- From: Don Fredrick
- To: Dick Eastman
- Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2009 3:05 PM
- Subject: Re: Dick Eastman to Don Fredrick Re: Highest
treason.
-
- Thanks for the response. Yes, I included some ridicule
in my question. (I assume that my being routinely ridiculed for believing
in the U.S Constitution constitutes grounds for my use of the same practice.)
Now that I have your answers, I realize I was going easy on you. I have
tried to keep an open mind on this subject, and have read quite a few things
sent to me by 9/11 skeptics. I do not underestimate the depths of
evil or abuse to which a government - any government, Republican or Democrat
- will go. I imagine that pretty much anything is possible. (I am skeptical,
however, when they tell me they "see something" in a blurry
Pentagon photograph that, to me, simply looks like a blurry photograph.
-
- Dick Eastman responds:
-
- Fair enough.
- Regarding the series of photos you dismiss
as "a blurry photograph" -- you need to review that data
-- or else you will be like the Jewish girl "Jude" who
after I sent her 13 posts of long articles and dozens of photographs sent
back within one hour dismissing it all with general ridicule that showed
she handn't examined any of it.
-
- For example, Don, what do you do with this:
-
-
-
- From: Dick Eastman
- To: A. K. Dewdney
- Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 9:32 AM
- Subject: proof 1: security cam video pics released Mar
2002, used as Federal evidence, re-released in 2006 under FIA -- establishes
killer plane or missile at most half the length of a 757
-
- The security camera video released in March 2002 shows
five pictures, one just prior to the explosion and four of the explosion.
The first picture shows the tail fin of the attacking object sticking up
behind a parking-pass machine in the foreground. There is also a thick
white smoke trail leading from the right edge of the picture to the parking-pass
machine suggesting that the smoke trail is either coming from the object
with the tail fin or else is the trail of a missile being fired from the
object with the tail fin. 1) given the size of the tail fin that is showing
and given the proportions of a Boeing 757 -- the ratio of tail fin height
and width to fuselage length -- the front end of the 757 would have
to be projecting from behind the parking-pass machine -- no front-end of
the fuselage is visible; 2) given a true-to-scale simulation of the 155
foot Boeing 757 beside the 71 ft. high Pentagon it is immediately obvious
that the plane hidden by the parking-pass machine is shorter than the Pentagon
is tall -- i.e., the killer object is less than half the length of a Boeing
757.
-
- The security camera pictures released in March of 2002
and officially released in May of 2006 establish that the aircraft or missile
that attacked the Pentagon was no more than half the length of a Boeing
757.
-
- I. Pentagon security camera pictures released March 7,
2002 reveal:
-
- A. Too-short a plane
- 1. tail fin too large for amount of fuselage concealed
(seven tail fins could fit along back of a Boeing 757)
- 2. picture shows killer jet must be shorter than
the height of the Pentagon, whereas a Boeing 757 is over twice as long
(155 ft.) as the 71 ft. height of the building.
- 3. The F-16 is 50 feet long -- that would be about
right, it is one possibility. See pictures suggesting how a remote controlled
F-16 could have fired a missile at the target ahead of its own crash.
-
- B. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
- 1. Too thick for off-wing condensation
- 2. Exactly matches air-to-ground missile trails
-
- C. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile
warhead
- 1. Aluminum airliner with kerosene jet fule hitting concrete
office building would not produce 120 ft. white flash
- 2. Trail of missile still seen in flash picture
- 3. Photos of large flash-burn stain on the wall confirm
the flash picture
-
-
-
-
- Security cam video pictures released March 7, 2002, were
used as Federal evidence, then officially re-released in 2006 under FIA
-- establishes killer plane or missile to be at most just half the length
of a 757
-
-
-
-
-
- But as an elephant cannot hide behind a teacup, so a
Boeing 757 cannot be behind that box. To convince yourself of this look
at the size of a Boeing 757 in relation to the Pentagon in this graphic
put out by Purdue University engineers.
- An F-16, shown above is one possibility for the "killer
jet" -- there are other possibilities, only not the Boeing 757.
-
-
- The Boeing 757 is 155' long. The Pentagon is
71' high.
-
-
-
-
- But by direct inspection of the photo the plane behind
the yellow pass reader box cannot be even as long as the Pentagon is high,
i.e., not even half the length of a 757.
-
-
-
- In the photo below, you see that when you match the image
size of the killer jet's tail fin and that of the tail fin of a Boeing
757 and then overlay the Boeing so that tail fins are aligned you find,
as Richard Stanley and Jerry Russell demonstrate below, that the overlaid
image of the Boeing fuselage sticks out past the obstruction which completely
conceals the image of the actual killer jet in the original picture. The
killer jet, therefore, has to be shorter and differently proportioned than
the Boeing 757. This alone tells us Flight 77 was not the killer jet.
-
-
-
- Source: http://911-strike.com/pentagon.htm
-
-
- But wait. We are not finished yet. We had no right to
make the Boeing 757 tail fin the same size as the killer jet's tail fin.
A Boeing 757 is over twice as long (155 ft.) as the Pentagon is high (71
ft.)! But, as seen by direct inspection, the killer jet in the picture
is not even as long as the height of the building, much less twice its
height. Thus the matched-tail-size Boeing overlay shown above is scaled
far too small for a real Boeing 757. An actual Boeing 757 in the same position
as the killer jet in the picture would present a much bigger image. What
Stanley and Russel have done is scale down a lion until its tail is the
same size as a cat, resulting in a puss-sized lion. Thus even their overlay
demonstrating that if the tail fin belonged to a Boeing 757 the plane's
fuselage would have had to stick from behind the obstruction, understates
the case because the tail fin shown is too small for a Boeing 757 given
its location with respect to the Pentagon.
-
- Here is someone's simulation showing roughly what a Boeing
757 would have looked like positioned where the actual killer object was
located in the first picture of the security camera series. Clearly this
is not what was going on.
-
-
- If the real video showed this there would be no problem.
However, it does not and we do have a problem.
-
- ========
-
- But whis information is only one piece of a picture that
fits in with other pieces of evidence proving the false-flag black op.
|