think for themselves. The flight data

recorder information released by the NTSB does not support the official hypothesis,

moreover it completely contradicts the official narrative presented by the 911 commission

report and is inconsistent with their own released "hard" data. There is overwhelming

evidence which suggests the data that is being provided to the public through the FOIA,

is not from an aircraft which has been operated by American Airlines. Check out the phone

call by Pilotsfor 911Truth to the NTSB confronting them with the barrage of inconsistencies.

The flight technical and operational impossibilities of the 4 airplanes exceeding their

operational and maneuvering limitations to the extreme while flying at supersonic equivalent

airspeeds in the most advanced and best protected airspace in the world without being

intercepted make the official hypothesis in my view absurd. Even more absurd in the

official hypothesis are the psychological miracles that happened during the attacks.

Take Flight 77 which allegedly crashed into the Pentagon as an example. 

The official story unfolds something like this. Within 3(!) minutes the following plot unfolds:

With his box cutter, the diminutive Hani Hanjour, sometime after take-off, fought his way

into the cockpit, and wrestled control of Flight 77 from a 6'4" former Marine combat fighter

captain with anti terror training, named Charles Burlingame, a man family members and

colleagues say would never have given up his aircraft or the safety of his passengers.

After dealing with the co-pilot as well and discharging both pilots to the back of the airplane,

clumsy Hani Hanjour settled in and turned his attention to the bewildering array of gadgets

and devices of a Boeing 757 instrument panel - a panel he was wholly unfamiliar with - in

an airplane traveling 500 mph, 7 miles in the air, while under the extreme stress of a recently

executed hijacking plot. Then, miraculously and without the help of any ground control or

air-traffic controllers providing him any information and/or settings, this pilot who could not

control a tiny Cessna 3 weeks earlier applied his genius and advanced situational and

positional awareness and instantly interpreted his heading, ground track, altitude, and

airspeed information on the displays before he could even figure out where in the world

he was, much less where the Pentagon was located in relation to his position."

Again, all this happened within 3 minutes according the official story. 

From the Ohio/Kentucky border, Hanjour then supposedly turned the plane around,

set course for Washington D.C. hundreds of miles away, and successfully entered

the most restricted airspace in the world without eliciting a single military intercept -

despite the crash of two other known hijacked aircraft into the WTC, and a missing

third, being covered on every radio and television station in the world. In order to

perform this bit of electronic navigation, he would have to be very familiar with

(Instrument Flight Rules) procedures. None of the alleged hijackers even knew what

a navigational chart looked like, or even how to plug frequencies into NAV/COM

radios, much less input information into flight management computers (FMC) and

engage LNAV (lateral navigation automated mode). If one is to believe the officia

l story, all of this was supposedly accomplished by raw student pilots while flying

blind with 500 MPH over unfamiliar (and practically invisible) terrain, using complex

methodologies and employing sophisticated instruments."

The official story of Hanjour's flight path continues in an even more bizarre narrative.

Having successfully entered D.C. prohibited airspace which was on high alert, with no

idea how soon fighter aircraft would show up to shoot him down, he finds himself pointed

in the ideal direction toward the East wing of the Pentagon, where all the top brass in

the military are known to be stationed. But then he apparently changes his mind as to

his heading, and pulls off that incredible, sweeping 270-degree descending turn at

400+mph to approach the Pentagon from the opposite direction. Once this maneuver

was completed, without going into a graveyard spiral, he started to pull out of the descent

at 2200 feet and accelerated 30 knots more at full power to 460 knots thereby exceeding

the B757 maximum operating speed Vmo by 110 knots. Hani Hanjour at the control of

the Boeing 757, who could not control a Cessna 172 during landing just 3 weeks before,

crossed the highways, knocking down light poles, came level over the lawn which required

up to 11G (Max positive G force for the B757 is 2,5G) While entering and overcoming

ground effect at 460 Knots, he didn't touch the lawn and got a 44 foot high target

(Tail height of 757) into a 77 foot target completely, without overshooting or bouncing off

the lawn, or spreading any wreckage at 460 knots. All this with a 33-foot margin for error.

Wow, impressive.                                          

                                                                                ...Willem Felderhof


The Pentagon

Conference on the 9/11 Pentagon Evidence


Scientists for 9/11 Truth, in conjunction with the International Center for 9/11 Studies

sponsored a Conference on the 9/11 Pentagon Evidence on May 4, 2019.  The invited

speakers were Ken Jenkins, David Chandler, Wayne Coste, Warren Stutt, and John Wyndham. 

A video record of the event can be found on the Scientists for 9/11 Truth web site.


Seeing the Pentagon Plane

Bitchute / YouTube     For more detail, go here.    [Image Sources]

A Joint Statement by David Chandler and Jonathan Cole

Overwhelming  Evidence of Insider Complicity


If you watch our videos and read the links on this site you will understand why we assert

that the weight of the evidence points to the fact that 9/11 was orchestrated by insiders…


  • with access to high tech military-grade nano-energetic materials (aka nano-thermite)

  • with access to the infrastructure of some of the most highly secure buildings in New York over an extended period of time

  • with the expertise to accomplish the most difficult demolitions in history

  • with the ability to manage public perception of the event despite numerous contrary contemporaneous eyewitness reports

  • with the ability to coordinate the take-downs of the twin towers with the airplane flights

  • with the ability to coordinate with the military to not intercept the airplane flights

  • with the ability to stage a highly coordinated cover-up, starting on the day of 9/11 itself

  • with the ability to prevent ANY investigation for many months

  • with the ability to stage-manage fraudulent investigations once the demand
  • grew too loud (the 9/11 Commission report the NIST reports)

All of this evidence comes from the investigation of the World Trade Center, based on

public evidence and the laws of physics.  The evidence is overwhelming, consistent, persuasive,

and broadly agreed upon by the “scientific wing” of the 9/11 Truth Movement.  The concrete

physical and video evidence leading to these conclusions narrows the field of possible perpetrators significantly.


The Pentagon


There are also anomalies in the events at the Pentagon.  The biggest anomalies, in our opinion ,

have gotten some of the least attention.


  • How could the Pentagon, the hub of the US military, have been so poorly defended that
  • it could be hit in the first place, after the buildings in New York City had
  • already been hit and other hijacked planes were known to still be in the air?

  • Why was Norman Mineta’s testimony about Cheney’s response to the
  •  approach of the aircraft discounted in the 9/11 Commission report?

  • Why was the target the newly reinforced west face of the building, occupied primarily
  • by accountants that were tracing down what happened to the missing trillions of dollars
  •  announced just the day before?

  • Why would the purported hijackers perform a difficult spiral descent to hit the face of the
  •  Pentagon that had the least number of people in it, and was opposite from the offices
  •  of the Pentagon high command?

  • Why would the purported hijackers risk mission failure by choosing a difficult
  • ground level approach when they could have simply dived into the building?

  • How could an untrained pilot have performed the difficult maneuvers?  Was the
  • plane flown by some kind of automatic controls and/or guided by a homing beacon?

Instead of these important questions, from very early on the focus has centered on what

hit the Pentagon.  The nearly unanimous testimony of over a hundred eyewitnesses, is that

a large aircraft, consistent with a 757, flew very low at very high speed, clipped several

light poles, and crashed into the face of the Pentagon at ground level.  Still, speculation

persists that the Pentagon was hit by something else, such as a Global Hawk or a cruise

missile.  The eyewitness testimony

is consistent with the pattern of damage both inside and outside of the Pentagon.

  Read through the many eyewitness accounts.


What is very clear is that there is a consistent and blatant ongoing cover-up at the Pentagon. 

Those INSIDE the Pentagon have all the physical evidence and all the confiscated videos. 

They undoubtedly have the definitive proof of what hit the Pentagon, and how it was done,

but they are not saying.


The problem with focusing on a protest of the Pentagon cover-up is that the population

at large attributes to the military the right to keep secrets.  Secrecy in wartime is understandable,

if it is in furtherance of military objectives.  It is not reasonable that the military should be

allowed to extend this privilege to the cover-up of evidence of a monstrous crime, but the

fact is, they can get away with it.  The population is not willing to second guess military

prerogative in matters like this.  Therefore despite the absolutely blatant cover-up of the

facts of 9/11 at the Pentagon, there is no public outrage, and there is no reasonable

possibility that the public can be aroused on this issue.


Therefore the Pentagon is a dead-end for research.  The puzzle of the Pentagon might

be fascinating or intriguing, but as an avenue to determining the truth, it seems

doomed to failure.  The ones who want it covered up literally hold all the cards.


Fortunately the evidence at the World Trade Center makes the investigation at the Pentagon

almost irrelevant.  If anything essentially new (and verifiable) can be discovered at the

Pentagon, fine, but the sparseness of information and the thoroughness of the cover-up at the

Pentagon makes it an unlikely venue for significant new findings.


The Honey Pot


On the other hand the mystery that surrounds the Pentagon makes it an attractive target

of speculation and the subject of truly wild conspiracy theories.  (This kind of attractive

diversion is sometimes called a “honey pot,” a “setup” to be discredited at a later time.) 

This is not the only instance of theories that seem designed to be easily discredited. 

There are groups that insist the towers at the World Trade Center were taken down by space

lasers.  Others claim no planes hit the Twin Towers at all: they were just holograms. 

What better way to tar the movement than to seed it with absurdly false theories

that fuel a media circus, while making the Movement look ridiculous?


Despite popular belief, the physical evidence does not rule out that possibility that it was

American Airlines Flight 77 that actually crashed into the Pentagon.  Confidently asserting

otherwise, then being proven wrong and discredited for sloppy research, would be

disastrous for the credibility of the solid science-based research at the World Trade Center.


Why, then, the strenuous push to focus the attention of the Truth Movement onto the Pentagon? 

Does it sound too cynical to suggest that we are being intentionally set up?  We must remember

that we are in a situation where nearly 3000 people were murdered in a day not counting the

thousands who have died since, and millions killed in the resulting wars.  If agencies of the US

government really are complicit, which the evidence shows to be the case, then the people

who really know what happened are playing for keeps.  Any movement with real potential for

arriving at incriminating truth will certainly be highly infiltrated.  This is not paranoia: it is a

simple fact.  The 9/11 Truth Movement must respond by policing itself and holding itself

to the highest standards of intellectual rigor.


CIT (Citizen Investigation Team)


It is sometimes hard to tell the difference between simply foolish theories and intentionally

planted foolish theories.  The difference is generally speculative. 

The wisest  policy is to avoid foolish theories altogether.


The generally accepted story regarding the Pentagon is that American Airlines Flight 77

was hijacked and flown to Washington DC, did a very difficult downward spiral maneuver,

approached the Pentagon flying essentially eastward along Columbia Pike, descended to

very low altitude, knocked over several light poles, damaged a generator sitting on the

Pentagon lawn, crashed into the west face of the Pentagon at ground level, at very high

speed, and created a trail of damage inside the outer three rings of the

Pentagon in perfect alignment with the exterior trail of destruction.


Enter CIT, the Citizen Investigation Team.  This grass-roots-sounding organization consists

essentially of two individuals  from California who fly back to Washington, conduct interviews

with a number of witnesses on video who reconstruct the flight paths (from memory, years

after the event) as being significantly further to the north than the generally accepted flight path.

  A north flight path is inconsistent with the trail of damage, both inside and outside the

Pentagon, so this flight path would require that all the damage was intentionally and elaborately

faked.  CIT then asserts that since the north flight path is inconsistent with the damage in the

building, the plane did not actually hit the building.  Instead it pulled up and flew over the

Pentagon perfectly timed with an explosion set off in the Pentagon.  The plane was

hidden by the explosion as it flew off and blended in with general air traffic.  (How the

passengers were disposed of is left to speculation.)  Interestingly, nearly all of the people

they interview are certain that the plane hit the building and none directly confirm the

flyover hypothesis.  The best they can do is elicit sketches of northerly flight paths that

actually differ significantly from each other.  They compile their thirteen interviews in a

feature-length video called “National Security Alert” (with an eyebrow-raising acronym shared

with the National Security Agency: NSA), then further cherry-pick their witnesses and present

the four who are most in agreement with their own views, and add a musical

sound track for a second video they call their “Smoking Gun” version.


Think about it just for a minute.  The Pentagon is completely ringed by major highways,

including Interstate 395 which had stand-still traffic that morning.  Any flyover of the Pentagon

would have been witnessed by hundreds of people from all directions.  If a plane flew over

the Pentagon at low altitude leaving a major explosion in its wake, anyone who saw it would

certainly think they were witnessing a plane bombing the Pentagon.  Yet there were no such

reports, and some who were questioned later, who were in a good position to see any flyover,

said they did not see any such thing.


The CIT videos don’t qualify as scientific studies.  Their witnesses are not representative

of the overall eyewitness pool, the witnesses accounts are far from contemporaneous

with the events, and the conversational style of the interviews frequently leads the witnesses. 

Who knows what conversations preceded the videotaped interviews to either shape or filter

the testimonies?  The “researchers” ignore the fact that none of their witnesses directly

confirms their primary hypothesis: a Pentagon flyover.  Some of the witnesses contradict

themselves, but this does not count against their credibility.  Furthermore, there is no mention

of the voluminous eyewitness testimony that supports the conventional path in line with the

path of destruction.  Rather than subject their work to peer review, even internal peer review

within the 9/11 Truth Movement, they simply disparage any who take issue with their

methods or their results, and instead rely on a list of questionable endorsements.  They

posted a literal “enemies list” on the internet in which they attacked the character of those

who disagree with them.  [Ed. Note: we are not yet on that list, but after posting this essay

we will surely qualify.]  CIT has even gone so far as to disparage their own witnesses,

accusing the driver of the taxi that was hit by a light pole of being a co-conspirator with the

perpetrators of the crime.  CIT has gone out of its way to make themselves a highly divisive

issue in the 9/11 Truth movement.  The “Flyover theory” had recent success in

getting main stream media coverage on the Jesse Ventura “Conspiracy Theory”

show. Whether CIT in fact represents an orchestrated attempt to splinter the 9/11 Truth

Movement or not, it is having a splintering effect.  “Divide and Conquer” has a long history,

going back to Caesar in the Gallic Wars, and Alexander the Great before him.  CIT is

attempting to become the public face of the 9/11 Truth Movement.  If it succeeds, the 9/11

Truth Movement will be seen as vicious, mean spirited, crazy, and ultimately discredited.


If the Pentagon issue intrigues you, we highly recommend that you balance your reading

with the literature that sets Pentagon theorizing into perspective.  Here is a short

recommended reading list. (All of the authors are on CIT’s enemies

list, but read them and decide about their credibility for yourself.)


In conclusion, we urge you not to be taken in by divisive speculation masquerading as research.


Recommended Reading

To Con a Movement: Exposing CIT’s PentaCon ‘Magic Show’ by Victoria Ashley


9/11 and the Pentagon Attack: What Witnesses Described and

A similar compendium of Eyewitness Testimony by Frank Legge

(This spreadsheet document requires spreadsheet software such as [Commercial] Excel,

or [Free but excellent!] Libre Office.  You may need to tinker with the column

spacing to make this spreadsheet more readable in Libre Office.)


A Critical Review of ‘The PentaCon – Smoking Gun Version’


Pentagon — Exterior Impact Damage by Jim Hoffman


Photos Of Flt 77 Wreckage Inside The Pentagon

Exclusive Photos & Story, From Sarah Roberts (on


Google Earth Exposes Pentagon Flyover Farce or Critiquing PentaCon (Smoking Crack Version)

by Jim Hoffman


American Memory Project of the Library of Congress — Interviews shortly

after 9/11 by witnesses to various aspects of the Pentagon events.
Note in particular the interviewing style compared to the CIT interviews.  There is no

leading the witness.  There is no agenda to prove a particular point.  The interviewees

are allowed to express themselves freely and fully with no coaching.  Several of the witnesses

interviewed here are also on the CIT videos.  Notice the differences in the overall tone as

well as the details of their stories.


Another great source for eyewitness testimony is provided on Jeff Hill’s website,

He has made a project of locating and calling witnesses and letting them speak for themselves.


The National Security Alert video and the

The PentaCon: Eyewitnesses Speak, Conspiracy Revealed (Smoking Gun Version)

are available to view online on various CIT web sites.


Mike Wilson of Integtrated Consultants, Inc. has constructed an animation based on a 3-D

computer model of the plane crossing the lawn and entering the Pentagon called,

911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77.  It presents the plane from various perspectives

including from the security cameras.  If you have ever had questions about

the basic geometry of large plane impact, this is a very helpful visualization aid.


New Research on the Pentagon Events


Ken Jenkins and David Chandler recently took pairs of direct copies from the Pentagon

surveillance video cameras and put them together as you would see them in a blink comparator. 

By doing this, the image of the plane “pops out.”  The one shown here has been converted

to an animated gif.  Converting to gif images degrades the color resolution, so an

alternate process is used here to blink higher quality png image.  Watch the image cycle

a few times and the details of the plane are definitely visible.  Hopefully this will go a long way

to take the air out of the “no plane” meme.




Since our joint statement was written

Frank Legge and Warren Strutt have published anew analysis of the data from the American Airlines Flight 77 FDR (Flight Data Recorder)

The previously published analysis omitted the last records and so appeared to be

inconsistent with the official narrative of the flight path of AA77 into the Pentagon. 

This new analysis is consistent with the path of damage inside and outside the Pentagon

and the vast majority of eyewitness testimony.  The article is published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies.


Frank Legge and David Chandler have also done an analysis of the plausibility of a

“North of Citgo (NOC)” flight path, based on flight dynamics, concluding that even with

a broad interpretation of the data, the transition to the NOC flightpath would have been impossible. 

These results have been published in two articles,

The Pentagon Attack on 9/11: A Refutation of the Pentagon Flyover Hypothesis Based on Analysis of the Flight Path,

published on the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice web site, and

Addendum to the Paper Refuting the Pentagon Flyover Hypothesis,

published in the Foreign Policy Journal.  Frank Legge published another summary paper in

the Journal of 9/11 Studies in 2012 with some additional information:

The 9/11 Attack on the Pentagon: the Search for Consensus.


Pilots for 9/11 Truth attempts to prove that a large plane could not have hit the Pentagon

based on has an analysis of the g-force needed to level out in the last seconds.  That analysis

is based on flawed calculations, as pointed out to them by the late Dr. Frank Legge over

5 years ago.  They continue to promote the flawed analysis on their website. 

Here is my own independent analysis (DC) that supports Frank Legge’s results.


Dwain Deets, flight research engineer, who once endorsed the CIT, no crash at the Pentagon

theory has revised his position and now argues in favor of a crash consistent with the

American Airlines Flight 77 aircraft.  He presented a paper describing his reasoning at 9/11:

Advancing the Truth, a 9/11 Commemoration Conference, September 14-15, 2013 in

Washington DC.  The paper is posted on his personal page at the Scientists for 9/11 Truth web site.


Physicist John Wyndham has written a comprehensive review of the literature in a paper

entitled The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact,

originally published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies with an updated version on the

Scientists for 9/11 Truth website.  He concludes that “a large plane hitting the Pentagon is

by far the most plausible theory.”



The Physics of High Speed Collisions

This is what happens to a plane (F4 Phantom jet) striking an impenetrable barrier at 500+ mi/hr.

A plane moving at this speed has 25 times the kinetic energy of a plane moving at 100 mi/hr.

All that kinetic energy must be dissipated by the time it comes to rest. The results are not

intuitive. In the case of a passenger plane hitting the pentagon, or a plane hitting the ground

at Shanksville PA, if it is traveling at the same speed it has the same kinetic energy per

kilogram of mass. Therefore the same degree of destruction is to be expected. This is

the major fallacy of exercises such as “Hunt the Boeing” at the Pentagon. Look at this video

then I invite you to “Hunt the Phantom”



9/11 Film Festival, Oakland 2015


I did a presentation in Oakland on 9/10/2015 on the Pentagon evidence.  At the time this

web page was started the primary concern was the theories being circulated by CIT. 

The newest incarnation of speculative Pentagon theories center on Barbara Honegger. 

(By agreement with the organizers of the event, I didn’t mention her by name in the talk,

but it is her theories I was addressing.)  My talk was back-to-back with a presentation

of the eyewitness testimony in a short film by Ken Jenkins. 

(This is one part of a longer work he is producing.)
(or view on YouTube here)


On a side note, several of the witnesses in the video were viewing the incident from upper

stories of buildings in Roselyn, VA, which is a little north of the Pentagon.  They would

have been in a position to see the plane if it had flown over the Pentagon, but they testify

instead that it crashed into the Pentagon, which directly contradicts CIT’s speculation. 

Also, (as Frank Legge has pointed out) several of the witnesses testify that the plane went

very low as it approached the Pentagon, so low that it disappeared from view before it hit.

  Once the plane was that low that close to the Pentagon, it would have been impossible

to pull up in time and there was no place else for it to go.  Therefore, even though these

people didn’t actually see the impact itself, they should be considered witnesses

to impact, because there is no alternative consistent with their testimony.


The 9/10/2015 Oakland talk was actually a preliminary sampling of the ongoing work by a

group of us who were working on a major paper refuting the Honegger hypotheses. 

That paper is now available: The Pentagon Event: The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted

by (listed alphabetically) Victoria Ashley, David Chandler, Jonathan H. Cole, Jim Hoffman,

Ken Jenkins, Frank Legge, and John D. Wyndham.  This paper is long, because

Barbara Honegger’s speculations and inferences are so wide-ranging.  In our view it was

important to address this theory (like the C.I.T. fly-over theory before it) because theories

that are this blatantly flawed can seriously damage the credibility of the scientific basis

of the 9/11 Truth Movement.  This is still a topic of heated controversy within the movement,

but perhaps a slow read through this analysis can bring some light to the issue.



More on CIT


Although Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis of CIT have seemingly faded from the scene,

their surrogates appear to be actively promoting their theories and disparaging their critics

on Truth and Shadows and elsewhere.  This has prompted me (David Chandler) to

write up something that has been brewing for a long time, a critique of the fundamental methodology used by CIT

It centers on Craig Ranke’s telephone interview of Albert Hemphill.  The techniques CIT

uses in their interviews do not qualify as “truth seeking” and the conclusions have no validity.



Why the CIT Analysis of the Pentagon Event on 9/11

Should Be Rejected Outright


There are fundamental grounds to reject the analysis put forward by CIT (Citizen Investigation Team),

which proposes that a large plane approached the Pentagon from a northerly angle

(north of the CITGO gas station) incompatible with the external and internal damage path.*

The plane, they say, flew over the Pentagon, masked by a synchronized internal explosion

and smoke cloud (which CIT compares to a “magic show”), and all the damage was staged.


The issue goes beyond the selection of witnesses or the implausibility of their fly-over

hypothesis and elaborate staging of all the physical evidence. It comes down to the validity

of their interview methodology and the illogic of the inferences drawn from their data.

Their flawed methodology invalidates the entire process.


I will focus on Craig Ranke’s telephone interview of Albert Hemphill because we have a

complete, unedited, start-to-finish record of the interview as well as two follow-up phone

interviews by Jeff Hill, an independent researcher living in Canada, that allow Mr. Hemphill

to express himself fully about the Ranke interview and clarify his testimony.


Here are the three interviews:

The other interviews used in the CIT videos, on the other hand, have been subject to

selection and editing, so we don’t know the full context that surrounds them.

They are therefore less helpful in understanding CIT’s methodology.


Albert Hemphill was a civilian employee of the Navy with an office on the top floor of the

8th wing of the Navy Annex overlooking the Pentagon. The line of sight from his office

window to the impact point on the Pentagon passed directly over the CITGO gas station.

His line of sight was eastward, so north was to his left and south was to his right. CIT

claims Albert Hemphill as a north path witness. Rather than simply accepting this

characterization, listen to Hemphill’s actual testimony.


Here are excerpts from Albert Hemphill’s characterization of the flight path.

5:52 [Hemphill] he would have been to my, over my right shoulder

6:02 [Hemphill] he clipped a street light

6:51 [Ranke] when you saw it pass the gas station did

it look like he was flying straight or banking or turning?


[Hemphill] Diving

[Ranke] Diving

[Hemphill] You could hear the spooling of the engines, the distinctive whine of those

things being wound up. And he kicked in, in my opinion, like he kicked in a little bit of

right rudder and threw in some aileron [def: flaps on the wings that control the roll of the

plane] because he hit the Pentagon at about the second window level. He did not

hit the ground. He did not touch the ground. It smacked right into the building.


7:47 [Hemphill] right over the bridge


10:04 [Ranke] Did you see it actually hit light poles or did you just hear about that afterwards?

[Hemphill] I saw him clip it.

[Ranke] Saw it clip a light pole.

[Hemphill] Yeah.


10:15 [Ranke] Did you notice the cab or anything like that?

[Hemphill] Nah, I don’t remember seeing a cab. I’ve heard that one. I don’t remember a cab.

It may have been there, but there’s so much going on, you know you only have a sight

picture there, you know we’re talking seconds. So, you know, when people say stuff like

that you have to be careful that you don’t absorb in stuff that they have said that

you didn’t really see, that correlates with your story, and what you witnessed.


10:49 [Ranke] But you say you’re absolutely certain that you did see it clip a light pole?
[Hemphill] Yeah, because it was like a flash with it, you know

[Ranke] A flash? Did you see a light pole go flying or anything like that?
[Hemphill] No. No, no, no. You just, you see the kinda a glance

or something, a flash of a wing catching it or something.

[Ranke] Interesting. Did you see it hit more than one pole, or just one
[Hemphill] Just one is all I picked up. It may have been more. I don’t know.


16:48 [Ranke] How sure are you that it was directly over the Navy Annex as opposed to

being on the complete south end of Columbia Pike, in fact I mean on the south side of

the VDOT building. You know where that communications antenna

tower that there is on the other side of Columbia Pike there?

[Hemphill] Yeah. I know where it is.

[Ranke] What are the chances that it was on the south side of that, between that and the highway?

[Hemphill] I think that’s over a little bit far.


27:06 [Ranke] Do you recall the location the light pole is that you saw get hit?

[Hemphill] I think that was one of the ones up there on 27, I believe it was right, let me

think now, the um, you’ve got the bridge, it was on the side of the bridge heading toward Rosslyn.

[Ranke] So the north side.

[Hemphill] It would be the north side, yeah.


38:02 [Hemphill] Now the plane I saw, I saw one plane and I saw it hit.

[…then again, after Ranke concluded that Hemphill must have been deceived by the explosion…]

39:36 [Hemphill] but all I can tell you is that I saw the one plane and what I saw was I saw it hit.

[For more detail and context, listen to the full interview (transcript)]


Let’s summarize Hemphill’s key testimony.


  • The plane came in over his right shoulder, i.e. to his south,
  • therefore, by implication, south of the CITGO station.

  • The VDOT tower is south of the Navy Annex. He estimates that the plane was not that
  •  far south. i.e. south but probably not that far south. This statement would not make
  •  sense if the plane were to his north, so this answer confirms that the plane was on a south path.

  • The plane flew right over the bridge, the site of the first two light poles.

  • He saw it hit one light pole. He knew from news reports that more light poles were hit,
  •  but he personally witnessed only one and carefully limits his testimony to what he
  • actually saw. As a matter of fact, the first light pole would have been clipped by the
  • right wing which would have been hidden on the far side of the plane from his vantage
  •  point. The second light pole, on the north side of the bridge (which is where he located it),
  • was clipped by the left wing and would be visible from his vantage point. The remaining
  • light poles were lower down, not up on the bridge. Hemphill’s testimony here is restrained
  • and precise. The one light pole he could most plausibly have seen was the exact pole he
  •  testifies that he saw.

  • The plane was diving and he saw it approach the Pentagon at the second floor level
  • while it was not obscured by smoke, so there is no possibility
  •  that the plane could pull up in time to clear the Pentagon roof.

  • To the very end, even as Ranke tried to persuade him otherwise, Hemphill repeatedly
  •  emphasizes his own direct observation that there was only one plane and that it hit the Pentagon.

  • Hemphill was an exceptional eyewitness who was very conscious of the dangers of mixing
  •  his actual observations with other material he had learned along the way. As he put it,
  •  “you have to be careful that you don’t absorb in stuff that they have said that
  •  you didn’t really see, that correlates with your story, and what you witnessed.”

After hearing Hemphill’s direct eyewitness testimony, Ranke pushed him to concede that the

plane flew north of the CITGO gas station, which he then used to dismiss the rest of his

testimony as being inconsistent with this one point. Listen to how this was brought about:


7:34 [Ranke] Now when you saw it, let’s back up a little bit. When you saw it pass the gas

station, what side of the gas station was it on? Was it on the again, on the Arlington

Cemetery or north side, or else perhaps the south side, the other side?


7:47 [Hemphill] You know it’s hard to say, it looked like it went right over the top to me,

you know, because of the way its flight path was, but you know you would have come

pretty much right smack over the top of it, right over the bridge there, it takes you

over to I think on the right if I did all those years ago, I said 110, I meant 27.


8:08 [Ranke] Right


8:08 [Hemphill] But he went right over there towards where the old heliport was, so if you

go from where the old heliport was and you draw a line straight back over

the Navy Annex, it’s going to take you pretty much over the gas station.


8:22 [Ranke] OK, but would you say if you had to say if it was leaning towards one side

or the other of the gas station, perhaps a portion of the plane,

or did it look directly over the top? Or what do you think?



8:32 [Hemphill] Yeah, I would say more towards the cemetery side


8:36 [Ranke] a little more towards the cemetery side, OK. And uh well it was interesting

cause you also mention that the blast from the explosion knocked you back onto your desk.


8:47 [Hemphill] Yeah, it was like a shock wave of a like a 2000 pounder going off. No,

just a, you could hear the deep, deep rumble and then boom, it just caused everything

on the Annex to just shake and stuff rattled and it just forced me back on the desk.


Here Ranke induces Hemphill to contradict himself. Hemphill has already shown himself

to be a south path witness in multiple ways. An honest interviewer would point out the

contradiction and ask for clarification. This is, after all, the focal point of the interview,

from Ranke’s perspective, so one would think it would be extremely important to get it right.

But Ranke does not do this. He restates the questionable claim without comment then

changes the subject to something entirely different. Has he elicited

Hemphill’s considered opinion or has he led him into a rhetorical trap?


Realize that this phone interview was conducted in May, 2010, nearly nine years after

the event. Hemphill no longer worked for the Navy. Wing 8 of the Navy Annex had

been torn down. He was not looking at any kind or map or diagram during the phone call.

He was going from memory as to the alignment of various features. When pushed the

first time on whether the plane flew to one side or the other of the CITGO station, he

declined both alternatives and said it went right over the top of the CITGO station, which,

according to his memory, was equivalent to going right over the bridge. (In reality the

two features don’t line up.) To go over the bridge the plane would have to go

south of the CITGO station.


Having answered that to the best of his recollection the plane flew over the top of the

CITGO station, Ranke continues pushing, “OK, but would you say if you had to say

if it was leaning towards one side or the other of the gas station, perhaps a portion of

the plane, or did it look directly over the top? Or what do you think?” He is clearly telling

Hemphill he is unsatisfied with his previous answer.


Finally Hemphill answers, “Yeah, I would say more towards the cemetery side.”


It is troubling that Ranke ignores Hemphill’s first answer and persists in digging for a

different answer. “…if you had to say,” “…if it was leaning towards one side or the

other,” “…perhaps a portion of the plane.” This is leading the witness, if not badgering

the witness. Such questioning is bad practice because it distorts the testimony. It has

no place in scientific data gathering interviews since the goal is to get at true memories

uninfluenced by the questioner.


Later in the conversation Ranke returns to the north path issue in order to solidify Hemphill’s

support for his Pentagon fly-over hypothesis. However, he does so in the context of telling

Hemphill what many other witnesses had said who were supposedly in a better position

to see what happened.


Hemphill concedes,

anybody who was out and about right then in that area would have had a great vantage point if they were at that gas station.”

Ranke is not asking Hemphill for his own memories as an independent witness, but rather urging him to go along with what others

had supposedly said. The Asch Conformity Experiment comes to mind. It has been shown experimentally that when

subjects feel alone in their perceptions they show a tendency to ignore their own perceptions and go along with the crowd. Ranke is

explicitly asking Hemphill to step back from his eyewitness role and accept a belief based on hearsay.

This by itself should be enough to disqualify the interview as having any scientific merit. He commends


Hemphill and tells him that “what you saw does corroborate these other witnesses.”

He uses the word “corroborate” 18 times in the conversation, as though this witness

needs praise or reassurance for going along with what other witnesses have said, and

ignoring the fact that nothing in Hemphill’s testimony “corroborates” the north path story

except for that single concession urged by the interviewer. Hemphill is not being treated

as though his own first-hand memories were the legitimate focus of the interview.

In Jeff Hill’s second phone interview with Hemphill, he reminds Hemphill of his earlier

statement to Craig Ranke that the plane was on the Arlington Cemetery side (north side)

of CITGO. Hemphill strenuously objects,


18:6 [Hemphill] “No, absolutely wrong. It flew over

the gas station more to the Columbia Pike side.

22:16 [Hill] So like I guess when you told Craig that it was slightly more toward

the Arlington Cemetery side you were just like mistaken in the moment?
[Hemphill] No I didn’t say that. I said my office is more toward the Arlington Cemetery side.

The aircraft was not more toward the cemetery. It’s more toward Columbia Pike.


The words he used earlier seemed to be telling Craig the opposite, but this comment clarifies

what was in his mind. One thing that did a lot to clear up his testimony was that Hill had

emailed Hemphill a photograph of the area from Google Earth with a line of sight drawn on

it from Hemphill’s office to the impact point (similar to the illustration included here but

without the extra annotations). That line passes directly over the center of the CITGO

gas station. With the geometry of the situation clearly in mind, Hemphill had no trouble

reconstructing the plane’s path and he was able to state definitively that the plane

was on the south side.


Once Ranke had maneuvered Hemphill into stating the plane was on the cemetery side

(north side) of the CITGO station, he inferred that since that observation was incompatible

with hitting the Pentagon or the light poles, those direct memories and the physical

evidence had to be false and only the north path observation was true. (How is this even

logical? Why not infer from the direct observations and the physical evidence of the light

poles and the memory that the plane came over his right shoulder that the north path

statement was false?) Hemphill didn’t buy Ranke’s reasoning. He insisted repeatedly,

“Now the plane I saw, I saw one plane and I saw it hit.” At the very end of

the conversation Hemphill reaffirms that he stands by his original statements.


Elevating the significance of a memory of a seemingly minor detail, many years after

the fact, is a common thread in nearly all of the Ranke interviews. The single detail

CIT cites as key to understanding the Pentagon event is the path of the approaching

plane. Ranke’s sales pitch to the world is that surely the eyewitnesses near the CITGO

station would remember which side of the station the plane passed by as it approached

the Pentagon. That is not obvious, however. It depends entirely on when a witness became

aware of and focused intently on the plane. The event went suddenly from nothing particularly

unusual to an earth shaking event: a plane hitting the Pentagon, seconds later. All of the

CIT witnesses, who were in a position to see it, testified that they saw the plane actually

hit the Pentagon. For some, the earlier path of the plane might have been a vivid direct

memory. The level of detail offered by Hemphill, the nearness and position of the plane over

his right shoulder, the sound of the engines spooling up, his detailed observation of the

plane’s maneuvers, the flash as it hit a specific light pole, the dive, and the place where

it hit the Pentagon wall, and the consistency of these observations with the physical

evidence all indicate this is true in his case. Others may have been only vaguely aware

of the plane initially with growing awareness as it was about to hit the Pentagon. For

these people the prior path of the plane could well have been a mental reconstruction

rather than a direct memory. An unbiased interviewer would recognize a memory that

the plane hit the building as more likely true than any memories of a path inconsistent

with that direct observation, especially when the eyewitness expresses certainty that it

actually hit. The explosion and smoke cloud would not obscure the impact.

They would follow the impact.


When I was in a PE class in the eighth grade I jumped over a low-hanging net, tripped

and knocked myself out. I woke up in the nurse’s office some time later. I remember the

accident clearly. The problem is I have two equally clear and competing memories of

the event, and I cannot, even to this day, discern which is what actually happened. I

remember jumping over the net as we were dismissed from the assembly formation at

the start of class, but I have an equally clear and compelling memory that the event occurred

at the end of the period, as the bell rang and we were running to the locker room.

Tripping over the net, falling, and waking up in the nurse’s office were clear and legitimate

memories burned into my brain. The circumstances surrounding my jumping over the net

were mental reconstructions, equally as vivid as the undeniable memories, but in reality,

not memories at all.


Our minds flesh out the details surrounding distant memories, as my own experience

illustrates. The methodology at work in the CIT interviews is to distract a witnesses from

an actual, vivid memory of a plane impacting a building, and soliciting, or even planting

by suggestion, a minor secondary detail. This sets the stage for the witness to reconstruct

or elaborate on the actual memories to “fill in the gaps” or to satisfy the questioner.


That detail is then elevated to be considered the single most significant element of the

testimony, and used to discount both the primary memory and the physical evidence.

The witnesses themselves are then declared to have been deceived about the discordant

elements of their testimony. The witnesses may come back and protest loudly that

the one thing they know for certain is that the plane actually hit the building, but such

protestations are ignored. When interviews are conducted in this manner, whatever the

reason, the conclusions have no claim to any

validity and should be dismissed.Notes:


*External damage path: scarred VDOT traffic camera pole and notched tree on Hwy 26

overpass, five downed light poles, damaged and rotated large generator trailer, damaged

fence around the generator trailer, scattering of a number of cable spools,

notch in a low concrete retaining wall, and severed tree in front of Column 16.


Internal damage path: nearly 100 foot opening in the first floor of the Pentagon E-ring wall,

external scars corresponding to the wing tips and tail of an impacting plane, a pattern of

damaged and destroyed interior columns on the first floor of the Pentagon E, D, and C-rings

and punch-out hole in the C-ring inner wall, all in line with the external damage path.