I've carefuly scrutinized every Pentagon witness report that is available online at least 18 times - and that's a conservative estimate. The Pentagon Flash, like all other intentional disinformation campaigns by Counter Intelligence Professionals, was designed to poison the well with easily refutable facts, such as the unbutchered
witness testimonies, in which nobody - not one witness - reports seeing a missile.
Witness: "it looked like an American Airlines jet, and it passed overhead like a missile".
Pentagon Flash: "It looked like....a missile."
That's how it works.
Who benefits from misrepresenting the witnesses?
I find it astonishing, in this digital age, that "truthseekers" could call for release of Pentagon impact footage 5 years after the event
, and claim that it will "seal the deal" for them on the 757. Curiously, none of these seekers of truth appear to have read the correspondence between the operator of flight77info and the FBI pertaining to that supressed footage, for if they had, they would have been made aware--for at least a year--that the FBI claim the footage hasn't been released because it is to be used as evidence in the Moussaoui circus. They might also be aware that the FBI says it will release publicly that footage
when the circus is over. I look forward to it, knowing that the accompanying C-130 will have been scrubbed.
"Nobody knows about the second plane
, or if they do, they're hiding it for some reason
C-130+757 witness, Kelly Knowles.
"I personally believe the government is hiding something a lot bigger than they are willing to let out
C-130+757 witness, Allen Cleveland
"It flew directly above the American Airlines jet, as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar
--while at the same time--guiding the jet towards the Pentagon
C-130+757 witness, Keith Wheelhouse
Allen Cleveland --- who was there --- thinks the video was suppressed because of the other plane.
I agree with Allen.
Allen says his testimony was censored by the washingtonpost to exclude the C-130.
And Frank, I can't understand why you would bother arguing against the phrase "mosquito netting" to describe the design of the towers:
"The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it
, that was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building could probably sustain multiple impacts of jet liners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door
- this intense grid - and the plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting
--Frank A. DeMartini, building enginner and World Trade Center construction manager
History Channel, January 2001 (Frank was killed in the North Tower on 9|11)see for yourself
addendum/p.s.: I think your best point, Frank -- a really good one in terms of plausible scenarios -- is not "the significance of Dov Zakheim", but of the military technology marketed by the company he headed prior to joining the Pentagon. And not just those "Flight Termination Systems" you referred to.