The video

The following three pictures are extracted from the video shown on CNN site, and said to origin from the department of defence (dod) and to have been shot by the pentagon's parking cctv on septembre 11 2001.

The authentic character of this video has never been denied by the authorities. It is possible to remark on image 2 that the camera has moved, not to say "bounced on it's support". On the upper-left and upper-right corners of the images appear some fuzzy details, probably located on the glass of the booth. This move corresponds to the arrival at the camera's location of the shockwave transmitted by the ground, which propagates much faster than the shockwave transmitted by the air, and such an effect is probably beyond the imagination of the average infographist. The images have probably been cropped with an image processing software, in order to let them viewed in an animation without being disturbed by this effect of move of the camera (see the legend cropped on the lower left part of image 2).

Complete pictures

I recently found on Mineapolis / St Paul Startribune.com web site the uncropped photos, apparently originating from AP (Associated Press ?) and published on march 7 2002. It is obvious, on these frames, that the camera bounces on it's support on frame N° 2.

The camera location can be seen on the following image (bottom right). Some interesting places have been indexed (in yellow). The presumed plane trajectory has been plotted in violet.

The video (animated gif)
	The general impression, at first look, is that something very fast is happening, and has been partially captured by the camera.
Frame 1
	Just above the yellow cabinet (housing of the id card reader ?) we can see a black stuff, which could be the tail of the plane. At the right of this cabinet, two white smoke clouds. Said to be vortexes created by the plane and/or smoke from the engines. Note the "free" space beetween the left of the yellow cabinet and the front of the pentagon : the plane must go through this space from the position on frame 1 (partially hidden by the yellow cabinet) to it's supposed position inside the Pentagon after the crash. At first glance, this free space could be evaluated to around 30 to 50 m. This is confirmed on further analyses, regarding to the total width of the grass band in front of Pentagon. But reasonning relatively to the size of a 757-200 (40 m long) and assuming that on frame 1 the 757 is hidden by the yellow cabinet, exept perhaps it's tail, then it seems that this free space must be at least two times the length of the plane : more than 80 m. This first impression makes the interpretation of this frame as the arrival of the 757 confusing and unreal.
Frame 2
	The supposed tail of the plane has disapeared. The explosion blast comes out from the pentagon front. The white color, as explained by a french explosives expert indicates the presence of a very fast propagating explosion front, caused by a solid explosive and not at all the burning of kerozene. Compare with the orange / black explosion cloud produced by the planes on the wtc towers. Note also that the white track (vortex or engine smoke) extends now to the left up to the point where it disapears in the explosion front. If it has been caused by the plane, it must have gone through this way
Frame 3
	The explosion blast extends. The white color has been replaced now by a nice red. Sign that very hot gases expand. Note also that the white track has quite disapeared on the right of the yellow cabinet, which seems to prove that it was a vortex rather than smoke from an engine. The extension of the explosion front, from the previous frame, could be estimated beetween 10 and 15 meters, by reference to the pentagon front height (24 m). Divided by sound propagation speed in air (300 m/s), this gives a time beetween 33 ms and 50 ms. This is coherent with a frame rate of 25 frames / seconds for the camera : 40 ms beetween frames.

Why there are "lost" frames

If we don't focus on the assumed presence of a flying object having caused this explosion but only on the explosion itself, frames 1 and 2 can't be in succession in the film, separated by 40 ms. Assuming that the blast propagation in the air occurs at a rather regular speed, close from the sound speed in the air (300 m/s), we should see at least one frame showing the beginning of the explosion, and probably two or three frames !

Why, if there is no lost frame, this can't be a 757

Assuming that there are no lost frames, and that a 757 has moved from frame 1 (hidden by yellow cabinet) to frame 2 (masked by explosion) beetween frame 1 and 2, in 40 ms, we must admit that this plane has covered a distance equal to :

If this was a 757, how many frames have been lost ?

If we assume that the 757 was about full speed, 900 km/h, or 250 m/s, the necessary time to fly over 60 m is 240 ms. This means that 6 frames have been lost. There is, obviously, a total lack of chance to loose the six frames of this video on which the 757 could be seen, crossing majestuously the space beetween the yellow cabinet and the pentagon, and crashing itself on the wall of the pentagon !

Why it can't be a 757

Thierry Meyssan first emited this "missing 757" theory in his book "L'effroyable imposture", followed by Pentagate.

The sereve attacks against the person of Thierry Meyssan, more than against his theory, have reinforced this theory to the eyes of those who know what are the usual way of doing of "under control medias".

From an engineer's point of view, it is obvious that it could not be a 757 seing the web site of : XOX , who made a fantastic 3D reconstitution : see for example image below. The cross-bars in some windows are not even broken at the exact place where the plane wings should have hit the building !

See also aerial photo on "defenselink" web site :

From the same point of view, the way materials of a 100 tons plane should move and what destruction they should cause in a crash against a building like the pentagon reinforce this impossibility.

Taking as references images of crashes against buildings, (the El Al 747 in Amsterdam - crash description, photos -, Concorde of Air France at Roissy), it seems evident that the scene of the Pentagon and surroundings after the crash (the lawn intact, ...) is not the scene of a 757 crash.

The approach of a 757 towards this building leave a lot of questions unanswered (realism of the approach trajectory, position of the impact point, no track of the landing gear on the grass though it gets down automatically near the ground, ...).

And if it was not a 757 ?

This would explain why these frames have been "lost" : they are those on which one can recognize that it this not this airliner which hit the pentagon. The first to claim for this thery was the french journalist Thierry Meyssan : according to him, something (a missile, a remotely piloted fighter) was directed on the pentagon, in order to increase the gravity of the attack of Bin Laden on 9/11, the pentagon being a military target. Four hypotheses can be formulated and argumented : the "cruise missile theory", the "foo fighter" theory, the "remotely piloted fighter" theory and the "suicided pilot" theory.

What we could see in this hypothese if the FBI and/or DOD released the complete video. What could it be ? Hypothese : it is an AGM 86 cruise missile.

Source : http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/calcm.htm

The model on the left would be more suitable. The two red military loads inside the missile are ( broach type, see description ) :

• On the front a conventional explosive, shaped as an "hollow charge", whose aim is to dig a hole in a wall, but limited to a few meter in action.
• On the back, an uranium load. This metal has the property to explode when projected on solid materials, creating a plasma inside which the mass of metal propagates. On a smaller scale, this principle is used to destroy tanks.

• visible limited destruction where the two short wings of the missile hited the front of the building
• 4 x 4 m hole in the front : where the hollow charge exploded.
• important wreckage in the first building : action zone of the hollow charge
• small (2 m diameter) and nicely digged holes in the inner buildings and their walls : action of the uranium load.

What could be the "lost" frames

The folowing animations have been done by copying/pastingd the image of the AGM 86 MWS cruise missile, mirroring it, reducing it to fit approximately the field of the cctv camera (more reduced on horizontal axis than on vertical, to cope with the fact that the angle of the trajectory is approximately 45° from the axis of the camera).

Frame A
	Everything is quiet and normal.
Frame B
	The missile appears on the right of the image.
Frame C
	The missile passes behind the yellow cabinet. It's tail is smaller that the "tail" than can be seen on frame 1 of the original video (left visible on this frame). This enlarging of the tail could have been done by an infographist to give the impression that it is a 757 and not a cruise missile. If he had done correctly his job, he should have presented the nose of this virthal 757 on the left of the yellow cabinet !
Frame D
	The missile crosses the free space between the yellow cabinet and the pentagon. The missile length being 7 m, it is assumed that it flies 10 m in one frame (a little more than it's length), which gives a speed of 900 km/h.
Frame E
	The missile passes behind the dark mass of the helicopeter field control tower and hits the pentagon front. The explosion begins to develop.
Frame F
	The explosion develops. The front of the explosion propagates at a rate which is similar to the rate beetween frames 2 and 3 (above)
Frame 2
	The original frame 2 of the video shown by CNN. Next frames are the same.
The reconstructed video (animated gif)
	The rythm of the reconstructed video is better. The explosion propagation is more realistic.

Arguments for the "cruise missile theory"

What pushes to think that this could be an AGM 86 cruise missile with an uranium load is the fact that the ground in front of the explosion site was covered of sand very quickly after the crash :

There was obviously no other reason than to protect people from the remains of this metal, known to cause severe long term intoxications (also known as the "gulf war syndrom"), and/or a way do make the proofs of the presence of uranium disapear. Note that there should be in that case lot of it on the shoes and dining room carpet of all those (firemen, rescue teams) who went on this site before it was covered by sand. Special teams in charge of taking the debris out of the building, later, were dressed with special protection clothes and decontaminate themselves after working on the site.

Let us consider the following scenario (see complete timeline).

1. Ben Laden has prepared an attack involving four hijacked planes.
2. The US official are warned of this attack, by several channels, the most serious being the minister of foreing affairs of the taliban regime who tried to open by this way a negociation with the U.S. officials.
3. On 9/11, four planes are hijacked at the same time. According to the procedures, the NORAD gets the information from the FAA.
4. A hijacked plane hits the first tower of wtc. Within 15 mn, almost everybody has the information (I had it in France at my office, the wife of a colleague having received a mail from somebody watching CNN in the USA, and having phoned to her husband).
5. A second hijacked plane hits the second tower of wtc. Everybody, including people in France who follow in real time the events on internet, know that this is not an accident but an attack.
6. The NORAD, which I can suppose has at least the same information than the french public, has sent fighter planes to intercept the two others hijacked planes (flight 93 and flight 77).
7. The two planes are intercepted. They refuse to obey the visual control signals from the fighters. They are fired. According to some witnesses, both of them in Pensylvania.
8. The fighters (same than those which fired these planes, or others), patrol over sensible zones, including Washington DC.
9. A fighter, let's say an F16 but the reasonning is the same if it is another model of plane, circles over the capital. At a moment, during a circle or a straight trajectory, it is heading towards East. As the sun has just rose, the pilot has the sun just in front of him and is dazzled.
10. He makes a tight turn to the left, at low altitude, perhaps because he just realises that he his arriving towards Ronald Reagan national airport and doesn't want to fly over it.
11. Being still recovering from his dazzle, he doesn't realize that his tight turn makes him loose altitude. Perhaps the "Fly-by-Wire" flight control system of the F16, which limits the angle of attack and gravity, forgives the pilot to achieve his manoeuvre without loosing altitude.
12. He is now right in front of the pentagon, realizes that he is very low and is going to crash. He stops his turn and pulls on the stick to climb, pushes the throttle, starting the afterburning on the engine.
13. He did it one second too late. His plane hits several lamps poles at the crossroads beetween highways 27 and 244. The shocks are not destructive for the plane, but bend the lamp poles and pull some of them out, making the F16 loose speed and perhaps damaging it's control system.
14. The post combustion makes a caracteristic "whooosh" noise heard by the witnesses, and leaves a white smoke on the plane trajetory.
15. Less than one second later, the F16 crashes on the pentagon front. The pilot has not even got the time to eject himself.
16. The explosion of the F16 missiles and the crash energy wrecks hardly the structures of the first building on which it crashed.
17. The engine, the heaviest part, continues with it's inertia and crosses the following buildings.
18. The depleted uranium amunitions of the F16 play their role of penetration, getting deeply inside the inner buildings, probably together with the engine and helping it to penetrate through walls and floors.
19. Within a few hours, the officials have to understand what exactly happened. Probably they knew in a short delay that they lost a fighter.
20. There can be an hesitation : they could think that the F16 had crashed in Pensylvannia and that flight 77 had crashed in the pentagon. The truth must have been known fastly : the pilots who fired the two airliners must have done their reports by radio.
21. In a meeting, perhaps just with military officials, perhaps involving political authorities like the vice president in the white house bunker or even George Bush in his "air force one" plane, it is decided that the information will not bee given to the public that two airliners have been shot by the USAF. For flight 93, it will be said that a revolt of the hijacked passengers turned to the crash of the plane. For flight 77, it will be announced that it crashed on the pentagon.
22. As the evidence that flight 77 didn't crash on the pentagon takes more and more importance in the media, George Bush and it's team want to maintain their official version of the facts, stacking bullshit over bullshit, just to the point where it represents now a huge heap.

Foo fighter trajectory

In violet, the trajectory of the plane, as described by witnesses, ending on the pentagon wall.

Simulation

Starting from a picture of a F16 on the ground, seen approximately on the view angle from which the parking camera has captured the arriving plane, let us suppress the landing gear by software.

We then reduce this image in size, 15% on the vertical axis, 20% on the horizontal axis (to "rotate" it a little). Then by copy / paste, lets us insert this image in the same animation than for the cruise missile theory above.

Arguments for the "foo fighter theory"

All the arguments above, in favor of the "cruise missile" theory apply to this theory. Other arguments can be found.

The image of the pentagon parking camera on which the plane arrives, partially hidden by the yellow cabinet, fits much more with a F16 silhouette.

The evolutions of the plane and it's noise, as described by the witnesses.

The size of a F16 and it's mass could explain the location of the hited light poles and their severe damages. It's more difficult to imagine that with a smaller and lighter cruise missile.

A cruise missile doesn't make a tight turn a few seconds before arriving on it's target : it would make it less precise.

The Pensylvania state police have first reported to have two crash sites.

The two previous theories can be combined into the folowing hypothesis : the crashed plane on the pentagon would be a fighter, equiped with a bomb (same as inside an AGM 86 cruise missile) intended to destroy buildings, remotely piloted to be crashed on the pentagon. An argument for this theory is that some witnesses say they saw a massive plane fly above the federal capital at the crash time. It could have been there to stay in radio range from the zone and would have the "pilot" inside, remotely piloting the fighter.

When algerian terrorists of GIA hijacked a plane in Alger, then flew to France, a meeting of the high officials was held. It was decided that, if the plane flew towards a big city, like Paris, it should be shot down, in order to limit the losses to the passengers and crew and protec the city inhabitants. Edouard Balladur, prime minister at that time, confirmed later on a TV show that he had taken this decision, saying how heavy it was for him.

If flights 93 and 77 had been shot down by one or several fighters, it is obvious that giving such and order and executing it is harmful. It is possible to imagine that the pilot of a fighter, which saw one or two airliners of american companies shot by it's missiles disintegrate and crash to the ground could have been severely shocked psychologically, and that he could have react deciding to commit suicid and crashing it's plane towards the presumed responsibles of this order : the pentagon !

Arguments against these theories

The more serious argument in favour of the crash of a large airplane, about 100 ft wingspan, is the analysis of the lamp poles hit by the plane before crashing on the pentagon : see The analysis of Ron Harvey. Difficult to make one's mind about this fact without going on the site, measuring, seing the lamp poles debris ... Just two hypotheses :

• One of the lamp pole could have been damaged by a heavy debris thrown by the blast, coming from inside the pentagon (piece of concrete...) or from outside (piece of a car, truck or helicopter).
• The hole dug by the explosion into the pentagon has the shape of a cylinder. The blast creates a schock wave towards the exterior, precisely guided by this cylinder. This shock wave could have propagate to the lamp poles, which are precisely on the axis of this cylinder, and damage one or several of them.

It is possible to have more technical information about the pentagon crash, surfing on the following web sites :

• Analyses of Eric Bart
• Killtown
• APFN : Complete analysis, lot of links
• John MITCHELL's web site : also lot of links
• Dulles airport air traffic controllers
  Note : the witnessing of Danielle O'Brien, controller at Washington Dulles airport, according to which she understood, seeing the arrival of the plane which crashed on the pentagon over Washington DC zone, that it was "one of ours", regarding it's maneuverability, has been taken off the above web site : too precise and compromising !
• The guardian investigation
• The power hour
• The 757 theory from cctv analysis
• Dave McGowan's analysis
• Human Underground site

Political arguments can be found on the following sites, much of them being oriented towards a "conspiracy theory" :

• A nasty smell of petrol
• Guerilla news
• Top 11 unanswered questions
• Testimony of Stan Goff, retired US Special Forces Master Sergeant
• The skolnicks report
• "oulala.net" web site (in french).

Since it is known that the japanese attack on Pearl Harbour was foreseen, and that the FBI ordered and organized JF Kennedy murder, there is no obvious reason to give any credit to the administration and government of the US. 9/11 attack and the info blackout following, including the infamous "patriot act", are just like a remake of these scandals. In other words, there have been precedents in history which prove that there can be such consipiracies / public opinion manipulations from US officials.

The theories described above are technically realistic. If it is not an accident or a fighter's pilot suicid, it is obvious that the US officials were warned of Bin Laden plans, but decided to leave them executed (same scenario as for Pearl Harbour). The fighter on the pentagon, if it is an accident or a suicid, was not in the original scenario, but why not use it to reinforce the gravity of the attack ? Inversely, the thesis of an accident or a suicid leading to the crash of a fighter on the pentagon would imply that flights 93 and 77 have been deliberately "neutralized" by the air force, and this could let think that there was no conspiracy, except the will to hide this fact to the public. The pain for the victims families is less important if they think that their relatives died from the direct or indirect action of terrorists, rather than from the action of an american fighter.

There can be questions also to wether or not a conspiracy involved the Bush government and civil officials, or was limited to military circles. It could, in this later case, be linked to the "war declaration" of defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld to the pentagon bureaucracy, on september 10 : the day before the attack !

The main problem today is that a growing number of persons, outside the USA first, and now inside, consider that there has been a conspiracy. If this is the truth, George bush and/or some of his administration members should be considered like Saddam Hussein : being able to mass murder their own people for internal politics or strategic goals.

It's time to say the truth. The best way would be for the FBI / DOD to

1. release the missing frames of the above video

2. release the cctv video of the "mysterious hotel" (the Sheraton or the Sheraton National ?) known to have been viewed by the hotel employees, shocking them. See point of view, the pentagon being just on the left of the picture ...

   

3. release the NEXCOMM/CITGO-gas station video : see point of view ..., source and witnessing.
   
4. Release other videos or photos like the Virginia department of transports's, or from the sites over which "flight 77" flew on 9/11.
5. allow independent experts to examine the debris of the crash on the pentagon, with witenesses having gathered these debris to identify them,
6. conducts a public enquiry in Pensylvania to find the sites of crash,
7. make some holes in the newly brought materials on the pentagon helicopter field, down to the original soil, and verify that there is no uranium on it.

Public opinion, inside the United States and outside, must ask the United State Congress to open an investigation on pentagon crash. Congressmen must know the truth before giving authorisation to the Bush administration to engage into conflicts in the middle east. Sign the petition on line !

This web site is dedicated to all those who died on 9/11/2001
Jean-Pierre Desmoulins, planet Earth citizen.