EX-NAVY PILOT FLIES FLIGHT 77

The pilot of flight 77 which supposedly hit the Pentagon, was an ex-navy F4 pilot who, less than one year prior, participated in an exercise in the Pentagon, in which it gets attacked by a commercial airliner.  The project is documented by the government. This is not a drill.
Even Fox 'news' talks about how an ex-navy man was the pilot, but they fail to tell you about the real story...

1) In October 2000, Government Simulates Exercises of a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon.
2) Charles Birlingame, Navy F4 pilot participates in this exercise.
3) Birlingame retires, gets a job flying commercial jet-liners.
4) Less than 12 months later, its' HIS flight allegedly crashes into the Pentagon!

In October 2000, before the 9/11 attacks, the government simulated a Boeing 757 attacking the Pentagon.  It appears as if they are interested in how the airliner will look in the aftermath.  As though they are considering what 'scenes' to stage, for maximum pictorial effect.

 
Actual Photos from government project MASCAL

If you look up PROJECT MASCAL on WickiPedia, you will find the same pictures, and a link to their source, the Dept. of Defense.  But guess what, the page has been removed form the Dept of Defense.
http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/

Contingency_Planning_Photos.html

(PAGE NOW REMOVED)

Condoleezza Rice said, 'No one ever imagined a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon'
...Whoops!?  ....Is she sure about that!?  She obviously missed the memo.

It seems someone in the government had not only thought about it, but created a mock exercise complete with little model buildings, planes, and even rescue vehicles on the scene.

So, yes, that is a blatant lie, gone unchecked by the news media & public.
You can look up the official flight data from any source.

One would assume the goal of the exercise was about the logistics of a plane strike, but oddly, you see models of little EMT trucks with flashing lights, as if the focus of the exercise, was how the scene would look in the aftermath.

FOX 'News' talks about 'how ironic' it is that an ex-navy fighter pilot was at the helm of flight 77!  However, they fail to tell you about project MASCAL.

Don't you find that odd?  Wouldn't the EXTREME IRONY alone be newsworthy?  Yet, this is probably the first you have heard about this.

The similarities and odds of MASCAL, as related to the events of 911 are beyond equation, yet they don't even mention it on FOX, CNN, MSNBC or any network news.

The major news media's are already under 'Martial Law' based  on the patriot act, it has superseded our Bill of Rights, and our Constitution.

MORE ODDITIES BEYOND EQUATION: On Sep 11, 2001 -THE DAY: How ironic, at the same exact time as the WTC attacks, a simulated crises was happening at the National Reconnaissance office in Chantilly, VA. An exercise, in which a corporate jet collides into the building, thus 'confusing' NORAD protocol  ...What a coincidence. NORAD is in the middle of a number of documented military exercises: 'Vigilant Guardian'  Described as an exercise of a threat that poses air defense protocol nationwide 'Northern Vigilance'  Moved Jets to Canada and Alaska to fight of an imaginary attack Russian fleet 'NC Exercise'  3 F-16's stationed at pentagon, flown 180 miles away to an impromptu exercise in NC This left 14 fighter Jets prepared to protect a real defense issue, in the entire united states Calls of a hijacked aircraft to NYC immediately asks for F-16's to be scrambled.     After FINALLY allowing the F-16's to scramble, Cheney is quoted as saying: 'Not to exceed 350 MPH' in flight"

MISSILE DAMAGE TO PENTAGON

Where are the bodies?  Supposedly 100 Tons of steel and titanium alloy completely disintegrated, yet, government forensics teams claim to have identified 180+ bodies.  This is just on 'paper'.  No witnesses saw any bodies, no witnesses saw damage consistent with a 757 slamming onto the lawn and Pentagon.  And Massive Pilot Irony Gone Unreported!
ALSO SEE TIMELINE TROUBLE

		If you saw the tape that the Pentagon claims shows the Boeing 757, you can see there is no 757!  It is laughable, if it wasn't so horrific. They claim you can see the nose of the 757 in one of the frames, however, if you apply scientific laws of distance and size, it is obvious that this is no Boeing 757 ...In fact, it does have the dimensions of a small drone or missile.

If a 757 hit the Pentagon, you would SEE a HUGE jetliner in the video frames! How we calculated the size. A Boeing 757 is 44 tall.  Airliner Dimensions That is over half the height of the Entire Pentagon Building, which is only 77 Feet Tall. With all the cameras taping the Pentagon, isn't it odd they cannot prove it, and release a paltry few frames, only after federal judgment makes them?
INCONSISTENT PENTAGON DAMAGE                         LOOK CLOSELY, ...This is the picture the administration does not want you to see!  Look at the red image, it is scaled to size, (ACTUALLY EVEN SMALLER) and shows where the impact patterns SHOULD be, yet, there is no damage except a single hole that goes through 3 sections of the pentagon. This wall collapsed or was brought down by explosives minutes after this picture, which clearly shows inconsistent damage for a Boeing 757. Given that the outer wall of the Pentagon had not yet collapsed and the only hole is approximately 16 ft. in diameter,  how does a plane over 44 feet tall and 125 ft. wide fit into that hole as shown in the photographic evidence from the Pentagon? Furthermore, can physics explain why there is no damage to the Pentagon's upper floors where the tail section would have hit? Close-ups of this section are extremely revealing. Why were America and the world never shown the video and photographs of the Pentagon, BEFORE the outer wall had collapsed showing only one 16 ft. hole. Many people do not realize that the outer wall did not collapse until almost 30 minutes after the initial impact.                                             PENETRATION TO OTHER SIDE OF PENTAGON 'C-RING'  -SUPPOSEDLY A JET FUSELAGE MADE THE HOLE, WITH A CARBON NOSE CONE, AND CAUSING NO LATERAL DAMAGE. How does a Boeing 757, constructed from lightweight aluminum, penetrate over 9 ft. of steel reinforced concrete with piercing clean round holes, and leave no evidence of itself?  A 757 Did this?  ...if it wasn't so horrific, it would be laughable.                         You really believe this building ate a Boeing 757? Now, 30 minutes after the missile pierced through 3 steel reinforced walls, leaving the hole shown in the picture above as it exited the last wall.   Are we supposed to believe it got hot enough to melt a 757 airliner, including two 6-ton titanium steel alloy engines? Not to mention, the 757 supposedly disintegrated, yet, you can see un-burnt desks, and un-melted computer screens immediately next to the impact sections.                                                           You can see, the pilot passed up a clear direct frontal assault on his target. He then passed through the air space of Reagan International. During this maneuver they dropped 7000 feet and by all reports did it like an ace fighter pilot. Amazingly, the pilot managed maneuver the 757, through obstacles, attaining a flight level of 20 feet , in distance of about 1/4 mile, in order to strike the only wall of the entire Pentagon to be reinforced to withstand such an attack.                                                                                                                         How could a 757 clear highway structures @A and manage to strike point B without touching the ground?  Physically impossible! “I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound. I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast – it sounded nothing like an airplane.” Lon Rains - editor for Space News (Pentagon eyewitness) Dozens of Video Cameras Missed something like this?                                 CNN Reporter at pentagon: "there does not appear to be any evidence that a jet-liner crashed here" Official claim the jet disintegrated due to the heat. 12-ton titanium alloy engines, wings, fuselage, all gone. In the aftermath, it was reported by media sources that a giant 100 ft. crater was plowed into the front lawn of the Pentagon as the result of a powerful airliner crash? Why does photographic evidence overwhelmingly show that this was absolutely not the case? Why no crater? Why no skid marks? Why no burn marks? Why was the entire world deliberately mislead? Examine the photographic evidence for yourself. (click to enlarge)

		Pentagon Crash has NO EVIDENCE of a jet-liner. These 3 pictures are the only evidence whatsoever that an airliner crashed at the Pentagon There seems to be a  few  'clean & placed' pieces of plane, small enough to carry off, the lawn, which was  undisturbed. Not one seat cushion. No engines No Vertical Stabilizer No wing sections Nothing.... Nothing but pictures.  And of course, these 'pieces' have since, conveniently disappeared and cannot be analyzed.
		This piece of wreckage looks real, not planted! But unfortunately, it is not from a Boeing 757! Official reaction to this photo / part, was to claim it is a HoneyWell rotor from the rear 'APU' engine in a Boeing 757's tail-section. But, after studying these high-resolution photos, HoneyWell, the manufacturers of the supposed APU engines, said: "there is no way that is any part of a APU engine we manufacture"

Karl Schwartz, former GOP Stratagist, patmoz nanotechnologies -inet security systems CEO recognizes the part as a JT8D Turbo from from a US Air Force A-3 Skywarrior.

The only piece of wreckage that appears 'genuine' in the FEMA photo is the front shaft-bearing housing from a US Air Force A-3 Skywarrior, or something very similar.

Only 4 or 5 still existed on 911, and they were stored at Hughes Aircraft in Van Nuys, CA,
now better known as RAYTHEON, a big war profiteer.
RAYTHEON corp has been in this site, here is the proof.

If a 757 had hit the building it would be an easy matter to prove, but,
They have not.
They will not.
They can not  ...Because it didn't happen.

Lets look at this again frame by frame

		911 Pentagon video examination 1 by Dave VonKleist of ThePowerHour.com Watch Video 1
		911 Pentagon video examination 2 by Dave VonKleist of ThePowerHour.com Watch Video 2
		911 Pentagon video examination 3 by Dave VonKleist of ThePowerHour.com Watch Video 3

As details of the passengers on the four hijacked flights emerge, some are shown to have curious connections to the defense company Raytheon, and possibly its Global Hawk pilot-less aircraft program.

*Stanley Hall (Flight 77) was director of program management for Raytheon Electronics Warfare. One Raytheon colleague calls him "our dean of electronic warfare." [AP, 9/25/01]

*Peter Gay (Flight 11) was Raytheon's Vice President of Operations for Electronic Systems and had been on special assignment to a company office in El Segundo, Calif. [AP, 9/25/01]

Raytheon's El Segundo's Electronic Systems division is one of two divisions making the Global Hawk. [ISR Journal, 3/02]

*Kenneth Waldie (Flight 11) was a senior quality control engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems.

*David Kovalcin (Flight 11) was a senior mechanical engineer for Raytheon's electronic systems. [CNN, 9/01]

*Herbert Homer (Flight 175) was a corporate executive working with the Department of Defense. [CNN, 9/01, Northeastern University Voice, 12/11/01]

Raytheon employees with possible links to Global Hawk can be connected to three of the four flights. There may be more, since many of the passengers' jobs and personal information have remained anonymous.
A surprising number of passengers, especially on Flight 77, have military connections. For instance, William E. Caswell was a Navy scientist.

Could these Raytheon employees have been on board to activate Global Hawk technology, or make sure it worked?

The evidence that this aircraft was not a Boeing 757, includes among other things :

1. The width of the impact wound is nowhere near wide enough.
2. The Bush administration has refused to release the black boxes, the voice recorders or even pictures of any wreckage of flight 77.
3. The Bush administration has refused access, by independent investigators, to any wreckage it, or the FAA, may have.

Contrary to the pictures shown to the American public, after the fact, why does photographic evidence taken only a few moments after the Pentagon event show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon? Where is the plane? Where is the tail, the wings, the luggage, the seats, the landing gear; the engines? What happened to the passengers? 

No one reports Bodies ...They are just on paper, supposedly 177 or more bodies were identified, even though their are no eyewitness reports.  Not to mention the fire was so hot it supposedly incinerated 100 tons of Aluminum and titanium steal alloy.
-------
Pratt & Whitney / Roll Royce engines
12' x 9' Diameter Titanium steel alloy
6 tons each  Melting point of titanium: 1,688
Max burning Temp of Jet-Fuel: 1,120.

What hit the Pentagon?

and whatever happened to Flight 77?

I could, and have been accused of circulating disinformation with regards to 911, however my only aim is to promote thoughtful discussion on the subject. If you are of the opinion that websites such as this serve no purpose other than to cloud the waters of what 'officially' happened then please do not read on.

.

Update 28.4.04: The 'Wing' inside the Pentagon appears to be a crushed air duct - Once every theory has been thoroughly explored and 'debunked' then all that should remain ought to be be the truth

A brief description of MMLS taken from the Hanscom website (see link below)

"The Mobile Microwave Landing System (MMLS), designated AN/TRN-45, is a portable, ground-based microwave transmitter that provides a mobile, precision approach and landing capability for MLS equipped aircraft operating under adverse conditions, including inclement weather and hostile environments. The MMLS equipment is modular and lightweight, yet rugged enough to withstand operations in forward battle areas. It can be assembled and put into operation under field conditions within 75 minutes by a team of three people. The MMLS will transmit MLS data to aircraft equipped with an MLS receiver, for conversion and display on the aircraft's cockpit display units. The aircrews may use the MLS information to perform precision approaches and landings on the specific site (runway) at which the M