Found an amazing site for Pentagon Research

[mikelewis]

Most of the information is beyond me but there is a lot of information I have'nt come across before.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/english.html

Just one of interesting things was the presence of radioactivity which I had not heard of before.

An objective proof of contamination

Leuren Moret wrote, in an article published on the web site "Centre for Research on Globalisation" :

DU is also used as ballast in commercial and military planes. On Sept. 11, a hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon. Dr. Janette Sherman, research associate with the Radiation and Public Health Project, had spoken a few days earlier at a Sept. 6 press conference in Hunters Point. After the Sept. 11 attacks, Dr. Sherman notified the Nuclear Information and Resource Service that she detected elevated levels of radiation in her home, located seven miles from the Pentagon. Dr. Sherman still had a gamma meter she had borrowed for her visit to Hunter’s Point. The EPA, the FBI, and other federal agencies, including HMRU (Hazardous Materials Response Units), USAR teams, the local fire department and the Virginia HAZMAT were notified, and an investigation began at the Pentagon.

A pile of rubble from the crash was found to be radioactive, but EPA official Bill Bellinger of the agency’s Region III Environmental Radiation Monitoring Office was unconcerned when contacted by Diane D’Arrigo from the Nuclear Information and Resource Service. Bellinger indicated that it was probably depleted uranium and mentioned that Americium 241could also be scattered around the crash site. He was convinced that depleted uranium is not radiologically toxic, but commented that it is more of a hazard when aerosolized.

Firefighters, Pentagon personnel, and communities nearby did breathe the smoke and ash from the fire. The agencies that are supposed to be protecting us are not. There was no follow-up investigation.

I'm still going through the site but this guy has done a hell of a job. It's definitely worth a look.

[mikelewis]

1. Impact Simulation - I'm now convinced it was flight 77

If you've read my previous posts. you'll know that I doubted flight 77 hit the Pentagon. I am now convinced, while reserving a modest level of doubt that it was indeed flight 77 that hit the pentagon.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/dam-traj.html

[jimmy47nyc]

6. Mike,

Hello,when I view DoD photo's of the<5>projectile that crashed into the Pentagon my eyes are drawn to the roof line.As you follow the edge you cant help but see a section that has already collapsed.also,the date time stamp had sept.12 2001.Videotape from across the highway<100 yards>was pointed toward the building.Why wont the FBI release them..The secrecy and failure to produce documents by bush/cheney is a serious reminder of a government gone bad.
:hi: :hi: :dem:

[spooked911]

2. Actually, I like the Pentagonresearch.com site better

But the desmoulins site is good.


The Pentagonresearch.com site ALMOST had me convinced that a 757 hit.

I'm still not sure about flight 77 though.


So what about the desmoulins site convinced you it was flight 77?

[mikelewis]

3. What convinced me was...

The problem I've had with the OCT of Flight 77 was the missing plane and the exit wound {if you will} did not appear consistant with the impact of a plane.

This site seems to tackle both of these issue quite well.


The first issue of the dissappearing plane is handle by this hypothesis.

A few minutes after the crash, before the first fire trucks came on the scene from Arlington fire department, an explosion occured.
This explosion could be due to the presence of very hot aluminum and water. In an aluminum casthouse, the main danger when casting is that water is poured onto billets or ingots to cool them. This water doesn't react with the external solid skin of the billet or ingot, the internal part being still molten. If the casting speed (descent) is too high, this skin can be teared and the water poured onto molten aluminum. In this case, a violent chemical reaction occurs, transforming aluminum into alumina along with the production of hydrogen. If this happens, the casthouse is usually destroyed. The chemical reaction is :

Molten-Aluminum + water ==> Alumina + Hydrogen + Heat

An hypothese about the second explosion at the pentagon crash is that the sprinkler system of the building did it's job. The crash and burning of the fuels contained inside the plane raised very fastly the temperature, allowing the automatic hoses to pour water. It is known that pouring water on a fuel fire is a very bad solution. When, moreover, there is a big mass of aluminum alloy heated at near 800 celsius (fuel combustion temperature), the violent reaction of aluminum and water occurs. This could have helped the fire to propagate inside the building.


There is even worse. As a big quantity of hydrogen is produced, if the local conditions don't allow this hydrogen to be burnt, because the fire is in oxygen starvation (frequent case inside the buildings), this hydrogen can escape. It is possible that in this case the hydrogen found an issue (stair...) to get to the second floor (hydrogen is a very light gas). There could have been a pocket formed under a ceiling, for example protected from flames and heat over a false ceiling. When this pocket of hydrogen, probably mixed with air, was reached by the flames, it exploded. The pictures below shows this explosion which seems to occur on the second floor of the building. "

The Pentagon would have had fire-proof plenum ceilings that would have delayed the expansion of the fire/heat to the drop ceiling in the office areas. The purpose of the plenum ceiling is to retard the spread of the fire. If a pocket of hydrogen did form, an explosion could have increased the temperature of the fire and melted more of the plane. This seems logical to me.

The second thing that kept me from believing it was flight 77 was the size of the hole. As I posted earlier, I don't think the plane had enough kenetic energy to penetrate as deeply as it did and create the hole that it left through the building. That section of the Pentagon had recently been reinforced and it seemed unlikely that the plane could have penetrated to the outer wall of the C ring. If you look at the WTC impact, the plane penetrated the building leaving a silloutte of the plane. The Pentagon did not leave such a silloutte suggesting that the outerwall of the Pentagon was much harder than the outside wall of the WTC and yet the depth of pentration was equal. This made no sense.

The OCT would have us believe that the plane impacted, created a wound and then disappeared like a Morgul blade from the Lord of the Rings. If this is true it would have take a considerable amount of heat to vaporize the plane.



If the plane had created the "Punch Out" hole that we are all familiar with then there should have been a very intense heat present that would have incinerated the plane. But if you look at the punch out picture, there is no evidence of an extreme amount of heat. There is no blackened walls just broken brick; as if something struck it and knocked a hole in the wall. If it was the nose of the plane, it would have been stuck there for quite sometime. The absence of extreme heat would not allow the plane to incinerate so the only logical thing is that something other than the nose of the plane created this hole.


The report of radiation suggests that it was a Depleted Uranium missile that was triggered upon or just prior to impact.

Dr. Sherman notified the Nuclear Information and Resource Service that she detected elevated levels of radiation in her home, located seven miles from the Pentagon. Dr. Sherman still had a gamma meter she had borrowed for her visit to Hunter’s Point. The EPA, the FBI, and other federal agencies, including HMRU (Hazardous Materials Response Units), USAR teams, the local fire department and the Virginia HAZMAT were notified, and an investigation began at the Pentagon.
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/dam-inside.html

This may be the same scenario for the WTC strikes as well. I have only seen one video that does not show a flash just prior to impact and this is the one that the NIST is using to analyze the strike.
I have serious doubts about the video offered by the NIST. I have collected a large inventory of videos that show the strike on the towers. I had not seen the video used by the NIST until they released thier preliminary report. This is the only one that does not show a flash just prior to impact. Until there is a realistic explanation as to what that flash is, I will continue to doubt the findings of the NIST. I will, of course, change my mind, as I did in this case, if there is sufficient and logical evidence to rule out a plane + missile strike but so far I haven't come across any.

[spooked911]

4. so you're saying it was flight 77 loaded with a DU bomb/missile?

if I am getting you right?

[mikelewis]

7. That's my opinion, yes

It may or may not have been flight 77, but there appearantly was a plane involved.

I don't know how they would get the missile aboard but it would have been possible for the missile to have been fired through the plane just prior to impact. Some missiles are sort of like two stage rockets, when the missile is launch, it shed it's outer skin and the second stage fires. The plane may have been the outer shell.

If the pentagon video is real then a missile on-board could have accounted for the intense explosion, the complete destruction of the plane and the deep penetration. {Every time I write that, it just sounds so dirty}

[DulceDecorum]

5. High alumina cement and September 11, 2001

Chemical Attack
If the concrete becomes wet, chemical attack may occur which under certain circumstances could result in almost total loss of strength. There are two forms of chemical attack which may occur, namely sulphate attack and alkaline hydrolysis. Sulphate attack can occur if sulphates present in screed materials or plaster coverings are transferred to the HAC. Alkaline hydrolysis can occur if sodium or potassium hydroxide present in Portland cement screeds or concrete is transferred to the HAC. For both types of chemical attack persistently wet conditions are required.
http://www.quest-tech.co.uk/hac.htm

Reading this pdf file
http://www.civil.columbia.edu/meyer/publications/2002_03_CIBPaper.pdf
will give you additional insights into US construction during the 70s.
You will recall that the steel showed signs of having undergone a eutectic reaction. The reaction you have described has much bearing n the WTC, but is almost irrelevant when applied to the Pentagon.

To return to the Pentagon.
The pieces of so-called debris all appear to be coated with the low-voc lime-green primer-paint that was qualified for use by Boeing in July 2000.
Catherder says as much in the piece entitled
"Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11"
Prior to July 2000, Boeing used a dark green primer.
All four 911 planes were built before July 2000.
I have yet to see ANY pieces of Penta-debris that have DARK GREEN primer.

mikelewis says:
The Pentagon would have had fire-proof plenum ceilings that would have delayed the expansion of the fire/heat to the drop ceiling in the office areas. The purpose of the plenum ceiling is to retard the spread of the fire. If a pocket of hydrogen did form, an explosion could have increased the temperature of the fire and melted more of the plane. This seems logical to me.

What? Where?
In everything I have read to date,
and I have read a LOT to date,
I have seen absolutely NOTHING
that would have cause me to ever suspect this was so.
How did you derive this theory?

And then speculate as to how it came to be that the plane melted at about 800 degrees,(?)
and yet the DNA did NOT decompose at about 200 degrees.

Please also explain the fate of the Kevlar and how it came to be that a TIRE managed to retain its tread within this inferno.
Also tell us what happens to limestone
(such as that which comprised the facade of the Pentagon)
when it comes into contact with high temperatures.

As for the alumina-hydrogen-exploding air hypotheses,
call your local firefighter on the non-emergency line
and ask them about combustion.
And maybe also the local high school chemistry teacher.

We also have a conundrum in that the Penta-plane left much of both wedges still standing and a humble wrecking ball then leveled these Penta-walls. Do the math.

If you take JUST ONE ASPECT of the Penta-crash
and focus on it to the exclusion of all else,
then,
and ONLY THEN,
is it is possible to explain it away.
However,
once that single aspect is placed in Penta-context,
the theories invariably fail and accuse diligent researchers to raise their voices to ask
WHERDY GO?