There are a lot of people in this movement that claim there is no debris at all from whatever plane hit the Pentagon. These people are either deliberately ignoring the photographic evidence or refuse to believe that an impact was possible. There are many photos clearly showing lots of debris scattered over the lawn and the heliport pad. You don’t have to believe anything I say but I do ask that you at least look at all the evidence before you come to a conclusion.

Photographic Evidence supporting a PLANE DID hit the Pentagon

plane debris


#4 (Collage)


For the people that claim there is no debris on the Pentagon lawn is not being very honest.

9/11 Attacks and Investigation Images (Pentagon. Released 03/23/17)





More oddities, regarding AA77. Suspicious debris……..
If this piece of debris is from Flight 77, why doesn’t it have any burn or scrape marks on it after it supposedly exploded into the hardened wall of the Pentagon at over 500 mph?



“One of the few sizable scraps of aircraft debris found on the Pentagon’s lawn matches the skin of an American Airlines 757 located just behind the forward starboard-side cabin door. Even the positions of the rivets match.”

Why is this the only piece of debris so far away from the point of impact and all by itself?

Some people claim that this piece of debris is the “n” of the American Airlines’ logo and that it is indeed “authentic,” but if it did come from an AA plane, couldn’t it have come from another wrecked AA plane and how did this small piece that is located near the front of the fuselage land outside so far away from the point of impact when we were told the entire fuselage of Flight 77 shot through the building all the way up to the 3rd Ring?
The piece of debris on the left is supposedly the “C” of the logo on an AA plane and the photo on the right is thought to be the “N,” “E,” or “C” which was mentioned above. Isn’t it just a little too coincidental that two of the very few pieces of plane debris found at the crash scene are pieces with part of an AA logo on it?


Are these white collar Pentagon employees removing or planting debris? Why do they have no gloves on? Who are these two men? What time was this picture taken? Is there any video footage of this happening? In any case, this would be considered obstruction of justice if they are removing or planting evidence from a crime scene.

911stealth FBI Order: Line of Civilians Removing Evidence from Pentagon (ignore the first 14 seconds of the “Tent”)



Fake Firefighters/Military personnel at the Pentagon!

Tampering with the crime scene:


Couldn’t any of the few pieces of un-burnt plane debris seen at the Pentagon have come from another AA plane that had previously crashed in which the government would have access to it’s debris?

APU Door

Excerpts from an interview with Dr. Duong Nguyen, COL, MC (retired), who was a physician at the Rader Army Health Clinic, Ft. Myer, VA.
“I rushed through Henderson Hall (a close-by Marine barracks) to the Pentagon. Along the way, debris of an airplane wing was on the grass.” – Soldiers to the Rescue/Responding in the Pentagon


Is this part of an engine from a Beoing 757? If it is, then why is on the outside of the wall? Shouldn’t it have gone inside with the rest of the plane? The Boeing 757 carries 2 x Rolls-Royce RB211-535E4B engines.

For comparison sake, this engine part could very well have come from a Boeing 757 Engine.

The problem we have is that the FBI won’t release any of the part numbers or serial codes from any debris recovered at the pentagon.
“The plane debris observed in the various photographs does indeed comport with that of a 757, at least to the limited degree with which they can be compared to actual 757 parts or the manufacturer’s detail drawings, as shown above. The engine compressor or turbine disk appears to be approximately the correct diameter to have been used in a Rolls Royce RB211-535E4B engine, as used in American Airlines 757 aircraft.”

“The prototype 757 rolled out of the Renton factory on January 13, 1982.[35] The aircraft, equipped with RB211-535C engines”
Other sources: RB211,N174AA-American-Airlines.php
ERROR: ‘Engine Parts From the Pentagon Crash Don’t Match a 757’


“This question shares many similarities with a previous analysis of engine wreckage photographed at the Pentagon following the September 11 attack. In the case of the landing gear wheel, most of the confusion is due to mistakes in comparing the Pentagon wreckage to the wrong parts from a Boeing 757 or to parts that don’t come from a 757 at all.”

Pentagon & Boeing 757 Wheel Investigation|



What knocked over the 5 lightpoles? Was it Flight 77 or were they pre planted?


Here is the link gain to the article where we analyze ALL of the alleged light pole witnesses:
Engines at the pentagon and light poles explained (Ryan Dawson)
Lets look at the witnesses that saw it hit the 5 light poles!

Eyewitness Reports of American Airlines Flight 77
Clipping Objects On Way to Crash

John McWethy, pentagon, witness, lightpole, ABC, 12:16, 9/11

Explicit eyewitness accounts (with rebuttals)

Eyewitnesses Accounts



The 5 light poles that were knocked over all line up with the official flight path. Many will argue that the light poles were staged but they fail to show any evidence supporting a staged scenario. Especially when it comes to Lloyd’s cab being positioned in the middle of the highway during busy traffic. But for arguments sake lets look at what happens when an aircraft wing hits a light pole.

airplane wing is cut off by wooden telephone pole

DC-7 Crash Test: “Transport Crash Safety Test” 1964 Federal Aviation Administration (Wooden light pole) @0:26 and @5:55

This is not a valid comparison because these poles were made of solid wood whereas street light poles are made out of light weight aluminum and designed to tip over on impact for safety reasons. Wooden poles are also buried deep underground giving it more strength, whereas a street light pole is bolted to a base above ground.
JET Crash Video: Man steals JET, crashes then kills himself in Salt Lake City


As you can see here, the wing of this plane crashes into a building and rips all the way through. The wing looks to be in one piece still.
Take off drama as British Airways jet crashes into building

Four injured after BA plane hits OR Tambo building

Another example of a wing tearing through the side of the building wedging itself inside. Still in one piece.
Notice the wtc columns pushed inwards.
“The 737 was taxiing to the gate when, a passenger Tweeted, it ran into a pole on the tarmac.”

New Plan Wing Design Greatly Cuts Drag To Save Fuel (September 11th,1990)

“Boeing and NASA used the titanium to replace a section of aluminum skin covering part of the upper surface of one wing of a Boeing 757, which meant that the titanium had to be mated with aircraft skin and structural parts made of aluminum. This was a major challenge, Mr. Nagel said, because of the difference between the rates of expansion of the titanium and aluminum when heated, and because of the difference in their load-bearing characteristics.”


Boeing 777 Wing Test


“This Boeing 777 wing was tested to destruction, finally breaking at one fifty four percent of the designed limit load.”

As you can clearly see in this wing test, that wings of a Boeing 777 are made of very strong and durable aluminum. Not like a popcan.
“The aluminum that modern aircraft are made of is not the same soft material as that of a beer can: Aluminum 2219-T81 UNS A92219; ISO AlCu6Mn; Aluminium 2219-T81; AA2219-T81 – with a tensile strength greater than that of structural steel.

“2000 series are alloyed with copper, can be precipitation hardened to strengths comparable to steel.”
“Tim Benjamin: Now, you mentioned aluminium is the material used in other jet aircraft. Can you just go into a bit more detail as to what the benefits of aluminium actually are – because for many of us – you mention aluminium and I certainly think immediately of tin cans for holding my beer and my Coca Cola.

Rainer Groh: There’s a wide range of different grades of aluminium.
And what we’re talking about is the 7000 range of aluminium which is the aerospace grade aluminium. And it’s MUCH stronger and stiffer than the aluminium you know from your cans. And the way that you do this is basically by creating an aluminium alloy.”
Even a Kamikaze plane with a propeller was able to cut through the 1-2 inch thick steel PLATES of a battleship during WWII.


Light poles on highways are designed to “breakaway” easily for safety purposes and are crash tested before installation.

“Breakaway supports meeting the current crash test criteria* have been required on all Federal-Aid Projects since 1990. (Since the ISTEA of 1991 that requirement has applied to all projects on the NHS regardless of funding source.)”

Valmont Breakaway Base Couplings

Valmont Transformer Breakaway Bases

Why are some street lights bolted above the concrete?

Breakaway utility pole shear base structure
US 4813199 A (Patent)
Light poles on highways are designed to “breakaway” easily for safety purposes and are crash tested before installation.

“Breakaway supports meeting the current crash test criteria* have been required on all Federal-Aid Projects since 1990. (Since the ISTEA of 1991 that requirement has applied to all projects on the NHS regardless of funding source.)”
Out-of-control truck takes out light poles on I-43

“The poles did exactly what they were designed to do….yeah there supposed to be breakaway like that.”


The Pentagon Attack:
What the Physical Evidence Shows
ERROR: ‘The Pentagon Attack Left No Aircraft Debris’
Here are photographs from the interior of the Pentagon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Go to Top