FLIGHT 77: Fake Pentagon eyewitness IDs Global Hawk

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
http://www.total911.info/2006/07/pentagon-eyewitness-ids-global-hawk.html

Pentagon eyewitness IDs Global Hawk
http://www.total911.info/2006/07/pentagon-eyewitness-ids-global-hawk.html

Audio report from Republic Broadcasting Network.
Summaries via LibertyForum July 7, 2006:
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Piper/0607/20060707_Fri_Piper.mp3

"Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, reports:

Samuel Danner (electrical engineer for AmTrak), was involved in the clean-up at the Pentagon crash site and inspected the debris at the site. He said, "It was not a Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon. The plane looked like a hump-back whale." He thinks a Global Hawk hit the Pentagon. (There were only seven made as of 9/11/01 and two were missing at the time.)

Danner is a former pilot. He said the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was very quiet with one engine near the back. He also saw a second plane overhead and wonders if it was controlling the plane that hit the Pentagon. He walked the lawn and picked up small pieces of debris with others. He did not see any bodies from the aircraft.

Danner is very ill now with lymphoma, which may be the result of DU exposure at the Pentagon on 9/11. He wants to talk now (after seeing "Loose Change") because "it's been bugging me."

The Global Hawk fired a DU missile that penetrated the thick concrete wall of the Pentagon. DU was detected at the time and workers on the scene later in the day wore protective equipment.

-----------------------

Yep, this 53-yr old Sam Danner, a pilot since the age of 16, was a first-hand observer of the crash. He pulled his car over to the south of the pentagon on the right side of 395 when he saw the approach of the plane that hit the pentagon.

He also observed a bunch of guys outside the pentagon standing there looking through binoculars.

He got a good view of the plane's approach, for a duration of at least three seconds. He says that the plane was not a 757, no way. "It was like a humpback whale" he says. Size of a gulfstream 300, about 100 ft wingspan, one engine on the backside with a "V" tail and no windows he could see. And it was very quiet. Going about 400mph. Overhead, at an estimated 15,000 feet he saw another plane.

As an EMT, he ran over to help at the pentagon, but found no bodies, no wreckage from a boeing aircraft on the scene. He smelled cordite and he saw a 3-foot single engine on the ground there. He picked up graphite pieces similar to the composite wings on a global hawk.

This engine matches the description of the single engine of a globalhawk. The globalhawk is a UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) but could not have caused the damage if it wasn't containing a bunker-busting missle deployed on impact. The plane observed overhead might have been the plane controlling the remotely-controlled mission.

If a 757 had crashed into the pentagon, then there would have been aluminum all over the grass and two 9-foot diameter engines.


http://www.total911.info/2006/07/pentagon-eyewitness-ids-global-hawk.html
 

anart

A Disturbance in the Force
Hmm, makes me wonder if it's only the DU that caused the lymphoma - silencing this particular witness would be a very advantageous thing for the criminals behind it all, or so it seems.
 
A

Anders

Guest
A good find. I have the same suspicion as Anart to the real cause of the disease suffered by Danner, though DU might also have been contributory.

I wonder how many more of the people working that day on cleaning up at the pentagon are going to come forward with their actual experiences.
 
A

Arlo_usa

Guest
Note that the physical evidence to determine if the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was a Boeing 757 has been "hiding in plain sight" since the event.

Specifically, the turbine recovered.

The FAA requires periodic, scheduled aircraft inspection for all domestic commercial aircraft. During these inspections, the relevant serial numbers of the aircraft, major components (like turbines) and sub component assemblies are recorded.

The serial number of the turbine, and any serial numbers of sub components, would appear on the maintenance and inspection records.

The serial numbers of the recovered turbine should match the maintenance and inspection records exactly.

Identification would be positive, if the serial numbers appeared in FAA records for the 757 in question.

If the recovered serial numbers did NOT appear in these records, then the aircraft was not a commercial aircraft.
 

Ruth

The Living Force
Anders said:
I wonder how many more of the people working that day on cleaning up at the pentagon are going to come forward with their actual experiences.
Only the ones who have 'nothing to lose'... The others have to run the risks of losing their jobs, their retirement payouts their benefits, their families, their health and their lives.

Its probably these things that keep people from speaking out and it wouldn't just relate to Flight 77 either.
 
H

heiho1

Guest
I sent this as an email to my list but I'm posting it here as it's relevant:

"""
Lest anyone miss the new "cool" thing to be, it's a "conspiracy theorist"!!

http://www.911blogger.com/2006/07/loose-change-creators-receive-4-page.html

Also, as a comment on the below article:

http://www.total911.info/2006/07/pentagon-eyewitness-ids-global-hawk.html

I was recently at a Democratic Party Meetup and I spoke about, among other things, the immense improbability of a 757 being able to approach such highly restricted air space, let alone vaporize itself while leaving DNA intact for identification purposes. At that meeting, I was approached by a gentleman who indicated he was in the area of the Pentagon that morning. He stated that he was in traffic and that he saw the plume of smoke arise but he neither saw nor heard any large airliner. From his perspective, it appeared that a bomb exploded in front of the Pentagon.

This was just a random individual at a local meetup [meetup.com for more info] and yet he knew, without a doubt, that the Pentagon story was complete bunk. Indeed, he knew that *as an eyewitness*.
"""
 

vinny

The Living Force
anart said:
Hmm, makes me wonder if it's only the DU that caused the lymphoma - silencing this particular witness would be a very advantageous thing for the criminals behind it all, or so it seems.
So, lets review: He has years of relevant experience, and he's using that to make sense of what he saw, and he has pretty strong data that contradicts the official story, backed up by professional expertise, that would be difficult to refute...

Yep, he's a dead man walking. IMO.

No wonder people don't come forward to disagree with the official story. They rightly fear for their lives.
 
H

heiho1

Guest
sleepyvinny said:
anart said:
Hmm, makes me wonder if it's only the DU that caused the lymphoma - silencing this particular witness would be a very advantageous thing for the criminals behind it all, or so it seems.
So, lets review: He has years of relevant experience, and he's using that to make sense of what he saw, and he has pretty strong data that contradicts the official story, backed up by professional expertise, that would be difficult to refute...

Yep, he's a dead man walking. IMO.

No wonder people don't come forward to disagree with the official story. They rightly fear for their lives.
It's a sad commentary that I know so many who fear for their lives when they should fear for their immortal souls...
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
It seems Sam Danner had admitted to lying about seeing the Pentragon crash. See: http://wingtv.net/thorn2006/danner.html

At first I thought someone might have 'gotten' to him, and he recanted on his testimony, but after reading the WingTV article (I haven't listened to the podcast yet), it seems he made it all up.

So, what will come of all this? Whenever someone brings up the Global Hawk theory, people will remember Sam Danner lying about seeing it.
 

Laura

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Yeah, exactly. Lisa sent me a clip from the conversation and this was definitely some fudgeduggery. I guess I'll change the title of the thread...
 

vinny

The Living Force
Laura said:
Yeah, exactly. Lisa sent me a clip from the conversation and this was definitely some fudgeduggery. I guess I'll change the title of the thread...
'fudgeduggery' LOL!
is that a technical term? :D

Well, that's interesting. is this another case of using a truth dressed as a lie to hide the truth? ie. using an obvious red herring, to obscure the fact that the real truth is also.... a herring.
 
H

heiho1

Guest
Here is the thread on the LOOSE CHANGE blog where Sam Danner [assuming the posts are legit] declared the falsehood of his claims:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8567
 
Top Bottom