The Basic Question:
- How can a B757 that was said by officials to have
totally disintegrated and vaporized as it impacted
(accounting for lack of substantial aircraft wreckage
on site), have nevertheless penetrated through the 3rd
ring's inner wall with its nosecone (the punched-out
hole on the cover of this book), given that the nose
cone is the most fragile part of the aircraft?
There seem to be zillions of other subsidiary
questions, such as:
- Why the FBI confiscated and has
never shown the adjacent hotel and gas station
security cam videos that must have caught the B757's
- Why the officially blessed few frames of
Pentagon cam video do not show anything remotely
resembling a B757 and appear to have been doctored
- How the "hijacker" pilot (incompetent by
instructors' reports) accomplished an extremely
precise approach and targeting (they say these guys
never learned to land, but the "B757" was just meters
above the ground when it hit, (in effect he "landed the plane"
- Why the little scrap of liveried supposed "wreckage" on the lawn shows lettering only one-half or less the size scale it should be for an AA liveried B757;
- Why the "plane" coincidentally hit the
least populated side of the Pentagon, after apparently
taking extra effort and time to target that position;
- Why after saying the plane was totally vaporized and
disintegrated officials now claim to have an almost
complete reconstruction of the "B757"; why the initial
entrance hole was so small;
- Why after a fire that totally melted and vaporized the plane computer manuals and other papers visible in offices at the
sheared cutoff are totally undamaged;
- Why initial eye witnesses reported a small plane or missile-like object; and on and on and on.
Meyssan deals with most of these questions and I got news for you - as a mainstream mind-controlled American (like me) you aren't going to like his answers!
Anyway let's face it - probably no Boeing 757 ever hit the
The only evidence supporting the Boeing hypothesis
seems to be the following:
- About half the eye witnesses state they saw either a
B757, a plane with AA livery, or both (i.e. a B757 in
- AA Flt 77 is unaccounted for
- The government has officially stated that AA 77 hit
- bits of possible 757 wreckage were photographed in
I really hate to conclude this, but to me it seems
probable that some form of cruise missile, dressed in
AA livery, was used and all the rest is a USA Mil-Gov
coverup. A horrible conclusion, I know it!
Please read this book and if you can convincingly
refute it, dealing adequately with all the anomalies I've
listed above and settling each concern, please write
your own counter-book immediately, and we'll put this horrible
hypothesis to bed once and for all.
Note that Purdue (Indiana) academics have completed a
government-funded graphical simulation of the crash
that on my reading, unfortunately again, does not come
close to answering all the questions raised above.
I don't know why the mainstream media doesn't at least
look into this? All I've seen are one or two jokey
reviews of Meyssan's first (much less detailed)
general book about 9-11. In one case, the "reviewer"
hadn't even read the book!
Why isn't the public more interested in this? Are we
just so satisified with our Hollywood FX story of
"Fires, Explosions, Arab Villians, American Heroes"
that we can't even be bothered to read and respond
rationally to an important analysis like this one?
"Nothing was wrong far as we could tell,
that's what we liked to tell ourselves,
but no it wasn't that way"
- Stevie Wonder "How Come, How Long"