hown that the Pentagon was not attacked in the way that all of the above claim it was attacked.

If it can be shown that the Pentagon was attacked by a remote-controlled jet fighter flying low and fast that fired a missile into the Pentagon target immediately ahead of its own crash there while at the same moment a Boeing 757 with American Airlines markings approached the same target at slower speed and from a different angle and overflew the target at the exact moment of the crash explosion, then each of the individuals named above had to have known of these details in advance of the crash in order to have "reacted the coverup" (concealed the true nature of the attack) as they did.

If a smaller jet aircraft firing a missile ahead of itself, rather than a Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon and if each of the above-named individuals and organizations concealed this fact -- a fact which instantly clears of all suspicion foreign Moslems today accused of hijacking Flight 77 with box cutters and, after two crashbombings of Skyscrapers in New York had taken place, flying through NORAD defenses of Washington DC after being known to be "lost" for half an hour, and hitting the supreme military headquarters of the United States -- then the above named individuals and organizations are complicit in a mass-murder frameup that has motivated and been the rationale for two wars, to the conquest of two Moslem countries, both conducted by the aboved named individuals and organizations.

The question then is whether or not a smaller attacked the Pentagon rather than American Airlines Boeing 757 Flight 77.

The evidence that a smaller aircraft, a platform like the F-16, rather than the 757 crashed in Arlington on September 11, 2001 is the following:

1. The Defense Department in March of 2002 released five frames from the video recording made by aPentagon security camera north of the crash. The first frame of this photo shows the tail fin of the attacking jet. In this frame the fuselage of the jet is concealed by a yellow cement pillar in the way of the camera. However the pillar is narrow and if the attacking jet whose tail fin is shown sticking up behind the pillar was a Boeing 757 then 2/7ths of the fuselage would have to be seen projecting out from the side of the pillar. Instead, where the shiny fuselage shoud be, there is seen only the buildings in the background. Deduction: The attacking jet was shorter than the Boeing 757.

2. Witnesses on Washington Blvd. in front of the west wall where the crash took place photographed the hole made by the attack. These photos show a hole on the second floor that is small enough to be totally beneith just two windows of the third floor. This hole centers the entrance of the attacking jet -- this is where the nose of the aircraft penetrated.

However, if the nose (and fuselage) entered the Pentagon through this hole, then in order for the plane to have been Flight 77, there would have to be damage to the right and to the left of the hole made by the fuselage, commensurate with the crashing of the starboard and port wing engines of the Boeing 757 respectively on the level of the first floor. While a outer wall at the first floor level did collapse to the left and to the right of the hole where the fuselage entered, three different photographs show first-floor interior wall (room dividing walls perpendicular to the exterior wall) still standing to the right of the hole where the fuselage entered and exactly at the spot where, the the attacking jet were a Boeing 757, the starboard wing engine would have had to have crashed through. Deduction: The attacking plane did not have a starboard wing engine.

3. The first frame of the DoD-released video recordings of the attack (mentioned above) show a thick white horizontal trail of smoke behind the attacking jet. This smoke, seen to the right of the yellow driveway pillar mentioned above, trails behind the attacking jet. The shape and the size of the smoke trail with respect to the size of the tailfin shown is consistent with the trail of a ground-to-air missile being fired. Contrail is rare at this low altitude and contrail is never this thick and "creamy" and usually the vapor does not condense so close to the aircraft engine in flight that emits it. Witnesses did not report a vapor trail following the Boeing 757 they saw approaching the Pentagon. Witnesses did see what they interpreted to be the plane crashing first into the lawn and then "bouncing" into the Pentagon, but the photos taken by witnesses show that the lawn along the path taken by the attacking jet is clean and untouched. Deductions: A missile was fired into the Pentagon. Witnesses mistook the sudden appearance of smoke from the fired missile as the jet crashing first on the grass.

4. The second frame of the DoD-released video recording shows a white-hot blast that envelopes the crash site and is half again as tall as the 70' Pentagon. This initial intense explosion of heat is consistent with the high-explosive warhead of an air-to-ground missile. It is not consistent with the explosion resulting from the crash of an aluminum and plastic airliner with tanks 3/4 filled with jet-fuel kerosene. Such fuel burns red-orange mixed with carbon smoke -- exactly as appears subsequently in frames three and four of the DoD recording. Deduction: The initial white-hot explosion was the blast of the warhead of the missile fired by the attacking jet, the trail of which missile is shown in frame #1 of the DoD video recording.

5. The attacking jet left a trail of damage indicating the path of its final appraoch. These indications are 1) the downed lamp posts southwest of the crash, 2) the initial crash point, centered by the hole where the fuselage entered below the two windows on the third floor mentioned above; and 3) the hole made in the wall of "C-ring" that faces the center of the Pentagon. These two points and the farily definite approximate location given by the locations of the downed lamp posts form a nearly straight line, a path of attack that meets the Pentagon's west wall at close to a 55-degree angle.

The final hole in the "C-ring" that is mentioned above, was made by a jet engine that broke through that wall and came to rest in the outside corridor between "C-ring" and "B-ring". Yet this is the hole that is in a straight line from the way between the lamp posts and through the initial entry hole made by the fuselage and nose of the attacking jet. Only one engine has been reported in the crash and only one engine was seen being lifted from the crash site and removed. Deduction: The engine entered with the fuselage, the attack plane was a single- engine plane, as is the F-16, and not a two-wing-engine Boeing airliner.

6. A piece of aluminum sheet with a fragment of the letter "n" has been photographed on the lawn of the Pentagon north of the crash site. The color of the lettering and the piece of aluminum skin itself is consistent with the outer skin of an American Airlines Boeing 757 and has been used as evidence that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon (appearing, for example on the cover of a major weekly news magazine.) However, the first person to photograph this piece says he did not arrive and photograph it until fifteen minutes after the crash. Well before that secret service men were on the lawn carrying pieces of debris, picking them up and putting them down. The piece is relatively small and easily carried by one man. Deduction: One of the men carrying pieces of debris could have planted that particular piece in that particular spot.

Because it is is marked with part of the letter "n" that matches the "font" and color of the "n" in "American" written on the side of American Airlines Boeing 757's the piece can be compared with both the port-side letter "n" and the starbord side "n" to determine which side of a Boeing 757 this fragment must have come from. It turns out that the fragment photographed on the lawn includes a wide space of bare aluminum following immediatley after the "n." And as examination of dozens of photographs of AA 757's shows, such a blank space following the letter "n" only occurs on the starbord side of the AA 757. On the port side of AA 575's the there is immediately to the right of the "n" a door for passengers to enter and exit. The distance between the letter "n" and the door on the port side is much shorter than the length of bare aluminum skin that follows the "n" on the fragment. Deduction: The piece that has been offered as evidence and is represented as being flung north of the explosion (flung to the port side of the attacking plane along its path of attack) by the explosion, in fact came from the starboard side of a Beoing 757, the side that faced North.

The piece of aluminum with the letter "n" is thin sheet and bent in awkward ways that would affect the distance it would be able to travel through the air if thrown at any level of force. One cannot throw an opened newspaper sheet across a basketball court. For this scrap of starboard siding from a Boeing 757 to have flown 200 feet it would have to get around and overa compacting fuselage, it would have to have pushed against a blast of energy radiating out from the crash point, and, as the wind was blowing from the north west, it would have had to advance against the wind to get to the location where it was photographed. Deduction: The piece of skin from the starboard side of a Boeing 757 was planted false evidence, placed by mistake on the wrong side of the crash, a location it could not have reached in the way represented by those using the piece as evidence that the attacking plane was Flight 77.

6. There are witnesses who saw the crash who say that the attack plane was smaller than a Boeing 757, not big enough to hold more than 12 people.

Steve Riskus reports seeing the Boeing 757 cross in front of him when he was north of the Pentagon driving south -- that it crossed Washington Blvd. only 100 feet from him and appeared to go straight in (i.e., at a 90 degree angle) -- yet the poles on Washington Blvd that were downed were at least 600 feet south of the crash and 700 or 800 feet south of Riskus.

Many witnesses placed the Boeing over the Naval Annex or coming straight down the Columbia Pike which runs east-west right past the south sides of the Annex buildings. Deduction: Yet if a Boeing was over the Annex or even over the Columbia Pike immediatley south of the Annex, it could not have lined up with the south-west-to-north-eastline of approach through the five lamp-posts that met the crash site at a 55 degree angle. The banking required would be too sharp. Deduction: The Boeing approached from a more northern direction than the killer jet and met the wall as it overflew the Pentagon at an angle much closer to perpendicular than the 55-degree-angle approach of the killer jet.

7. The plane was not intercepted, even after being lost for half an hour, even after the two wtc buildings had been hit. Deduction: Air defenses were stood down to permit the attack.

8. An aircraft overflying the west-wall crash point would be exaclty one mile from Reagan National Airport, which lies south-east of the crash. Deduction: Banking to the right the aircraft could have landed immedaitely at any of the runways (all planes had been ordered from the skies and were landing at the airports nearest to them) or it could have assumed a position in a cue of airplanes preparing to land.

9. A plane overflying the crash would have been hidden by the crash. The DoD-released video shows the initial explosion reaching perhaps 120' into the air in the first frame and massive black smoke begining to rise in the subsequent frames. Deduction: The Boeing was able to "disappear" behind the smoke and with the benefit of the distraction of the explosion. Within three seconds it would be closer to the airport than to the Pentagon and would thus have blended into the confusion of unscheduled sudden ordered by the FAB. Deduction: Flight 77 landed at Reagan National and, like a stolen Mercedes taken by professional car theives, was never seen again.

Rumsfeld (Sec. of Def., Jew, Zionist), Wolfowitz (Deputy Sec. of Def., Jew, Zionist), Gen. Meyer (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Jew, Zionist), the CIA (working black operations jointly with Mossad and MI6 related to terrorism prior to and leading up to 9-11) are implicated as perpetrators of 9-11 or accomplices in 9-11 if it can be shown that the Pentagon was not attacked in the way that all of the above claim it was attacked. That has been shown and these men, along with their many accomplices, are guilty of this mass-murder frameup.

Let me warn the Israelis and ADL zionists who have been waging a war of ridicule against this evidence of the guilt of Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and other zionist Jews (and of gentiles too, make no mistake) and of Mossad working with the CIA and MI6 -- that by helping to obstruct justice, by helping to suppress public disclosure of this crime by zionists -- you make the crime done by neo-con zionists and Likud zionists and Mossad zionists into a crime by ADL, and Israelis, and, by an unfair but inevitable overgeneralization that people learning the truth about 9-11 are bound to make, a coverup crime by "Jews" as a group -- choosing to protect mass-murderers of 3000 people and provacateurs who engineered two wars in phony "retaliation" and "terrorist hunting" against people known to be wholly innocent.

The truth will be known. Jews interested in the standing of Jews have a choice. They can stop helping the coverup, stop protecting mass-murderers worthey of Hitler's or Pol Pot's mantle for evil -- or you can stand for justice -- yes, you can stand with the gentiles, against mass-murder and treason and horrible corruption -- or you can become part of that corruption.

Decide now whether men like me are your mortal enemy or men like Ariel Sharon, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsefeld, Bush, Rice, Gen. Meyer and Paul Wolfowitz.

The future depends on the decision you make.

I'll know by your responses to this message how you have chosen.

Dick Eastman 223 S. 64th Ave. Yakima, Washington

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/77_deastman1.htm

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/77_deastman2.htm

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/77_deastman3.htm

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