Coverup at the Pentagon

A rapid mop-up operation commenced around the Pentagon immediately following the attack, including the seizure of videos from adjacent businesses and a suspiciously rapid clean-up of debris. The suppression of evidence has continued ever since, with the public still lacking access to the contents of the black boxes, photographs inside the Pentagon prior to its clean-up, video from nearby cameras, and information about any analysis of the aircraft debris. The meaning of this systematic suppression of evidence may be quite different from what skeptics of the official story frequently assume.

Meanwhile, at the Pentagon, people in office attire were seen combing the lawn, and moving scraps. The rapid response at the crime scene contrasts with the remarkable inaction of Pentagon officials before the attack as they watched Flight 77 approaching the capital for over 30 minutes.

Photographer Mark Faram arrived about ten minutes after the explosion and was able to find only one piece of aircraft debris that was large enough to stand upright, which he photographed (left). The piece appears to lie about one hundred feet north of the plane's flightpath. The piece does not show signs of abrasion or singeing.

Some have said the metal looks too thin to be from the pressurized hull of a 757. However, a 757's hull is less than two millimeters thick. Some have suggested that the color does not match the shiny aluminum finish of American Airlines jets. However, the image has limited color and brightness resolution, making the surface look less shiny. Note that the red areas look flat compared to the sky-blue background.

Dick Eastman pointed out that the scrap of debris matches an American Airlines 757, but that its condition and position were not consistent with the crash of such a plane, suggesting that the piece was planted. In the image on the right, he shows that the piece matches the skin of an American Airlines 757-200 fuselage from the upper starboard side just aft of the front door. However, its position and condition contradict the official account of the crash: it was photographed far to the left of the flightpath though it was from the right side of the aircraft, and it showed no signs of abrasion or shearing though it was from near the front of the aircraft.

• The video frames can easily be seen as evidence that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon, since the apparent plane is too small, there is a vapor trail suggesting a missile, and the explosion sees to white to be a jet-fuel fireball. People embracing the no-Boeing theory for other reasons, such as the lack of obvious debris in post-crash photographs, are inclined to uncritically embrace the video frames as corroborating evidence.
• The hiding of the apparent attack plane in the video makes it seem genuine. People who suspect the motives of the video's source will nonetheless easily overlook this ploy.

Even if the video frames looked real they would be of almost no value as evidence, given their source. But they show signs of forgery.

There is no question that officials have systematically suppressed evidence pertaining to the Pentagon attack. It is not clear, however, exactly what officials are hiding. Skeptics of the official story frequently assume that the suppression and destruction of evidence were carried out because the Pentagon was not hit by a jetliner. However, it is also possible that the cover-up was designed to bait skeptics into supporting the no-jetliner theory in spite of the fallacies of nearly every argument made for it.