Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

"The Last Second: A Forensic Analysis of the Pentagon Murder Weapon's Final Approach," by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Private Attorney General

Expand Messages
  • Supreme Law Firm
    See also: http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/executive.summary.htm Subject: The Last Second: A Forensic Analysis of the Pentagon Murder Weapon s Final
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 19, 2010
    • 1 Attachment
    • 53 KB
    See also:

    http://www.supremelaw.org/ authors/mitchell/executive. summary.htm

    Subject: "The Last Second: A Forensic Analysis of the Pentagon Murder Weapon's Final Approach," by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Private Attorney General

    "The Last Second:  A Forensic Analysis of the Pentagon Murder Weapon's Final Approach"

    by

    Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
    Private Attorney General (18 U.S.C. 1964(a))


    [ W O R K I N G  D R A F T  #1 ]


    This analysis relies heavily upon the attached diagram,
    which is also here on the Internet:

    http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/pentagon/last.second.1.gif


    The reader is encouraged to print a hard copy of that diagram
    while reviewing what follows.


    The letter "P" represents the Pentagon's exterior wall,
    at the point of impact on the morning of 9/11/2001.

    The letter "A" represents an Aircraft that crashed into
    the Pentagon at point "P".

    Four different points in time are represented by the
    circled numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4. 

    The symbols A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5 represent
    points at which A's final trajectory intersects with
    the shock wave from an intense blast at epicenter "P".

    An air-to-ground missile ("AGM") is mounted on a
    missile pylon on the underside of A's port wing.

    The object of this exercise is to determine
    what would have been the optimal point in time
    for the Aircraft to launch the AGM at target "P".


    Assume that A is incoming at more than 300 knots
    (300 nautical miles per hour), probably faster.

    Point "1" is a theoretical construct in which
    the Aircraft hits point "P" without launching the AGM.

    Point "2" is a more realistic construct in which
    the AGM has been launched and hits the Pentagon
    before the Aircraft's nose arrives at point "P", and
    the Aircraft arrives to meet a very high pressure
    shock wave -- high enough to cause destructive,
    disintegrating damage to that Aircraft.

    Point "3" is another realistic construct in which
    the AGM has been launched and hits the Pentagon
    long enough before the Aircraft arrives to attenuate
    the shock wave sufficiently to cause only minor
    turbulence through which the Aircraft must pass.

    Point "4" represents the Aircraft with the AGM
    still mounted under its port-side wing, both of
    which are traveling at a terminal velocity
    in excess of 300 knots.  Here, the Aircraft is
    about one second away from hitting point "P".

    The problem we wish to address now is this:
    at what exact point in time should the AGM be
    launched from the Aircraft, to satisfy all of the
    following constraints?

    (a)  if the AGM is launched too soon, the
    Pentagon's automatic fire control system
    will have enough time to detect the incoming
    and activate its own systems of defense,
    e.g. anti-aircraft guns shoot a wall of lead
    that will destroy the AGM when it hits that wall;

    (b)  if the AGM is launched too late, the
    Aircraft hits the Pentagon before the missile
    can soften an entrance hole through which
    the fuselage can travel deeper into the Pentagon's
    interior office spaces;  think of a mosquito hitting
    a car windshield at 70 mph;

    (c)  if the AGM is launched and its warhead
    detonates so as to soften an entrance hole
    for the Aircraft's fuselage to pass through,
    the launch timing may be late enough for the shock wave
    to meet the incoming Aircraft when that shock wave
    is very intense, causing very destructive, disintegrating
    damages to the Aircraft;

    (d)  ideally, the AGM should be launched
    and its warhead detonated with precise timing that
    causes the shock wave to attenuate enough
    that it causes only minor turbulence through which
    the incoming Aircraft must pass, but without
    suffering any destructive/disintegrating damages
    before the Aircraft actually reaches point "P".


    For some of the following reasons, we think that (c) above
    is the most probable scenario.

    Put yourself at the controls of a remote computer monitor
    and system, which displays the view from an on-board
    video camera mounted in the Aircraft's cockpit.

    You may be seated in another nearby aircraft,
    or you may be seated in an office on the other
    side of the Pentagon.

    You have rehearsed this moment numerous times.

    You must "pull the trigger" launching the AGM
    at precisely the right moment, in order to satisfy
    all of the above constraints.

    You pull the trigger, but what you have not anticipated
    are the delays, or latencies, that exist in all of the
    intervening electronic steps that must occur perfectly
    and in perfect sequence.

    There are delays in the telecommunications pathways
    connecting you and the AGM's launch mechanism.

    You have failed to take those latencies fully into account
    during all of your rehearsals.

    In order to "err" on the side of greatest confidence
    in your abilities, you avoid launching the AGM too early,
    and wait until the very last moment.

    You pull the trigger, but the latencies give the
    incoming Aircraft just a few more milliseconds
    to reach the Pentagon at a point where the
    resulting blast wave is still very intense.

    That shock wave is so intense, it severs the
    Aircraft's fuselage amidship, blowing the aft half
    away from the Pentagon and onto the grass
    perimeter.

    The Pentagon's closed circuit television camera ("cctv")
    records evidence of the Aircraft's instant disintegration
    at Points "A4" and "A5" in the attached diagram:

    http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/pentagon/majic4a.jpg
    http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/pentagon/majic5a.jpg

    The latter 2 photos are at a relatively high resolution,
    so Pentagon personnel are promptly ordered to
    re-sample all of the 5 cctv frames before they are
    released to the public and to the major media
    like CNN and the BBC.

    Also, the one frame which does show any part
    of the incoming Aircraft, is deliberately altered
    by "air brushing" a purple-like color over the
    fuselage that is forward of the visible tail section,
    and nowhere else in that one key photo:

    http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/pentagon/the_plane.gif  (lo res)
    http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/pentagon/majic1a.jpg  (hi res)

    ... and certainly not where the nose and front one-third
    fuselage of a Boeing 757 would have appeared in that photo,
    if tail sections were aligned and superimposed, like this:

    http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gwbush/pentagon/ldsxox.2.gif

    That particular purple-like color does not appear at the same
    pixel locations in ANY of the preceding frames, nor in any
    of the subsequent frames of the full cctv frame set.

    Those re-sampled photos have a much lower pixel resolution,
    which makes it intentionally impossible to verify forensic details
    that are readily apparent in the high resolution versions.

    Such deliberate alterations of evidence of a murder weapon
    is a serious FELONY Federal offense, to be construed as
    aiding and abetting premeditated murder in the first degree and/or
    murder-for-hire.  Such a crime is on the order of hindering
    the apprehension of a suspect who is guilty of a homicide. 

    In Seattle, Washington State, 2 defendants were recently found
    guilty of hindering the apprehension of Maurice Clemmons
    after he murdered 4 police officers in Lakewood, Washington,
    on November 29, 2009.

    [more to follow]




    --
    Sincerely yours,
    /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
    Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
    http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
    http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
    http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
    http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
    http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
    http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

    All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.