911 truth See the facts for yourself


A retired 27-year CIA analyst who prepared and presented Presidential Daily Briefs and served as a high-level analyst for several presidents stated that the Pentagon is a heavily-defended building, with defensive weapons on the roof. This matches a Pentagon employee’s statement that she was told "you are now standing in one of the most secure building in all of the United States".

And a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand", and who handled two actual hijackings, says that that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off, and that Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon tracked three of the four flights from the point of their hijacking to hitting their targets (also, listen to this interview).

Indeed, the Secretary of Transportation testified to the 9/11 Commission that
"During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President … the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?"
(this testimony is confirmed here and here. See also this comment by the retired high-level CIA analyst mentioned above).

So how was a hijacked plane able to slam into such a heavily-defended building long after it had become apparent that a terrorist attack was being waged against America with hijacked airplanes, and given that the military was actually tracking the airplanes? Why did the Vice President of the United States, in charge of counter-terrorism on 9/11 (see this Department of State announcement; this CNN article; and this essay), watch the plane approach from many miles away but say “the orders still stand”, when such orders led to the plane not being intercepted?


There are additional questions about the attack on the Pentagon. However, we believe that these questions are largely distractions from the vital questions raised above.

For example, there are many who question whether the hijacker who allegedly piloted the airplane had the skills to perform such a difficult maneuver, at least not without the aid of remote control equipment. We find such claims interesting, but have not come to any conclusions, and do not know if they will lead anywhere.

In addition, the government has to date not released all of the videos showing the strike on the Pentagon. Michael Moore, for example, said
"I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon-- before 9/11 -- there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere. They've got that plane coming in with 100 angles. How come with haven't seen the straight-- I'm not talking about stop-action photos, I'm talking about the video. I want to see the video; I want to see 100 videos that exist of this".
We believe that it is very possible that when the videos are finally released, they will clearly show that the hijacked Boeing 757 was flown in a standard manner by the hijackers and crashed into the Pentagon. However, according to those who have watched the government videos released to date, such footage is not conclusive. While we are not convinced that anything other than a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, The government should release all of the relevant videos to give a full accounting.

Other claims have also been made about the Pentagon (see, for example, the claims made here). However, we believe that the questions regarding the government intentionally allowing the aircraft to hit the Pentagon, discussed at the top of this webpage, are the most important.

NEXT:  But this couldn't happen in modern America!

Updated April 4, 2007 • Design by