|Pentagon missile attack 9/11?||F77 home 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 alpha index||
Parallel to the ground trajectory
More Panoramic Views
Woodward book Sure, the new Ron Suskind book, out today, is already drawing headlines for its "impeachable" revelation about a cooked CIA document linking Saddam to al-Qaeda. And there may be much more in this vein in the book. But Suskind's influence -- with the mainstream -- pales in comparison to that of Bob Woodward. ... And Woodward, very quietly, has a new book coming out on September 8. It's so quiet that it is still untitled and is known officially only as his Bush at War Book Vol. IV.
The Amazon page has nothing beyond that and its purported length at 486 pages. Barnes and Noble doesn't even have the length. But wait: there is a strong hint about the contents. At both Amazon and at the publisher's own site (that would be Simon & Schuster) there appears this super-brief description: "Bob Woodward's fourth book about the Bush presidency at war declassifies the secrets of America's political and military involvement in Iraq. It will be essential reading for all citizens -- and candidates -- in this election year."
My guess would be that Woodward, who finally grew much more critical of Bush and the war in Vol. III (State of Denial), will go even further this time, perhaps even producing some "smoking gun" type documents ("declassifies the secrets") of the trumped-up evidence in the march to war. If he doesn't, would he really have a book at all at this point? Especially in the wake of the McClellan and, now, Suskind books?
My colleague here at E&P, Joe Strupp, spoke to Woodward this morning, and the author refused to describe the book beyond confirming its existence and release date. He did reveal, however, that it will be excerpted in The Washington Post. Woodward in recent months has both admitted that the media failed in their pre-war coverage, and defended that performance, given what was known at the time. Stay tuned. * Greg Mitchell's new book covers Woodward's track record. It is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq. He is editor of Editor & Publisher.
|Left: Pentagon at far right
of photo, shows flight path over metropolitan areas.
Below: Isn't it extraordinary that an untrained pilot could fly a passenger airliner into the Pentagon at ground level, clipping off light poles, never hitting the ground, and impacting the Pentagon precisely at the first floor? pole damage info
|Left: Arrow shows approximate flight path|
|below: Light Pole Damage map. Yellow -damage poles. Blue - undamaged poles. and see large panorama light pole damage map|
|trajectory info below|
Light Pole damage width dimension: approximately 100 ft.
Tail height ==44'6"
Boeing, 757 details 200 passengers, Rolls Royce RB211-535E4 engines, or Pratt Whitney PW2037, PW2040, wingspan 124', tail height 45', Engine weight: 29200 lbs.
|Multiple Plane Theories||
|There are a number of theories that multiple planes were involved and that Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon at a few hundred feet as the attack jet simultaneously flew underneath it and into the Pentagon. The smoke from the attack jet confused eyewitnesses?|
Theory: Flight 77 then landed at Reagan International Airport?
|The wingspan of a Global Hawk is similar to a Boeing 757. See light pole damage details|
|left: proves near parallel to the ground trajectory|
|Trajectory illustration: For a 757 to have struck the building only at the first floor, would have required a descent so steep it could not have sheered of the lamp posts. and: see large panorama light pole damage map large file: 430k|
|And see more of NewsFollowUp.com and sitemap|
Secondary Explosions reference
Washington Post Secondary Explosions reference
and NFU stats