Pentagon eyewitness IDs Global Hawk

[ianrcrane]

Audio report from Republic Broadcasting Network.
Summaries via LibertyForum July 7, 2006:

"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. . . . 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.

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

[TimmyG]

interesting stuff

aren't judicial watch supposed to be getting more pentagon vids made public.
I wonder how many more blurry vids are going to apparently prove it was a 747?

[kbo234]

Eric Hufschmidt said it was a Global Hawk in 'Painful Deceptions'. The 'Loose Change 2' guys that it was a cruise missile that struck the Pentagon.
Is it possible that they are both right or was the DU missile (as claimed) a different animal entirely?

This is a feather in Eric H's cap though. He might seem a bit mad at times but he definitely ain't no fool.

[emil]

[Steven Collins]

9/11 Eye-witness Saw What Hit The Pentagon - And It Wasn't A 757

Listen to Sam Danner interview. The show takes a few minutes to get going - but a must listen for those who want to know the truth ...

http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Piper06.html

[blackcat]

Dead link for me.

[Andrew Johnson]

KBO (Any relation to HBO?),

Point of info - I believe that LC2 said it was an A3 Skywarrior that hit the pentagon.

Audio interview linked from this page:

http://www.erichufschmid.net/EyewitnessToFlight77.html

It's long, and Eric Rants quite a bit, but the info is there....

[Annie]

[insidejob]

I believe a drone hit the Pentagon and the idea that a 757 hit it is laughable. But I have two questions concerning the new eyewitness:

1. how come it took him so long to give his testimoney?

2. why use a missile and a drone to attack the Pentagon? Why not just a missile?

insidejob

[melmoth]

metoo

[Newspeak International]

methree, seems the whole site is down!

[Newspeak International]

Found a transcript for the programme though:

http://www.ricksiegel.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=80

[andrewwatson]

This should put an end to the nonsense about a grass-skimming 757 and those videos which they are about to release. It is a ploy to distract us from examining the real evidence, like the above: a double bluff, not a 'honeypot' but a 'vinegar jar'.

[dodgy]

[Snowygrouch]

All,
I`ve just finished a lengthy Computer Aided Design reconstruction of
the Pentagon crash.
Assuming that the CCTV is not faked (and I doubt it is due to its utter failure to show a 757).
I have calculated the size of the plane in the image to be almost exactly
100 feet long +/- 10 feet.
This was done by using hi resolution satellite photos of the Pentagon, AutoCAD and a very accurate CAD model of a 757-200. By overlaying the image I was able to place the `camera` within 5 feet of the actual CCTV location and recreating the flightpath from the hole damage.
The object visable in one of the frames is NOT a 757 but is quite large and would match a 737 for size almost exactly.

However this does assume the CCTV frames are genuine so there are still unknowns involved. However I cannot see any sense in faking them as

1: Why take 5 years to release faked frames that would vindicate the offical story?
2: Why fake frames which dont prove your case conclusively?

An A3 Skywarrior is about 75 feet long I recollect, my guess is that in fact a small cargo plane such as a 737 was used and that shaped charges were set off inside to simulate a much larger plane impacting. You can see this my the fact the pentagon clocks were stopped several minuites earlier than the crash took place.

I think that the wreckage that proved it was not a 757 was removed and the fact it was a cargo plane accounts for the no-baggage, no-bodies and no-seats.

Just another possiblity, I dont see why you would use a global hawk. They dont look anything like an airliner, are very expensive & technology for controlling any fly-by-wire plane has been around for years. Why bother using mega expensive easily recodnised military technology?

Then again I could be totally wrong as these are also the people who thought that nobody would notice a 47 story skyscraper collapsing!

Calum

[Veronica]

With the greatest respect to all concerned, Sam Danner's lies are fairly obvious when listening to his interview with Eric Hufshmid.

He was an 'innocent bystander'. Yet he had his binoculars to hand. He knew they had searched his car because 'tapes everything down'. He just walked across the grass and 'joined a group'. They are walking around with sub-machine guns, but they 'just let him' join in. JOIN THE PENTAGON CRIME SCENE?

He 'just happens' to describe precisely what Eric Hufshmid has been 'pushing since day 1'?

Sam Danner gives reasons for considering he is 'making it up as he goes along'. There is too much inconsistency. He goes backwatds an forwards. After 5 years consideration, once could reasonably expect him to get his story straight.

He feigns 'lack of knowledge', acts confused, and Hufschmid mentions some 'key words' and provides a small explanation. Then - as if by magic - Danner 'knows all about it'.

And, furthermore, Hufschmid is a 'Jew baiter'. He makes no distinction whatsoever between 'Jews' and 'Zionists'. Neither does Daryl Bradford Smith, nor does Chris Bollyn, nor Douglas Herman (nor, indeed, does Rense).

95% of the world's so-called 'Jews' are not Jewish in any way whatsoever. and this includes ALL Soviet, European, American (etc.) Jews - and ALL ZIONISTS. (Zionists include many Gentiles as well, or course ... because Zionism is a Political Party, not a religion).

These so-called Jews are the AskeNAZI Jews ... descended from the Khazars.

TRUE HEBREW Jews, the Sephardim, should not be demonised by the Hufschmid - Bollyn Axis of Hate.

The point I'm making is that - to the majority of the world - the world 'Zionist' immediately invokes the concept 'Jew', which is totally fallacious.

As and when Hufschmid, Bollyn and Co. make this distinction up front in what they write, what they write may become tolerable. Until that day, it all sounds like deliberate 'Jew hating' & 'Jew baiting' to me, I'm afraid.

[kbo234]

[Me]

http://membres.lycos.fr/applemacintosh2/Pentagon2.htm