PDA

View Full Version : Commercial Pilot & Aeronautical Engineer Explains Why 911 Pentagon Story Is Bogus



Hardrock69
12-06-2005, 09:36 AM
Nela Sagadevan sets the record straight about Pentagon crash while 9/11 fringe movement meets Dec. 7 in Tampa for beginning of five-day rally.

By Greg Szymanski
www.arcticbeacon.com
12-6-5

It's impossible to fit a square peg in a round hole. It's equally as impossible to fit a large 757 airliner through a small hole like left in the Pentagon wall after 9/11.

And this is just one of the many examples that the official 9/11 story makes no sense. In fact, it makes about as much sense as trying to keep jamming that square peg into that proverbial round hole.

However, while the feds fiddle with pegs that don't fit, the 9/11 debate rages on across the country, mainly among the fringe truth movement groups whose numbers are small.

And this is precisely where politicians want the debate to remain, away from the public's ear, since so far they have been dealt a winning 9/11 hand, knowing any serious measure to bring justice has been effectively cut-off.

So this week the fringe 9/11 movement takes its "forces and soldiers of truth" to Tampa and Miami, Florida, staging a five day assembly starting Dec 7 with the intent to spark a larger public debate and bring the "enemy within" to justice.

Millionaire Jimmy Walter is footing the bill and hosting the event with speakers to include Dave von Kleist, Joyce Riley, Morgan Reynolds, Eric Hufschmid, William Rodriguez and others. There is an $11 entry fee and it will be interesting to see the turn-out, including the media coverage which in the past has been sporadic at best for 9/11 truth events.

Although the speakers bring to the table interesting facts discounting the official story, Rodriguez will be the most compelling, telling his tale of hearing explosions in the basement prior to the airplane hitting the North Tower.

But one person in attendance not on the speaker's list is commercial pilot and aeronautical engineer, Nela Sagedevan. And the reason he should be speaking, at least about the Pentagon crash, is because once he gives his technical rendition of why the government story is bogus, it's like someone finally held up, for the whole world to see, the round peg fitting perfectly into the round hole.

In the past, many pilots and other experts have tried to communicate the impossibility of the flight pattern taken by an inexperienced Arab terrorist in the cockpit, but none have done a better job than Sagedevan, telling the story from an expert's pint of view but communicating so the layman has no trouble understanding.

Recently, Sagadevan spent two hours on Greg Szymanski's radio show, The Investigative Journal, on the Republic Broadcast Network at
www.rbnlive.com, leaving the audience nodding their heads in agreement that the Pentagon crash couldn't have happened the way the government contends.

"Let's look at it plain and simple," said Sagadevan in an extended telephone conference this week from his home near San Diego. "The government wants us to believe that a person who couldn't even solo a small Cessna took over the controls of a Boeing 757 jetliner and performed complicated maneuvers even myself or other experienced pilots could have never performed.

"It's just not going to happen and, from my point of view, is impossible. If this was fabricated by the government so was the rest of the 9/11 story."

But staying on point, Sagadevan wanted to further illustrate the absurdity of a small, inexperienced 5'8" Arab terrorist, taking over the controls of the jetliner from a burly, well-trained former military pilot.

"You mean to tell me, the supposed terrorist overpowered the pilot, who weighed more than 185 lbs and trained in the military. And then after that overpowered the co-pilot in the same manner, a person who also weighed upwards of 185 lbs," said Sagadevan, emphasizing experts aren't needed to explain the absurdity of this portion of the government story.

"I am not sure if anyone has been in the cockpit of one of one of these big jets, but I will tell you there isn't much space. How in the world would one man pull out two big pilots in cramped quarters while, at the same time, maintaining control of the airliner. Again, it's just not going to happen.

"In the beginning right after 9/11, like most people, I believed most of what I heard about 9/11, not really giving much thought to a government conspiracy. However, about a year ago when I began gathering information related to my expertise as an aeronautical engineer and pilot, I began to see clearly how the government story regarding the four flights, their paths and their pilots didn't make sense.

"Now I am firmly convinced after looking at an enormous amount of evidence, as well as using well-establishing aviation principles, that something else crashed into the Pentagon since it couldn't have been a commercial jetliner."

Besides calling attention to the impossibility of a untrained pilot performing complex flight maneuvers and navigation, Sagadevan said the flight path taken near the Pentagon was also impossible for a large jetliner to perform without crashing before reaching the Pentagon.

"First of all, the supposed pilot would have been overwhelmed just looking at the complexity of the cockpit dash board and the computerized controls," said Sagadevan. "He would have had no idea what to do, but we are led to believe that he was able to turn the jet around, head back to Washington D.C. and then bank at high speeds and at a low altitude, hitting a target which would have looked as small as thimble from the air. Again, it's impossible and you don't really need an expert to make this final determination."

Sagadevan was quick to point out one of the main problems with the government story is the low trajectory of the airplane, flying at high speeds and roughly only 20 feet off the ground for a long distance, another impossibility defying the standard principles of aviation.

"The evidence indicates that the airplane was flying low before it reached the Pentagon lawn since several light poles were sheared off several hundred yards away form the building," explained Sagadevan. "With that in mind, the plane was traveling at about 400 knots at about 20 feet off the ground for a long distance prior to hitting the Pentagon.

"This in itself is an impossibility in itself since the airplane would have been forced to the ground well before hitting the Pentagon. No pilot in the world would have been able to control the plane while maintained that air speed at 20 feet off the ground for that long a distance. Again, it's just impossible but here I will admit that an expert is needed in order to explain the standards of lift and drag associated with flying a large airliner."

From the beginning of the supposed hijacking of Flight 93 and to its eventual crash into the Pentagon wall, Sagadevan presents a compelling case, essentially cruising the official story.

"I really don't understand how anyone could give the government's story any credibility after seeing the original pictures taken of the small hole left in the Pentagon wall by whatever flew into it," said Sagadevan. "I am not totally sure what the military used but one thing for sure, it wasn't a 757 jetliner."

Sagadevan is referring to the tiny circumference of the hole left in the Pentagon wall, illustrated on pictures taken right after the crash scene, but immediately taken out of circulation and never widely distributed by the news media to the American people.

"I think if someone just looks at the hole left and then looks at the size of 757, experts aren't needed to determine it was an impossibility that a big jet hit the Pentagon wall, especially when there was very little wreckage visible after the crash," added Sagadevan.

Regarding the Pentagon crash, as Sagadevan aptly points out, there are "so many holes in the story" that it becomes, as the English say, rather a laughing matter, making one believe even the bungling Inspector Clouseau, made famous by Peter Sellers, could crack the case wide open if given half a chance.

But the problem is Inspector Clouseau, Sagadevan and every other independent investigator haven't been given the chance, leaving the case to be investigated and tried in the court of public opinion, a place where politicians like it and know they are safe from prosecution.


For more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com

BigBadBrian
12-06-2005, 09:46 AM
http://www.cert.dfn.de/infoserv/dib/c3_animation.gif

knuckleboner
12-06-2005, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by Hardrock69

By Greg Szymanski
www.arcticbeacon.com
12-6-5


Besides calling attention to the impossibility of a untrained pilot performing complex flight maneuvers and navigation, Sagadevan said the flight path taken near the Pentagon was also impossible for a large jetliner to perform without crashing before reaching the Pentagon.


...


Sagadevan appeared shocked that more people hadn't figured out the truth. "The evidence is overwhelmingly clear," he stated. According to the facts, Flight 93 was diverted to a secret landing facility in the Appalachian Mountains where the passengers where spirited off by Aurora stealth spy planes to the government's clandestine Iowa corn field base where they have been living underground for the past 4 years. In order to cover up the evidence, Flight 93, itself, was dismantled and consumed, piece by piece, by three prototype Naval goats, who were themselves shipped off to a meat processing plant in Dover that the government claims does not exist, and turned into MREs sent to the soldiers in Afghanistahn.

As for what actually hit the Pentagon on 9/11, Sagadevan is certain. "It wasn't a Tomahawk, that's for sure. Since it's much smaller, a Tomahawk doesn't leave nearly as big a hole. It was a small meteor, deflected out of orbit by a classified military space-based ray gun."

Sagadevan displayed schematics for this ray gun that he had obtained. The elaborate blueprints were sketched out in crayon on the back of a cardboard box. "It must exist. It was written in burnt sienna," he nodded, "the truest of all the crayons."

As for why anyone would believe the so-called official story when the truth is so much more plausible, Sagadevan retorted, "You tell me? What's more impossible, that load of crap the govenment's trying to feed us, or this?"



Staff reporter and recent alien abductee, Sam Hagar, contributed to this article.

diamondD
12-06-2005, 11:31 AM
This shit again? Go tell the 100s of witnesses that saw it fly over their heads in rush hour traffic it wasn't a plane.


I'll take their word over some guy's theory any day. This conspiracy crap is beyond old. There's nothing new here.


Nice post knuckleboner! :D

FORD
12-06-2005, 12:12 PM
Where's the documentation of these "100s of witnesses"?

Better yet, where's the Pentagon security tape, and the tape from the gas station across the street?

Those tapes are the existing footage of whatever impacted the Pentagon. If the BCE wanted to prove at least that part of their original story was true, they would release those tapes.

The fact that they haven't, suggests that the tape footage clearly shows something other than a 757 coming out of the sky at an impossible angle and slamming into the ground floor of the Pentagon, performing maneuvers that even experienced pilots admit they couldn't do.

Ally_Kat
12-06-2005, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by FORD

Those tapes are the existing footage of whatever impacted the Pentagon. .

Along with the million pieces of plane debris and photos taken for insurance reasons.

Like I've said all along, make a field trip to Manhattan and I'll sneak ya in. Then we'll take the train over to the Brooklyn Brewery and get some alcohol.

diamondD
12-06-2005, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Where's the documentation of these "100s of witnesses"?

Better yet, where's the Pentagon security tape, and the tape from the gas station across the street?

Those tapes are the existing footage of whatever impacted the Pentagon. If the BCE wanted to prove at least that part of their original story was true, they would release those tapes.

The fact that they haven't, suggests that the tape footage clearly shows something other than a 757 coming out of the sky at an impossible angle and slamming into the ground floor of the Pentagon, performing maneuvers that even experienced pilots admit they couldn't do.


If I repost a link the article again, will you read it and offer your opinion on why all these people saw a commercial airliner fly over them if it didn't happen? You ignored it last time like you do most times when your theories are disputed and then just go right back into repeat mode in another thread.

I've even told you before that I have a friend who's dad was in the Pentagon when it was hit. But you just think he's part of some vast conspiracy...

Warham
12-06-2005, 04:33 PM
The kooks never stop coming out of the woodwork.

Guitar Shark
12-06-2005, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by diamondD
If I repost a link the article again, will you read it and offer your opinion on why all these people saw a commercial airliner fly over them if it didn't happen?

I can tell you right now that his answer will be that these people were all BCE operatives.

diamondD
12-06-2005, 04:41 PM
Conveniently planted in rush hour traffic...

I sense the words "perhaps" and "suppose" are about to be used frequently!

ELVIS
12-06-2005, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by FORD
at an impossible angle

What the fuck is an "impossible angle" ??

You conspiracy freaks are washed up idiots...:rolleyes:

Stop beating this dead fucking horse, already...

Hardrock69
12-06-2005, 05:49 PM
No

ELVIS
12-06-2005, 06:02 PM
Well, I'm not reading or responding to anymore of this 9-11 conspiracy bullshit...

It's pointless, childish, and TOTAL BULLSHIT!

Nickdfresh
12-06-2005, 06:45 PM
http://www.triton.nu/albums/pics/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again.thumb.jpg

mwsully
12-06-2005, 09:00 PM
I don't know exactly what to believe yet, because I haven't been given enough information to have a clear opinion.

BUT, I'll tell you one thing: my father, a neuroendocrinologist, was treating men who developed Gulf War Syndrome back BEFORE the federal government admitted that the soldiers were getting sick from some nasty chemicals. They at first denied they even had serious health issues. Then they acknowledged there was a GWS, but it was a psychological condition (aka in their heads). Then finally, seeing as there was no way to cover it up because of the number of cases, they eventually admitted that Gulf War Syndrome was a very real, very physical, very serious condition. In case you don't know, Gulf War Syndrome was passed to family members as well, causing a number of serious ailments, including sterility and birth defects! Before government admittance, these soldiers were DENIED proper medical care from veteran's hospitals because GWS was NOT recognized as a legitimate illness!

Now, my point is, whatever the government can do to make themselves "shine" they will do, even if that means concealing or bending the truth.

diamondD
12-06-2005, 10:10 PM
How did I know that FORD wouldn't choose the option to look at a different point of view and say he would legitimately comment on it?

diamondD
12-06-2005, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
No


Then offer something different and don't just cut and paste and run without saying why this particular post is any different than the countless other BS threads about this. It's a rehash of the same old shit.

ELVIS
12-06-2005, 10:35 PM
Fuck this bullshit...

FORD
12-07-2005, 12:31 AM
Censorship is not Christian.

Hardrock69
12-07-2005, 01:20 AM
And Elvis is?


LAFF MY FUCKING ASS OFF!!!!
:D

Warham
12-07-2005, 06:51 AM
Why is Christianity being brought up in this?

DrMaddVibe
12-07-2005, 06:55 AM
RESEARCH!!!!!

Ally_Kat
12-07-2005, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by Warham
Why is Christianity being brought up in this?

Because they're trying to justify why some threads in the front line get closed and why others of the same calibur should stay open by attacking Elvis' belief.

DUH Warham! :p

Nickdfresh
12-07-2005, 11:21 AM
http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=788633

OMG, I agree with 'VIBE in the FL...

Can we keep the 9/11 cuntspiracy crap in one of the 1500 existing threads?

Guitar Shark
12-07-2005, 12:22 PM
OK ELVIS, since FORD reopened a thread that you closed, I guess it's your turn to delete this thead. :)

FORD
12-07-2005, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
OK ELVIS, since FORD reopened a thread that you closed, I guess it's your turn to delete this thead. :)

Don't encourage his Unchristian censorship :mad:

LoungeMachine
12-07-2005, 12:28 PM
I smell a Rothie Nomination.....

Ally_Kat
12-07-2005, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Don't encourage his Unchristian censorship :mad:

awh, come on. The threads should either be both open or both closed. We have a million threads on what may or may not have happened with Teddy, a car, a girl and a body of water and we have a million threads about what may or may not have happened with a plane, douchebag jihadists, the gov't, and the pentagon. You close the drowning one because you say there's too many threads about it and that it's assinine, yet you keep this assinine conspiracy thread, which has probalby more equal threads than teddy's incident, open because it's what you believe. Why can't this topic be like the other one where we leave it to the other countless threads it's spawned?

And you want to go on about censorship?

*raises eyebrow*

Guitar Shark
12-07-2005, 12:36 PM
Ally, I was referring to a thread a couple of weeks ago (before you returned I think). FORD closed the thread, ELVIS reopened it, and then FORD deleted it.

Not a big deal, but these guys should be consistent, no? ;)

Ally_Kat
12-07-2005, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Ally, I was referring to a thread a couple of weeks ago (before you returned I think). FORD closed the thread, ELVIS reopened it, and then FORD deleted it.

Not a big deal, but these guys should be consistent, no? ;)

yeah, i know all about it but therei s a bias with these things. I mean, we have 11 threads about Chappaquiddick and 7 pages worth about how 9/11 was bogus. Yet, there's too many threads about Chappaquiddick but we we're allowed to rehash the missle hitting the Pentagon theory

There should be a consistency. What's good for the good is good for the gander.

Nickdfresh
12-07-2005, 12:42 PM
I actually wish this thread would be closed, or folded into another "9/11 Inside Job" thread...

I mean, I know "The Arctic Beacon" is a bastion of journalistic credibility right up there with the Weekly World News, but really...

Guitar Shark
12-07-2005, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by Ally_Kat
There should be a consistency. What's good for the good is good for the gander.

Agreed - I assume you meant goose ;)

knuckleboner
12-07-2005, 12:56 PM
i agree GS, sounds like more republican doublespeak :D

"it's good for the good. why isn't it good for you, you lousy liberal gander?! aren't you good? if you're against this, you're against good."

Ally_Kat
12-07-2005, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Agreed - I assume you meant goose ;)

yeah. I'm still blaming the meds. Lord knows they're making me feel worse than I was before I got them. :(

Warham
12-07-2005, 01:52 PM
Ally, the meds must not be affecting you too much. You make more sense than most of us here.