Danish official at Pentagon disputes official story re: time, etc.

[philb]

from Henrik Melvang's video:

Per Stig Mollers (Danish Foreign Minister) eyewitness report from Washington on 9/11 at meeting at Defense Academy Building with 10 other Danish officials and others:
radio interview: Denmark Radio P3
"My first impression was that a Bomb had been detonated at the Pentagon" "At 9:30 I saw airline on an unusual path close to Pentagon. And when the meeting ended at 9:30 or 9:32AM,...then I saw smoke from Pentagon
and I said to the other fellows,.....Hey,...A Bomb just went of at the Pentagon,....they did not believe what I said,....but when we left the Building we could all see the smoke.,...:" (end of quote)


Note that is time is inconsistent with time of official story and makes it impossible that Flight 77 could have been what caused the damage. If the Danish Foreign Minister is correct.

[philb]

1. Two other researchers dispute official story

Discussion
I discussed somehow with Eric Bart this DU penetrator hypothesis. Eric is convinced, also, that a 757-200 hit the Pentagon and that an explosion occured during the crash. He argues that it is a shaped charge, and that all the damage can be explained in this way. Though I respect his point of view, I disagree on this particular point.

The first damage, near the entry point could be due to a solid explosive, like a shaped charge explosion. The other damage, deeper inside the building up to the "punch out" hole, are more likely due to a depleted Uranium penetrator. The fact that the damage trajectory is deflected by pillars 1 K and 5 N shows that it cannot be the plasma influx of a shaped charge which did this, but that it is a solid mass which is deflected unpon impact with pillars.

But, whatever it is which made the damage deep inside the Pentagon, Eric and I agree on the fact that the plane contained a military charge (bomb) before taking off. Just a disagreement on the model...

Conclusion
The witness accounts, the damage inside the Pentagon and the available data about this crash, ASCE report and CCTV video frames, prove a conspiracy and a cover-up. The plane had been prepared with a military charge on board, and was used as a missile. The complexity of the approach trajectory, along with this "missile-like" use makes it probable that it was under electronic control, at least for the last part of the trajectory. This sophisticated attack scheme, with the use of the more recent high technologies, cannot be the product of "arab terrorists armed with box cutters". There seems to be some cover-up of facts, as well in the ASCE report as in the reports made by specialists of seismic detection.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/dam-inside.html
(pilot/engineer/professor)

[spooked911]

4. while it is tempting to conclude that a 757 hit the Pentagon,

I still have problems with that theory. The major problems are the extremely low to the ground approach path, the obstacles in front of the entry hole, the general lack of enough plane debris and the hole size.

The one thing that makes me think a 757 hit the Pentagon is the 757 landing gear apparently found inside the Pentagon. The landing gear is indisputably a 757 gear, and it is hard to see it being planted. However, the picture of the landing gear is of unknown origin, and therefore it is hard to completely say this proves anything. Plus, there are still the other problems I listed above that need to be reconciled.

[philb]

2. Some of initial news reports said Pentagon damage due to helicoper crash

There were witnesses who reported this; and some news stories that
reported it- for example an AP story said a military officer saw a helicopter crash inside the pentagon complex.
Does anyone know the URL for this story, and why they might have thought this- and no one early talked of plane to these reporters?

I think others reported the helicopter as well, though didn't say it crashed.

[philb]

7. Melvang says that his video shows Media part of cover-up; what do

people think about that?

He says he knew it was going to happen because of the widespread warnings so immediately started taping coverage when it happened.
He says his video includes early Media reports that were run the first 2 days, then edited and changed leaving out witness testimony contrary to the official story; including editing out evidence of explosions at WTC- both pictures and witness statements and audio dubbing of sounds during the WTC collapses.

There have been such cases posted before; some by me.
Anyone seen his video?

What do people think explains that?

[spooked911]

3. Yes, the official time is certainly wrong and something happened at the

Pentagon around 9:31am.

See here for more details:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=125&topic_id=49414

[LARED]

5. No one is disputing anything

My first impression was that a Bomb had been ......

Using the expression "first impression" tell the reader that this impression was later changed.

[philb]

6. I don't think he changed his mind to believe the official story. But he

surely got a lot more info about the events.
The Danish Prime Minister was warned that something like this was going to happen before it happened; so the Foreign Minister might have also known.

What he didn't change his mind about was the time it happened. Which is the main point of the post. The time that he says he saw the smoke is inconsistent with Flight 77 having caused the damage.

Personally I believe that an airplane hit the Pentagon. but I don't believe the official story. Too many anomolies and too much obvious cover-up. If the official story is true, why would they carry out an elaborate and extensive cover-up?

[TomClash]

8. "At 9:30 I saw airline on an unusual path close to Pentagon."

Impact was at 9:38 so he saw an airliner on an unusual path close to the Pentagon 8 minutes ealier? That's curious.

Of course, the Pantagon is close to National Airport.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

9. This may be of interest to you philb....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x13460

[philb]

10. The two clocks do support the report by Danish Foreign Minister

Apparently people have been paying attention to the wrong Gov't. leaders. The Danish leaders seem to have more accurate info.

[philb]

11. The 9/11 Commission deliberately issued bogus times and timeline

for all events that occurred on 9/11 to cover up big problems in the official story, as has been documented by Dr. D.R. Griffin in his book The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, with help from Paul Thompson's timeline;
and as summarized by:

http://www.flcv.com/offcom11.html
http://www.flcv.com/offcom77.html
http://www.flcv.com/offco175.html
http://www.flcv.com/offcom93.html