Friday, July 20, 2018

Aeronautical Engineer: Memorandum for the President: No Boeing 757 Hit the Pentagon

Aeronautical Engineer: Memorandum for the President: No Boeing 757 Hit the Pentagon

Collective Intelligence, Corruption, Cultural Intelligence, Government, IO Deeds of War, Peace Intelligence
9/11: No Boeing757  Hit the Pentagon
20 July 2018
Mr. President,
According to The 9/11 Commission Report (2004), American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, was flown into the Pentagon at around 400 mph barely skimming the ground and taking out a series of lampposts on its approach. As a pilot and aeronautical engineer, however, that cannot be correct: high-speed flight in relatively close proximity to the ground is virtually impossible – in any fixed-wing aircraft.
An exception would be cruise-type missiles, whose flying surfaces are more akin to horizontal fins than wings, and thus have extremely high wing loadings (lbs/sf) — much higher even than of ground-attack fighter-bombers.
Commonly invoked photos of aircraft in flight close to the ground do not depict flight at anywhere near maximum speed; they are photos taken of craft flying at greatly reduced throttle settings – which is what actually happens during any landing!
An aircraft’s wing, basically, is an air deflector. As an aircraft moves forward, the wing essentially deflects the resultant airstream downward. This downward deflection of air causes an equal and opposite reaction upward. This upward reaction (equal to the weight of the aircraft when in level flight) is what is termed ‘Lift.’
This downward deflection of air, which occurs along the entire span of the wing, is also what constitutes downwash. This downwash ‘sheet’ has a vertical component that is normal (I.e., at a right angles) to the direction of flight.
When an aircraft flies in close proximity to the ground, it is this vertical component of Downwash that causes the ‘cushion’ of air between the wing and the ground.
This “cushion,” when sufficiently energized (by an aircraft’s high speed), behaves much like a pneumatic “spring,” and tends to resist any action against it — such as that caused by a pilot trying to force the aircraft down against it.
 
In the case of a Boeing 757, given its wingspan of 124 feet, this would equate to roughly 62 feet AGL. Sixty-two feet is a theoretical minimum; a practical minimum would actually be considerably higher.
In a real-world situation (such as allegedly at the Pentagon), a pilot — especially one as demonstrably inept as Hani Hanjour who could barely fly a trainer — probably could not have come within 100 feet of the ground in a Boeing 757 flying at 400 mph.
This means that the “official account” of the Pentagon hit cannot possibly be correct because it violates the laws of aerodynamics. The 9/11 Commission has been playing the American people for saps.
Reference:
Phi Beta Iota: The author desires to remain anonymous to the public. He is known by name and reputation to our team.
See Also:

Thursday, July 19, 2018

John Lear: Memorandum for the President: 9/11 Twin Towers Were Not Hit By Nor Destroyed By Two Airliners

John Lear: Memorandum for the President: 9/11 Twin Towers Were Not Hit By Nor Destroyed By Two Airliners

Collective Intelligence, Corruption, Cultural Intelligence, Government, IO Deeds of War, Peace Intelligence
9/11 Twin Towers Were Not Hit By Nor Destroyed By Two Airliners
19 July 2018
Mr. President,
The 9/11 Commission refused to take evidence from Pilots for 9/11 Truth, of which I am a member, with over 19,000 hours flight time, much of that flying covert missions for the CIA, and including 17 world speed records in a Lear Jet Model 24.
No Boeing 767 airlines hit either of the Twin Towers, as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors. All of the “evidence” to that effect, including video depictions, has been fabricated and can be forensically challenged.
You yourself, Mr. President, one of the most experienced property developers in New York City, have correctly observed that the buildings could only have been brought down by explosive as “planes would never be able to penetrate the steel beams”, had it exactly right. I leave it to you to create a new independent commission to examine all possibilities including thermite, pre-planted explosives (TNT), directed energy weapons from above, and nuclear explosions from below.
My focus is on the physical impossibility of the specific alleged aircraft crashing into either of the twin towers.
In the case of UAL 175 going into the south tower, a real Boeing 767 would have begun “telescoping” when the nose hit the 14-inch steel columns which are 39 inches on center. The vertical and horizontal tail would have instantaneously separated from the aircraft, hit the steel box columns and fallen to the ground.
The engines – made of titanium and virtually indestructible — when impacting the steel columns would have maintained their general shape and either fallen to the ground or been recovered in the debris of the collapsed building.
No Boeing 767 could attain a speed of 540 mph at 1000 feet above sea level because ‘parasite drag doubles with velocity’ and ‘parasite power’ cubes with velocity. These are scientific facts.
The fan portion of the engine is not designed to accept the volume of dense air at that altitude and speed.
No significant part of the Boeing 767 or engine could have penetrated the 14-inch steel columns and 37 feet beyond the massive core of the tower without part of it falling to the ground.
The piece of alleged external fuselage containing 3 or 4 window cutouts is inconsistent with an airplane that hit 14-inch steel box columns, placed at over 500 mph: It would have crumpled.
The debris of the collapse should have contained massive sections of the Boeing 767, including 3 engine cores weighing approximately 9000 pounds apiece which could not have been hidden. Yet there is no evidence of any of these massive structural components from either 767 at the WTC. Such complete disappearance of 767s is impossible.
Instead of bodies, seats, luggage, wings and tail having fallen to the ground external to either building (which would have happened had real planes hit them), we have a component from a General Electric CF-6 engine, found at Church and Murray Streets under a rain canopy, which was neither torn nor damaged, which would have happened had it been thrown from an airplane crashing into the South Tower.​ Whoever placed it on the sidewalk, which would have been deeply gouged by something so massive having hit at high velocity (the sidewalk was pristine), did not know that only the American Airlines Boeing 767-300 uses General Electric CF-6 engines, which therefor cannot have come from United Flight 175. Planting evidence demonstrates by itself that 9/11 was an orchestrated and planned event.
The Boeing 767 has approximately three million FAA approved parts, each of which must be stamped or engraved with an FAA approved manufacturers identification and parts number. Not a single part of the 6 million parts from the two Boeing 767’s which allegedly crashed into the World Trade Center has been found.
The “crash” in Shankesville, PA is a bomb crater with a truckload of trash dumped into the hole. From sources at Boeing. the ACARS (Aircraft Communicating, Addressing and Reporting System), which transmits the position, altitude, speed and engine data of aircraft in the air via satellite to its respective operators (Boeing, UAL, P&W) it is quite certain that the flight alleged to have crashed there was in fact operating for a minimum of four hours after its alleged crash in Shankesville, PA, which was therefore also obviously fraudulent.
Mr. President, it is quite clear to all patriotic citizens that are paying attention that 9/11 was a false flag attack that framed Muslims, using patsies documented by Saudi Arabia, as part of a Zionist plan in which at a minimum Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet at the CIA, and others in key US Government positions, were complicit. The purpose of this false flag event was to draw the United States into perpetual war against the Arab states that served as a counter-balance to Israel’s domination of the entire region and to pave the way for the expansion of Israel in accord with the Yinon Plan (to create Greater Israel) – it is this plan and the Zionist culpability for 9/11 that needs to be a focus of attention as you seek the truth about 9/11.
I have spent years working with the Mossad and flying for CIA into and around the Middle East, to include being the pilot that delivered the arms and ammunition to Iran by order of President Ronald Reagan in return for the hostages. I was friends with Salim bin Laden. I am quite certain that the 9/11 Commission Report is a pack of lies, an orchestrated cover-up similar to the Warren Commission cover-up that is now unraveling even further in the aftermath of your directed release of 50,000 more records. America needs the truth about 9/11 and it is my view that your leadership on  this matter, in time to educate America on the truth when you speak on 9/11 2018, can be the critical factor in “rebooting” public understanding of who our enemies are, both foreign and domestic.
Please, Mr. President, use the truth about 9/11 to accelerate your taking down the Deep State and its Zionist under-belly. May God Bless you, Mr. President, and may God Bless America.
Very respectfully,
John Lear
Reference:
DOC (2 Pages):  911 POTUS Lear on No Planes
John Lear, a captain for a major US Airline has flown over 160 different types of aircraft, in over 50 different countries. He holds 17 world speed record in the Lear Jet and is the only pilot ever to hold every airline certificate issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. Mr. Lear has flown missions worldwide for the CIA and other government agencies. A former Nevada State Senator candidate, he is the son of William P. Lear, designer of the Lear Jet executive airplane, the 8-track stereo, and founder of Lear Siegler Corporation.  Detailed aviation biography.
See Also:

T. Mark Hightower: Memorandum for the President: 9/11 Twin Towers Collapse and Vaporization Cannot Be Explained by Nano-Thermite Alone

T. Mark Hightower: Memorandum for the President: 9/11 Twin Towers Collapse and Vaporization Cannot Be Explained by Nano-Thermite Alone

Collective Intelligence, Corruption, Cultural Intelligence, Government, IO Deeds of War, Peace Intelligence
9/11 Twin Towers Collapse and Vaporization Cannot Be Explained by Nano-Thermite Alone
18 July 2018
Dear Mr. President,
Nano-thermite (a finely-granulated version of thermite, an incendiary long used to weld railroad tracks and to disable artillery using thermite grenades) has been oversold by those who claim that it holds the key to understanding how the Twin Towers were taken down. This thesis, promulgated by the lame stream media as the predominant if not exclusive “9/11 truth movement” view, is very easy to disprove, thus further confirming that what you call the “fake news” media is totally complicit in maintaining an official narrative that is false.
It is a law of materials science that, in order for an explosive to destroy a material, it must have a detonation velocity equal to or greater than the speed of sound in that material. Nanothermite does not satisfy that condition for either concrete or steel, which makes it a non-starter for this role.
The speed of sound in concrete is 3,200 meters/second and in steel 6,100 meters/second. The highest possible detonation velocity for nanothermite in the scientific literature is only 895 meters/second – 28% of what is required for concrete, and 15% of what is required for steel.
This means it would not be physically possible for nanothermite to have been responsible for blowing apart the Twin Towers insofar as it cannot blow apart either concrete or steel, the primary constituents.
While nanothermite may have been used in an auxiliary role (for the purpose of cutting through specific joints and trusses), its explosive force is only 1/13 that of TNT, which is the universal standard. It would have made no sense to use nanothermite in lieu of other more powerful explosives, which is revealed by the estimate of Neils Harrit, a proponent of the nanothermite hypothesis, that it would have taken from 29,000 to 143,000 metric tons of nanothermite for each tower. Q.E.D.
Other means – not at all investigated by the 9/11 Commission which appears to have been more of a cover-up Commission – were used to achieve the vaporization of the Twin Towers.  It remains for you, Mr. President, to fulfil your campaign promise to get to the bottom of this, and give us a new independent 9/11 investigation on the who, why, how, and costs of the 9/11 atrocity.
Very respectfully,
Mark Hightower
Reference with additional facts and links: T. Mark Hightower, “Nanothermite: If it Doesn’t Fit, you Must Acquit! James Fetzer Blog, 26 August 2011
Mark Hightower holds both BS and MS degrees in chemical engineering from San Jose State University. His initial work experience was in the chemical industry, and then he worked for NASA where he retired in 2015 after 25 years of federal government service, where he worked on space life support systems for future long duration missions, hazardous materials management, arc jet testing of heat shield materials for spacecraft entry into planetary atmospheres, hyper velocity free flight aerodynamic testing of spacecraft and aircraft models in enclosed terrestrial ballistic range, facility water management including drinking water, storm water, industrial waste water, water conservation and reclamation, pollution prevention, above ground storage tanks, and climate change risk management.
See Also:

Richard Gage, AIA: Memorandum for the President of the United States: 9/11 Explosive Evidence As Identified by AE911Truth Not Addressed in the Official Reports


Richard Gage, AIA: Memorandum for the President of the United States: 9/11 Explosive Evidence As Identified by AE911Truth Not Addressed in the Official Reports

Collective IntelligenceCorruptionCultural IntelligenceGovernmentIO Deeds of WarLaw EnforcementMediaPeace Intelligence

9/11 Explosive Evidence As Identified by AE911Truth Not Addressed in the Official Reports
17 July 2018
Mr. President:
When you were campaigning for the presidency in Bluffton, South Carolina, on February 15, 2016, you told voters that under your watch they would “find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center.” And so we implore you, while you are now involved in exposing FBI corruption, to also investigate the agency’s reluctance to examine the explosive destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers—namely, Buildings 1, 2, and 7—on September 11, 2001. As you know, the events of that day are responsible for much of the worldwide carnage that continues to this day. Thus, 9/11 remains an issue of grave importance to the United States of America.
I’m Richard Gage, a San Francisco Bay Area architect of 30 years, member of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), and one of 3,000 members of the non-profit organization Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which I founded in 2006.
The FBI has been made aware of the gross inadequacies of the investigations into 9/11 that have been carried out over the past seventeen years by various official entities, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the 9/11 Commission.
The FBI has also been made aware of the real investigative work being done by AE911Truth. In fact, in 2008 the then-assistant director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division, Michael Heimbach, praised our work, noting that it was “backed by thorough research and analysis.”
Yet ten years later, here we are, still with no credible WTC investigation—only a series of missteps and misstatements by FEMA and NIST, which we have documented in our 50-page booklet Beyond Misinformation: What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7.
When obtaining licensure, architects and engineers commit themselves to upholding their respective profession’s code of ethics. The 3,000 architects and engineers with whom I work are meeting this ethical obligation regarding 9/11: They are challenging the false assumptions and lies that have created an endless “post-9/11 era,” in which $5.6 trillion has been spent by the U.S. government on waging wars and implementing unconstitutional policies.
Here are some of the questions our architects and engineers are asking—questions that remain unanswered and ignored by officialdom to this day:
  • How did the elevated building mass of the upper section of each Twin Tower (Buildings 1 and 2) destroy the 80,000 tons of structural steel at nearly free-fall speed, as if the steel framing weren’t even there?
  • Given that open-air jet fuel fires burn at only about 600° F. (per manufacturers specifications) and that normal office fires burn at only 1,500° F or so and that the melting point of steel is above 2,700° F, what thermal energy source could have produced the several tons of molten metal observed flowing out of the South Tower shortly before its collapse? This lava-like flow of metal was also seen under the rubble for weeks in the aftermath of the Twin Towers and Building 7 destruction by numerous witnesses—even by the World Trade Center’s structural engineer, Leslie Robertson.
  • What explains the chemical evidence of thermite, an incendiary material found on the ends of steel beams and in pools of molten iron in the World Trade Center debris? In Appendix C of its BPAT Report, FEMA documented “evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting.” This is clearly not a feature of gravitational collapse, of hydrocarbon fuel, or of normal office fires. Yet NIST summarily dismissed this key evidence when its engineers took over the investigation from FEMA.
  • What is the source of the billions of previously molten iron microspheres, which are well-documented in samples of the World Trade Center dust? Both the United States Geological Survey (USGS), in its “Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust Report,” and engineering consulting firm RJ Lee Group, Inc., in its December 2003 “WTC Dust Signature Report: Composition and Morphology,” document these once-molten droplets of iron. But neither of them explains how these microspheres got there! Importantly, the microspheres contain the chemical signature of thermite, an incendiary material used by the military to cut swiftly and cleanly through structural steel.
  • Why did Building 7, the third WTC high-rise to collapse, descend at free-fall acceleration during its seven-second collapse? Video analysis shows the upper portion of the steel-framed structure accelerating at the maximum rate of gravity. Even NIST acknowledged this can only mean one thing: The structure below offered “no resistance.” And the only possible way there was no resistance, according to the laws of physics, is that the structure was “removed.” What removed it?
  • What mechanism can account for the simultaneous failure of the critical number and distribution of columns required to produce this rate-of-gravity acceleration? NIST now attributes the catastrophic collapse of Building 7 to a new phenomenon called “thermal expansion” due to “normal office fires”—with little or no contribution from falling debris or from diesel fuel. Based on this outlandish claim by NIST, are we to suddenly accept that our understanding of fire science, building materials, and structural behavior has been deeply flawed all along? If so, then why has the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) steadfastly resisted all proposed post-9/11 changes to structural building codes?
On the subject of Building 7, please read the potent five-minute executive summary testimony by AE911Truth, titled Undisputed Facts Point to the Controlled Demolition of WTC 7 and delivered to NIST on a December 18, 2007, teleconference call in response to NIST’s preposterous new theory. Then watch our fifteen-minute, made-for-PBS documentary on the destruction of WTC 7, narrated by actor Ed Asner.
  • Why did more than 100 FDNY first responders describe, in great detail, the sounds of explosions and flashes of lightimmediately before and during each tower’s collapse? Why did we not know about these thousands of pages of FDNY “oral history” evidence until August of 2005—and only then after a court order mandated their release? FDNY’s own chief of safety, Albert Turi, and its top chief, Ray Downey (who is the “premiere collapse expert in the country,” according to a fellow chief), both spoke of the presence of explosives in the towers prior to their failures. Why were 118 FDNY testimonials that referred to multiple, violent explosions ignored and unreported by the 9/11 Commission and by NIST and FEMA?
  • What was the energy source that pulverized 400,000 cubic yards of concrete into a fine powder in mid-air? Through what mechanism was the energy source applied? Why did that powder blanket lower Manhattan as each of the three buildings was collapsing? Calculations show that the energy requirement for this pulverization and the rapid expansion of the subsequent dust clouds was far greater than the available gravitational potential energy of the structures. This simple energy imbalance alone proves the official explanation impossible. Is this the same energy source that is responsible for the vaporization of more than 10,000 steel file cabinets and of 1,100 human bodies that were never found, not even the smallest traces of DNA?
  • How were four-ton steel members ejected from the Twin Towers at 70 miles per hour and why did they land up to 600 feet away? A simple gravitational collapse would only allow up to 100 feet of “drift,” so what provided the energy required for them to travel six times that distance?
  • Why were virtually no floors found at the base of either Twin Tower? There were originally 110 floors in each Tower—each of them one acre in size. What could explain the disappearance of a total of 220 acres of four-inch thick concrete floors (180,000 tons of concrete) and of each floor’s steel decking and trusses?
  • What caused the explosive ejections of pulverized building materials that appeared as many as 60 stories below the rapidly descending “collapse” of each Tower? These “squibs,” readily visible in all of the publicly available videos, indicate that building materials were being ejected at a speed of more than 160 feet per second.
  • Why does the seismic evidence collected by Columbia University’s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory corroborate the evidence that supports the explosive demolition theory instead of the official collapse theory?
  • Why did NIST refuse to test for residue of explosives, citing the nonsensical, unscientific rationale that such tests “would not necessarily have been conclusive”? Meanwhile, an international team of scientists found and documented nano-thermitic explosives residue in the World Trade Center dust. The National Fire Protection Association’s NFPA 921 document, “Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations,” requires such testing when there is “high order damage,” as there obviously was at the World Trade Center.
  • Finally, how can we allow this September 2007 admission by NIST to go unexplained: “[W]e are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse [of the Towers]”?  Inexplicably, NIST did not even attempt to “analyze the structural behavior after the initiation of collapse.”
We have carefully documented all of the above evidence in our video documentary 9/11: Explosive Evidence—Experts Speak Out, which uses basic physics and simple, rational forensic inquiry to expose the fraudulent nature of the official explanation of the World Trade Center destruction.
In addition, we have publicly presented the evidence of controlled demolition to audiences in well over one hundred U.S. cities and in dozens of foreign countries. The response at these presentations has been stunning. After hearing us recite the facts, at least eighty-five percent of attendees who initially believed the official story of “fire-weakened steel” change their minds, decide to support our theory of “explosive demolition with explosives/incendiaries,” and agree with our call for a new, independent investigation with subpoena power.
The body of clear, scientific evidence that we present has been vetted, to one degree or another, by our more than 3,000 building professionals, as well as by hundreds of physicists, chemists, and other science-based experts who have signed our general petition. So compelling is the evidence that we were invited to be interviewed on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal. Since its airing in August 2014, our 40-minute interview has become the most-watched video on the entire C-SPAN website, with more than one million views.
This deeply incriminating evidence raises urgent concerns for our country’s counterterrorism, law enforcement, and public safety professionals. Indeed, the evidence led Joel Hirschhorn, Ph.D., a senior staff member of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and an AE911Truth.org petition signer, to suggest, “First, let the technical truths emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political and conspiracy issues.”
Mr. President, AE911Truth’s top representatives are prepared to come to Washington, D.C., to meet with you. We are determined to fulfill our patriotic duty to obtain justice for the 9/11 families and to ensure the future safety of our fellow Americans. We have the technical expertise to defend your demand for the truth about the criminal destruction of all three World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001. Humbly, we offer ourselves in service to your mission to Make America Great Again.
Very Respectfully,
Richard Gage, AIA
cc: Board of Directors, AE911Truth

Richard Gage

Richard Gage, AIA, is a San Francisco Bay Area architect of 28 years, a member of the American Institute of Architects, and the founder and CEO of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a 501(c)(3)educational charity. In his architectural career, Gage designed most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed, steel-framed buildings. Most recently, he worked on the construction documents for a $400M mixed-use urban project with 1.2 million square feet of retail and 320,000 square feet of mid-rise office space, plus a parking structure, totalingsome 1,200 tons of steel framing. Gage has delivered his live multimedia presentation 9/11: Blueprint for Truth more than 500 times in 37 foreign countries and 110 American cities to audiences ranging in size from 30 to 3,000. He has appeared in more than 550 radio and television spots.
Phi Beta Iota: A&E911Truth has earned over 3,000 signatures from those with verified academic degrees and professional licenses, and an additional 20,000 non-architects and engineers, all calling for a new, independent investigation–with full supoena power–into the September 11, 2001 destructions of the World Trade Center Buildings, 1, 2, and 7. A&E911Truth has not focused on and takes on position on the Pentagon or the Shanksville, PA aspects of 9/11. A&E911Truth disputes the no planes, nuclear, and directed energy weapons theories; as others dispute their exclusive focus on thermite. Any independent investigation must consider all possibilities together.
See Also: