“I can prove that it was not an airplane” that hit the Pentagon

 – Major General Albert N. Stubblebine

By Ross Pittman

How easy is it for you to shift your belief system from ‘I totally believe in my government’ to ‘Oh My God! What’s going on?’  That’s exactly where I went in all of this.” – Albert N. Stubblebine III
Albert Stubblebine

Albert N. Stubblebine III is a retired Major General in the United States Army. He was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984.  In this compelling interview, Stubblemine reveals the following information (what he calls dots) about the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001:

  • Stubblebine initially believed the official story regarding 9/11.
  • Then, he saw the hole in the Pentagon. He can prove that the Pentagon was not hit by a Boeing 757. DOT.
  • All of the sensors around the Pentagon were turned off except one. That one sensor captured an image of the object the hit the Pentagon.  It looked like a missile.  But, after he went public, the imagery was changed to look like a plane. DOT.
  • The collapse of the twin towers was caused by controlled demolition – not the fuel from the airplane. DOT.
  • Larry Silverstein, the lease holder of the WTC complex, admitted that that building 7, which was not hit by a plane and had only a small fire, was intentionally “pulled” – which is phraseology used for controlled demolition.  DOT.
  • All of the air defense systems around Washington DC were turned off that day. DOT.
  • Also on 9/11, there was an exercise designed to mimic an attack on the towers by airplanes.  DOT.
  • When you connect the DOTs, the picture says that what we were told by the media was not the real story.
  • Stubblebine, visibly upset, describes how he felt when he realized the truth about his government after having a strong belief in his country since early childhood: “My belief system was so strong from age five when I could remember standing on a parade ground at attention with not anybody telling me to do that – at West Point.”

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Below are some notes from the interview including a partial transcript. (Be sure to watch all the way to the the end, where you can see the deep hurt on his face when he recalled the moment that he realized that his government, the government that he proudly served for over 30 years, was not what he thought was):

5:15 Stubblebine hears about the 9/11 attacks: “We’re at war.”

6:00 Stubblebine said there must have been intelligence information to know that an attack was coming and we didn’t see the signals.  Somebody missed it.

6:35 He initially believed that it was terrorist attack done by other forces: “Not my government.”

7:45 Stubblebine  then saw a photo of the Pentagon showing the hole in the Pentagon supposedly made by a Boeing 757.  ”Something’s wrong. There is something wrong with this picture…”

8:30 “Well there was something wrong. And, so I analyzed it not just photographically, I did measurements… I checked the plane, the length of the nose, where the wings were… I took measurements of the Pentagon – the depth of the destruction in the Pentagon.”

Hit Point and Clean Lawn (2)

 The very modest “hit point” and the clean, clear Pentagon lawn

9:05 “Conclusion: airplane did not make that hole.” 9:10” I went public at the time. I am the highest ranking officer, I believe, that has ever gone public… The official story was not true.”

9:25 “I was very careful to not say what it was because I couldn’t prove it. I was careful to say that it was not the airplane that did that, because I can prove that it was not the airplane.”

9:45 “In the hole, however, was a turbine that looked like a turbine from the missile… I can’t prove that, I don’t know. But there was something there that did not look like the engine from an airplane, but did look like a turbine from a missile.”

10:10 “Later I saw another photograph taken by one of the sensors on the outside of the Pentagon. Now, all of the sensors had been turned off, which is kind of interesting – isn’t it? That day, why would all of the sensors around the Pentagon be turned off? That’s strange. I don’t care what the excuse is.  That’s strange. There happened to be one that apparently did not get turned off. And in that picture, coming in, flying into the Pentagon, you see this object, and it obviously hits the Pentagon.  When you look at it, it does NOT look like an airplane.  Sometime later, after I’d gone public, that imagery was changed. It got a new suit around it that now looked like an airplane. But, when you take the suit off, it looks more like a missile – not like an airplane.”

YouTube - Veterans Today -

11:30 “Let me go back to the next very important piece of information.  The amount of energy to melt the girders – the steel in the tower – cannot be gotten to a melt point with the fuel that was in the airplane.  Not possible!  So, any melting did not occur as a result of the hit from the airplane.  Point. I call it dot. OK?  DOT.”

12:10 “When you look at the tower coming down, what you see at each floor is successive puffs of smoke: puff, puff, puff, puff… all the way down. What are the puffs of smoke coming from? Well, they claim that they are from the collapsing floors… No. No. No. Those puffs of smoke are controlled demolitions. That’s exactly what they are, because that’s exactly how they work. And so, the fact that the airplane hit, it did, it did not cause that collapse of the building.  The collapse of the building was caused by controlled demolition.”

13:05 “Fact: Building 7 – Silverberg, I believe is the name of the owner…” (his name is actually Larry Silverstein), “…was on a video and you could see Building 7.  And, there was a fire in Building 7, there’s no doubt about that. No airplane hit it.  I assume that the fire came from some debris, but I’m not even sure of that.  But, in the lower right-hand corner of the building was a fire – not a very big fire. It didn’t appear to be out of control. It certainly was in a small part of the building.  But, then he is heard on the video and he says Pull it.  Then, the building collapsed. What does pull it mean?  Let me tell you.  That’s the order for controlled demolition.  That is the phraseology that’s used for blowing up something.” CLN

[Editorial note: Stubblebine got mixed up with his facts regarding the Siverstein video, which you can see here.  The video is a PBS interview with Silverstein that was shot sometime after 9/11.   The footage of Building 7 going down is historical footage, not live during the interview.  Nonetheless, Silverstein does say that he gave the order to “pull it.”]

15:00 All of the air defense systems in that part of the country had been turned off that day.  All of the air defense systems had been turned off… Why would you turn off all of the air defense systems on that particular day unless you knew that something was going to happen? It’s a dot.  It’s information. But, it’s strange that everything got turned off that day.  DOT.”

15:50 There was an exercise that was designed for the air defense systems that was an attack on the towers by airplanes.  Isn’t that strange that we had an exercise that mimicked what really happened?  Strange that we had planned an exercise that was exactly what happened. And, at the same time, the air defense systems were turned off.  Don’t you find that strange? I find that really strange?  DOT.  Just a piece of information.

16:50 “But how does it correlate with everything else? So, you see the dots. You have all of these dots. They’re just bits of information.  But, that’s exactly how the intelligence world works.  You get a bit of information here. A bit here, and a bit here. And, pretty soon you’ve got a picture. To me, what does the picture say?  The picture says that what we heard and were told in the newspapers, the media, was not the real story. There’s enough doubt in the official story where the story is absolutely not consistent with what happened. They paint a different picture than the one that was given to the media.”

17:45 “How easy is it for you to shift your belief system from ‘I totally believe in my government’ to ‘Oh My God! What’s going on?’  That’s exactly where I went in all of this. Because, my belief system was so strong from age five when I could remember standing on a parade ground at attention with not anybody telling me to do that – at West Point. I did it because I wanted to do it – because I believed! And then going to the military academy and serving, defending…

18:30 The real story was, I have a question I guess. The real story to me is: who was the real enemy? Who participated in this? Who planned this attack? Why was it planned? Were the real terrorists the people in Arab clothing? Or, were the real people that planned this the people sitting in the authority in the White House?

Pentagon plane the wrong size

                   The plane in the Pentagon frame was too small to be a Boeing 757

Physical Evidence and Eyewitness Testimony That A Missile Hit The Pentagon – NOT a Boeing 757

The following physical evidence and eyewitness testimony is presented in detail below, most of which is video footage:

  1. Analysis of the physical damage to the Pentagon and lack of debris. You can’t fit a 125 foot wide Boeing 757 into a hole 16 feet wide.  The theory that the plane vaporized is idiotic.  And, what happened to the wings that allegedly sheared off?  DOT
  2. The official story of how the plane arrived at the Pentagon by making a 270 degree turn at a speed of 800 kilometers per hour is absurd.  A Boeing 757 could not possibly perform that maneuver according to experts.   DOT
  3. AA Flight 77 was lost from radar as early as 8:56 a.m. and then allegedly reappeared 36 minutes later at 9:32 am. According to Danielle O’Brien, an air traffic controller at Dulles International Airport, the plane that showed up on the radar was not Flight 77: “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that it turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that it was a military plane.”   DOT
  4. No unknown aircraft are allowed within 50 miles of the Pentagon.  The Pentagon has its own anti-aircraft missiles that should have fired to protect the building. Only a military aircraft with a special IFF transponder (identifying it as a friend) would have been allowed to approach the Pentagon.   DOT
  5. CNN reporter on the scene shortly after the impact saying that there was no evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon.   DOT
  6. Aerial footage showing no debris (confirming the report by the CNN reporter), plus more analysis showing the size of a Boeing 757 compared to the size of the hole in the Pentagon.  Recall also that the initial hole was only 16 feet wide and the CNN reporter said that the Pentagon structure did not collapse until about 45 minutes after impact.   DOT
  7. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and 9/11 Commission Member Timothy Roemer both saying that a MISSILE was used on the Pentagon.   DOT
  8. Analysis of the Pentagon video footage of the alleged Boeing 757 (it certainly doesn’t look like a Boeing 757) hitting the Pentagon that concludes it was faked.   DOT
  9. A leaked video showing a missile hitting the Pentagon.   DOT
  10. Expert testimony that a high radiation reading near Pentagon indicated that a “depleted uranium warhead may have been used”  DOT
  11. Two witnesses who were at the Pentagon who said there was no debris or jet fuel, and another witness who “was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast it sounded nothing like an airplane.” DOT
  12. KEY POINT. Many people reported seeing a low-flying plane heading towards the Pentagon.  Thanks to a series of videotaped interviews with multiple witnesses by the Citizens Investigation Team, we find out that: (a) a plane did approach the Pentagon, but it was smaller than a Boeing 757, and it approached from a different angle than reported by the 9/11 commission; (b) the plane did not actually hit the Pentagon, but instead flew past the Pentagon at under 200 feet – immediately after the missile hit; (c) the downed flag poles at the Pentagon were staged, which was admitted by the taxi driver whose taxi was supposedly hit by one of the falling poles. DOT

Connecting the dots, a very clear picture emerges: (a) American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) disappeared from radar and never re-appeared; (b) instead, a smaller military craft appeared on radar 36 minutes later that was capable of performing a difficult maneuver and could approach the Pentagon without being shot down; (c) a low-flying military craft approached the Pentagon but merely flew past the Pentagon immediately after the Pentagon was struck by a missile.

You Can’t Fit a Boeing 757 into Hole that is Only 16 Feet Wide

Watch this 10-minute segment of the outstanding Italian documentary titled Zero: An Investigation into 9/11, which includes analysis by Stubblebine and addresses many of the serious problems with the official account of what happened at the Pentagon:

YouTube - Veterans Today -

The discrepancies that are addressed in the above video include the following:

  • There is no airplane debris visible anywhere in front of the Pentagon. Examples of what you would expect to see at a plane crash site are shown. Captain Russ Whittemberg, a pilot with over 30 years in military and civil aviation, said: “I have been at some accident investigation sites in the Air Force. And I have never come across any accident scene where there is no tell-tale evidence of the plane that crashed.”
  • There is no evidence that either the airplane engines or the wings impacted the building. Instead, we are supposed to believe that the 38 meter (125 feet) wide Boeing 757 fit into a hole that is only 5 meters (16 feet) wide. We are supposed to believe that the wings folded up like those of a dragon fly and squeeze into the 5 meter wide hole.
  • Major General Albert Stubblebine: “One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What’s going on?”
  • One theory is that the Boeing 757 was vaporized due to the speed and the force of the crash. The engines are made of a titanium steel alloy that would not vaporize unless they hit a temperature of 3,286 degrees Centigrade. That did not happen. Plus, the engines would have caused significant damage upon impact. Yet, there is no indication that the engines impacted the Pentagon.
  • After a period of time, various photos of airplane debris began to appear in newspapers and on the web did not appear in any photos shown in the days following the event.
  • The Pentagon had numerous cameras that had complete and separate recordings of the incident. The FBI was immediately on the scene and confiscated many video tapes from the Pentagon and nearby buildings. Yet only four videos were released after 2006 when FOIA requests compelled them to release them. Only two showed any useful information. But most experts believe the white image in the videos is too small to be a 757.
  • The story of how the plane arrived at the Pentagon is absurd – by making a 270 degree turn at a speed of 800 kilometers per hour.

AA Flight 77 Was Lost From Radar For 36 Minutes, Then a Smaller Military Plane Appeared On Radar That Was NOT AA Flight 77

Please continue watching the next segment of the documentary Zero: An Investigation into 9/11:


YouTube - Veterans Today -

  • According to the official account, the Pentagon was struck by AA Flight 77, under the control of al-Qaeda hijacker Hani Hanjour. Hanjour was known as “a terrible pilot,”  who could not even fly a small airplane.
  • An experienced pilot with thousands of hours would probably require 10-20 attempts to pull off the maneuver that was performed with the Boeing 757 on its way to the Pentagon. “You just can’t do that with one of those big airplanes.” –Robin Hordon, flight controller and flight instructor
  • AA Flight 77 was lost from radar as early as 8:56 a.m. and then allegedly reappeared 36 minutes later at 9:32 am. According to Danielle O’Brien, an air traffic controller at Dulles International Airport, the plane that showed up on the radar was not Flight 77: “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that it turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that it was a military plane.
  • No unknown aircraft are allowed within 50 miles of the Pentagon.  The Pentagon has its own anti-aircraft missiles that should have fired to protect the building. Only a military aircraft with a special IFF transponder (identifying it as a friend) would be allowed to approach the Pentagon.
  • The official report of the final half mile of Flight 77 before it allegedly hit the Pentagon is aerodynamically impossible. “I challenge any pilot, any pilot anywhere: give him a Boeing 757 and tell him to do 400 knots 20 feet above the ground for half a mile. CAN’T Do. It’s aerodynamically impossible.” – Nila Sagadevan, pilot and aeronautical engineer.
  • The alleged hijackers had difficulty flying small aircraft, which means that there is a zero possibility that they could pull off an impossible maneuver on the first try.

CNN Reporter: “There is NO Evidence of a Plane Having Crashed Anywhere Near the Pentagon”

Jamie Mcintyre, CNN’s senior Pentagon correspondent at the time, was at the Pentagon shortly after it was hit. Here’s what he reported: “From my close-up inspection, there is no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon… The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, a fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse. Even though if you look at the pictures of the Pentagon you see that the floors have all collapsed, that didn’t happen immediately, it wasn’t until almost about forty-five minutes later that the structure was weakened enough that all of the floors collapsed.”

Jim Fetzer

A former Marine Corps officer, Jim Fetzer has published widely on the theoretical foundations of scientific knowledge, computer science, artificial intelligence, cognitive science, and evolution and mentality.

McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth, he has also conducted extensive research into the assassination of JFK, the events of 9/11, and the plane crash that killed Sen. Paul Wellstone.

The founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, his latest books include The Evolution of Intelligence (2005), The 9/11 Conspiracy (2007), Render Unto Darwin (2007), and The Place of Probability in Science (2010).

Related Posts:

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors or partners and technicians. Notices

Posted by on 10:39 am, With 0 Reads, Filed under 9/11. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments Closed

71 Responses to "“I can prove that it was not an airplane” that hit the Pentagon"

  1. LC  August 14, 2013 at 9:59 am

    Dr. Fetzer:

    The 9/11 Eyewitness documentary which you had linked in another page is no longer available to buy on its web. Have you downloaded it & can you post a link to it? Mr. Fox wrote it documented two 300 ton pieces of one WTC blasted into the Gallerry 600 feet away:


    • Jim Fetzer  August 14, 2013 at 9:34 pm

      Try this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCrLDQwNlqw

    • LC  August 15, 2013 at 12:21 pm

      Thanks. What an amazing documentary!!!.

      Although I haven’t yet watched the entire film but @Min: 79 it begins showing the hundreds of tons of WTC chunks flown into AMEX & the Gallery. The amount of WTC pieces at the Gallery site seems well over 1000 tons. There is more steel visible here than at Ground Zero itself!!!
      @ Min: 89 the film maker said: “…this was a nuclear attack…”

  2. LC  August 12, 2013 at 7:54 am

    $100,000 reward for anyone who proves planes hit buildings:

    June 5, 2013 – 9:14 am
    I thought there were no planes (and no drones) for WTC1 WTC2.

  3. mevashir  August 11, 2013 at 3:54 pm

    Professor Fetzer,

    Off topic slightly, but could I ask what you think about claims of the lunar landing hoax? If this was a hoax to coverup the weaponization of space, was JFK in on it from the beginning? If so could one argue that he deserved to die for promulgating such an odious deception?

    See some of these links:

    David Percy’s critique seems thoughtful articulate and deadly accurate in this film:
    youtube * com/watch?v=yo5w0pm24ic

    From 13′ -17′ he analyzes the funny view of earth from 130,000 miles out. Please explain where he goes wrong?

    And why is the US flag blowing in the non-existent lunar wind at 8:20?

    • mevashir  August 11, 2013 at 3:58 pm

      moon-landing-hoax-archive * blogspot.com/

      biblebelievers * org.au/nasaindx.htm#Has%20NASA%20Mooned%20America?

      apfn * org/apfn/moon.htm

      whale * to/c/NASA_mooned_america.pdf

    • Jim Fetzer  August 11, 2013 at 5:13 pm

      I have done only one interview on the moon landing hoax, which is
      at http://kliv.gotdns.com/kliv/paid/2013_05_02_SpirtToSpirt.mp3
      Although it is a “sacred cow” in America, it appears to be faked.

    • captain obvious  August 12, 2013 at 4:39 am

      kinda knew that as a 1st grader when they wheeled TV’s into our classroom to watch it all..
      I dont care who ya are or how well trained, in 1/7 gravity, you’re gonna DO a 3-4 ft high jump!
      thats my blatantly honest opinion from when I was just a child, IT WAS ALL PURE BS.
      since then I’ve seen plenty of information that near completely verifies my perception back when.

    • mevashir  August 14, 2013 at 5:52 am

      I listened to your interview. Very interesting. Do you think JFK was in on the hoax from the outset, or was this implemented after his assassination?

    • Jim Fetzer  August 14, 2013 at 8:15 am

      No, I don’t think JFK lied about anything except, perhaps, to keep Jackie in the dark about his liaisons,
      where I think she pretty much knew the score anyway. He sincerely believed it would prove to be possible.

  4. Gerry Kraut  August 10, 2013 at 5:01 pm

    JFK was murdered in 1963 – 50 years later – we all know Oswald did it.

    9/11, twin towers, pentagon, building 7, plain crash, was done in 2001 – 12 years later – we´ll all know 19 Arabs with the help of a tool box did it.

    How do I know? Well, the newspapers say so! They are the people’s opinion, not we.

  5. LC  August 10, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    John Lear’s federal court expert testimony proving impossibility of airliners flying into WTC’s or Pentagon:


    NO objection was filed against John Lear’s above affidavit so if the case hadn’t been blocked by Zio-Satanists it would have been one of the established facts of the case.

    Plus another related document:

  6. Martin Maloney  August 10, 2013 at 5:20 am

    Over the years, in several different venues, I have posted the following, and no one has ever responded. Perhaps this time will be different.

    Check the above frame from the video which purports to show Flight 77’s approach to and impact with the Pentagon. Note the date-time stamp.

    The time shown is 17:37:19. The local time — Eastern Daylight Time — was 09:37:19. If the clock were set to GMT/UTC, then it would have been 13:37:19.

    The date shown is Sep. 12, 2001, not Sep. 11, 2001.

    The obvious explanation is innocent enough — somebody set the date-time wrong.

    Why, then, when the video frames were re-released, In May, 2005, was the date-time stamp erased?

    • sandyhooked  August 10, 2013 at 1:42 pm

      Good info.

  7. Martin Maloney  August 10, 2013 at 3:56 am

    @ David Martin

    “How do we actually know Afghanistan’s opium production was gone in Aug of 2001?”

    1) Both the CIA Factbook and WHO reported that Afghanistan’s 2001 opium production was only 5% of the 2000 figure.

    2) On March 15, 2001, I read an article on the Web site of the Mineapolis Star-Tribune about a news conference held by a couple of officials from the UN’s drug abatement agency. (The paper’s archives are no longer free access — otherwise I would look up the name of the agency and copy-and-paste excerpts from the article.)

    They stated that the Taliban had given them free access to the entire 90% of Afghanistan that the Taliban controlled. They reported that they saw wheat fields, not opium poppy fields.

    I knew that the CIA would not permit that situation to continue, and that the US would find some excuse to invade Afghanistan that fall.

    BTW, that was my first hint that 9/11 was not what the media was feeding to us. As soon as I heard “Osama – Afghanistan” I began my journey on 9/11 Truth.

    I hope that the above answers David Martin’s question.

    • LC  August 10, 2013 at 10:58 am

      Maloney are you looking for this: ********http://www.picj.org/docs/issue3/The%20Taliban.pdf

      Its charts show Afghan Opium had disappeared in 2001.

      You might also find some useful numbers here:


  8. Cold Wind  August 9, 2013 at 7:02 pm

    Yes, it’s clear the Israeli/Zio/Neocon architects of 9-11 has a missile strike the Pentagon, but the Towers were turned to dust before they hit the ground. A simple controlled demolition could not have done this. But good on Stubblebine for at least questioning the Government’s absurd narrative.

    • yes2truth  August 10, 2013 at 1:56 am

      The towers turning to dust and engine blocks in cars disappearing is explained by Dr Judy Wood. Many weird things happened that day that cannot be explained by nano-thermite controlled demolition. Building 7 was the only controlled demolition.

      Re the Pentagon there was an aircraft that day but it flew at very low altitude over the Pentagon whilst a missile did the damage. There’s a youtube vid on this with witness accounts.

    • captain obvious  August 12, 2013 at 4:54 am

      I’m aware the burned cars (neutron type bomb would explain that too maybe).
      maybe I’m “over-simplifying” here, years ago we’d stacked rocks 2ft high for a campfire pit about 2.5ft across. after feeding it LOTS of wood, FILLED with a big orange hot glowing ball, the rocks began exploding. put an oxy-acetalene torch to concrete the concretes skin starts exploding too.
      thermate can get hot enough to make trapped water in concrete do the same, I’d think anyhow, but also think we’d seen a lot more flames with the squib bursts..

    • Jim Fetzer  August 12, 2013 at 5:25 am

      T. Mark Hightower and I have exposed the myth of explosive nanothermite repeatedly. Most of the evidence that has been advanced on its behalf, like the glowing cavern of molten metal, the cut support beam during the clean up and the flow from the 80th floor of the South Tower, appear to be misinterpretations or even instances of deliberate fakery. Consider:

      (1) The image of rescue workers peering into a cavern of molten metal, which would be around 3,000*F, were it true, would have caused the skin to melt from their faces and arms. None of us would put our faces over the spout of a teapot when it starts to whistle, yet that is only around 212*F. The “glow” appears to have been created by changing the color thereof.

      (2) The cut of the support beam at Ground Zero has been often touted as demonstrating the use of nanothermite (or at least of thermite), which is an incendiary; and well it may. But it is a FRESH CUT and appears to have been created during the clean up. Had it been made during the destruction of the towers, it would have been damaged by debris and looked battered.

      (3) The flow from the corner of the 80th floor of the South Tower is unique, but if it had been caused by nanothermite that had been distributed throughout the towers, there should have been similar flows at random around both buildings. The 80th floor housed a massive arrays of batteries as back-up for the Fuji Bank in case of a power outage. I believe it was lead.

      I confronted Steve Jones about these points (and some others) during an exchange at Chandler, AZ, during The Accountability Conference, but he never managed to explain them away. For more about this kind of evidence and why it doesn’t add up, see “Thinking Critically about Conspiracy Theories”, http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/search?q=Conspiracy+Theories%3A+A+Triple+Header

      For more about nanothermite, which cannot possibly have blown the Twin Towers apart, try these:

      “Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth community?”

      “Is ‘9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”

      “Nanothermite: If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit!”

    • yes2truth  August 13, 2013 at 9:34 am

      @ captain obvious

      Not just burned cars, but cars without engine blocks or door handles yet with rubber windscreen seals intact and parked several blocks away from WTC 1 & 2.

      As I have said elsewhere here, nuclear devices leave nuclear fall-out and surely would have left New York and the surrounding area uninhabitable.

      All the heat issues are dealt with by Dr Judy Wood. I am a not a scientist, she is I believe.

  9. Mike Kay  August 9, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    Dr. Fetzer,

    What is particularly compelling about this testimony is that it adds to the human angst re; 911.

    This is also, however, what has everyone mired at first base.

    Those of us who accept the evidence of complicity within the highest halls of American authority, are waiting for the action to move to second base, a phenomenon that never materializes. Its almost as if the work of 911 was to keep the people in an endless feedback loop, where no real progress is ever made. Rather, we all keep reliving the event, expressing our disgust, loosing our trust, and spinning our wheels.
    Yes sir, we do need an introduction for those unversed in the events actual events, yet it is tacitly critical to move the action forward. If this is not done, humanity will forever simply be caught in the nightmarish spectacle, with no vision for exit.

    • Gerry Kraut  August 10, 2013 at 4:42 pm

      Mike ~ there isn´t going to be a second base, we might as well accept it. This is as far as we are allowed to get. Same as in the JFK murder. There is no lawyer, judge nor jury – in all of the USA. God bless Jim.

    • yes2truth  August 11, 2013 at 1:24 am

      We never get anywhere because we own no property. Our birthright was given away via our birth (berth) registration. We attorned everything with the Birth Registration and an SS number making us all attorneys. Judges and attorneys are two fold treasonous bastards having sworn an oath to The Bar in the City of London which is a City State separate from Britain as is Washington DC a separate City State and not a part of America.

    • Gerry Kraut  August 11, 2013 at 4:08 am

      You tell them, yes ~ that´s EXACTLY the way it is.

    • yes2truth  August 11, 2013 at 7:44 am

      Yes I learnt most of this stuff from the Kentuckian Winston Shrout and Roger Elvik back in 2008/9, but have recently discovered a Canadian fella called Marcus at his web page ‘Servant King’ – he has a nice way about him and is very easy to listen to.

    • Gerry Kraut  August 11, 2013 at 9:29 am

      yes2truth ~ thanks for your info. There is a site from an American called Jordan Maxwell, it´s all there, for the last 20 years or so. Equally good is Kerry Cassidy´s site ´Project Camelot` having 3 or 4 – two hour video interviews from Jordon Maxwell (and many others). Free. You won´t regret watching any of this stuff, especially him explaining Babylonian, church and Illuminati (and other) symbolism. There is quite a bit on your one $ bill already. I guess you probably know all this stuff though. Take care.

    • captain obvious  August 12, 2013 at 5:06 am

      yup! “Jordan Maxwell” spells out a LOT of info, it just takes assembling the tidbits mentally to understand the bigger picture machine, how all the parts inter-relate to be VERY fascist.
      his video’s etc are very much worth the time and thought, he’s informative and correct.

  10. Joe  August 9, 2013 at 12:11 pm

    Another great article as usual. Here is some honest feedback for you. Those of us who are going to get it did so long ago. Continuing to argue semantics is foolish though not something you engage in directly I know. When you write another article however, you give those looking to split hairs time to argue another point. The Globalists did this and so much more and we know it. We don’t need them to confess to prove the point. What more needs to be said? The rats in the US government in particular are about to abandon ship and that will create a new group that will claim they have suddenly “seen the light”. The sheeple will gravitate to them as much as they do to Walmart and McDonald’s. Us “enlightened” ones are fools for not spending more time covertly undermining their efforts…time we spend writing and reading instead. We have enough US military veterans alone to be a covert pain in the ass to the globalists and their agenda. Hence the reason we have been labeled terrorists of course. Time to shove the shit back up their ass for a change. Didn’t we promise to fight all enemies “domestic” too?

    • Jim Fetzer  August 9, 2013 at 12:33 pm

      Joe, Of course, it did not author this, but I regard Albert Stubblebein’s assessment as enormously important because of his standing as a Major General and the military’s leading expert on photographic analysis. You are presuming that everyone shares your knowledge and understanding of 9/11, when there are many out there who have never given it serious thought. Encountering the findings of a recognized–even indisputable!–authority on a question of this magnitude can made the difference for them. So I shall continued to publish on JFK, 9/11, Paul Wellstone, Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing and NSA surveillance as long as they matter. While I appreciate that you may not benefit from reading this and other articles, that does not mean there are not many who will.

    • denysepez  August 13, 2013 at 8:25 pm

      The complete look of betrayal in his eyes broke my heart~

    • Allesandro  August 9, 2013 at 4:22 pm

      I would imagine that Larry “I said ‘Pull-It'” Silverstein is shitting his pants, and those fellow conspirators must be thinking “What if this guy, or another one, Cracks, asks for and gets immunity?”

      They must be really wondering if the first one, two or three people get a “Get out of Jail Free Card”, where does that leave them?

      And each new call-in to C-Span on Bldg 7 or the WTC Towers brings it all back from memory. Every new rally for 9/11 Truth, every article, whatever. It must be torturous. Why don’t they just tell us the whole story, they’ll feel better afterwards; at least for a little while.

  11. PAUL LEO FASO  August 9, 2013 at 6:11 am

    For those Americans still in denial, the General’s observations are not only troubling, but dangerous to the preconceived notions they carry about the benevolence of the Government of the United States of America.

    By now you would think with all of the other evidence in your face – the picture of this democratic nation going down in flames, lit by the deceit from within, would awaken even the dead in body, mind and spirit.

    In September 11, 2012, I wrote “9/11-A LIE BELIEVED BY EVERYONE IS NOT THE TRUTH”
    The interview with General Stubblebine was included with a host of other corroborating articles and videos, but the first one posted, dealt with the evidence of a forced military stand down, as outlined in the case against Ralph Eberhart, NORAD’s 9/11 Commander.

    General Stubblebine has many good reasons to wonder what happened on 9/11 and we all, are now only making sense of the many dots that form the picture of what treason really looks like.

    For more on the 9/11 NORAD case and more lethal dots, try this view;


  12. Sami Jamil Jadallah  August 9, 2013 at 3:03 am

    Jim, back in the late 70’s as a young associate, I worked on Wall Street ( 55 ) and I know the Twin Buildings very well, and I know there must be tens of thousands of people in those two buildings…I always wondered what happened to all the staff and employees in the tens of thousands who did not show up that day?

    • SneakyBastard  August 9, 2013 at 9:49 am

      As I understand it, at the time of 9/11 both buildings had low lease/tenant rates, much less than they could actually hold. There have been articles about this… but I’m too busy to look now… sorry.

      And don’t forget about the warnings that were given to (some) Jews to stay away from the towers that day… you will need to look that one up as well.

      Both topics might be available here on VT.

  13. Howard T.Lewis III  August 8, 2013 at 9:16 pm

    Vaporizing that many thousands of ons of steel and resin based cement took preset nuclear technology, with apparently replenishing of the proper condition of nuclear fuel as needed. See Dr. Ed Ward, MD and Jeff Prager for the details. They showed us first.

    • yes2truth  August 12, 2013 at 1:59 am

      If that were the case then the nuclear fall-out would have rendered the east coast of the USA uninhabitable, unless you’re saying that nuclear devices are now safe and fall-out free.

    • captain obvious  August 12, 2013 at 5:20 am

      again, short half-life neutron type bombs exist.

    • yes2truth  August 13, 2013 at 9:38 am

      Half of what life? Please see my comment above in answer to your other points.

    • Howard T.Lewis III  August 13, 2013 at 10:27 pm

      Thousands of detonations of different nuclear devices covered a wide range of combinations of differing components, all with differing results. Each test probably was different than any of the others. This WTC I and II were of at least one centralized high radiation /low explosive device per building complemented with components integrated into the primer paint covering the steel.

      This info is directly from the people who were forced to do it by the NYC Port Authority/Bush White House cabal. The undertaking was plainly insane. They did it anyway. The painting crews were kept out of the loop of what exactly was being applied.

      See Major General Stubblebine’s full report, including high quality photo graphic images. There is indeed parts from an A-3 Skywarrior included in the wreckage, with two A-3 or first run 737 jet engines present. If you think you see a smoke generator coughing out huge quantities of black smoke at the Pentagon, you do. The paper work for the smoke generator was found.

      Although I cannot testify as to what happened to the 757s featured in the 9-11 reports, it seems most reasonable that substitute jets were used. Especially to assure 100% penetration into the WTCs.

    • Jim Fetzer  August 13, 2013 at 11:18 pm

      This is interesting, but it was physically impossible for real planes of any kind–military, commercial,
      large, small–to have penetrated the Twin Towers. I have explained this many times. See, for example,

      “9/11: Planes/No Planes and ‘Video Fakery’”

      “The 9/11 Passenger Paradox: What happened to Flight 93?” (with Dean Hartwell)

      “Reason and Rationality in Public Debate: The Case of Rob Balsamo”

      “The ‘official account of the Pentagon attack is a fantasy” (with Dennis Cimino) http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2012/06/official-account-of-pentagon-attack-is.html

      “Were the 9/11 crash sites faked?” (Seattle, WA, 13 June 2012):

      Part 1: http://archive.org/details/scm-75926-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320

      Part 2: http://archive.org/details/scm-75938-drjamesfetzerinseattlejune1320

      “Fakery and Fraud in the ‘Official Account’ of 9/11”

      “9/11 Truth will out: The Vancouver Hearings I”

    • yes2truth  August 15, 2013 at 2:33 am

      @ Howard T.Lewis III

      How did these nuclear devices put circular holes in the roofs of the adjacent buildings to WTC 1 & 2

      And you still haven’t addressed the disappearing engine blocks of cars parked several blocks away from WTC 1 & 2.

      Are you saying that the US Military does not have high energy space weapons at its disposal and the power to control weather via its HAARP technologies?

  14. boogieknight  August 8, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    This is all pity speculation – press for ALL classified 9/11 info to be released. Period.

    People aren’t able to grasp Airplane impacts into buildings, when ever did such thing happen??? BinLaden boasted about “knowing” the towers would collapse, Airdefenses shut down? Show me proof! These were no explosions, I saw the vids in slomo again and again, the pressure impacts downwards to elevator-/building-shafts made those small “explosions” – rather emissions – happen.

    Don’t hate me now, please, Truthers – I want to know the Truth too, this is why ALL material classified about 9/11 has to be opened now!

    But some of us WANT and NEED a certain “Truth” to sustain their certain suspicions no matter what any proof might deliver – this isn’t helpful, too much suspicion on Washington, Conspiracy-Networks very high ranking et al – honestly, if Mossad+Cia were 100% responsible for this – WHY WERE THEY SO STUPID TO BLAME IT ON AL-QAEDA and AFGHANISTAN??? Makes no sense – they would have tied it to IRAN+IRAQ. Think about it, if “qui bono”, why such a complicated disorientated move by any conspirators?!

    • Howard T.Lewis III  August 8, 2013 at 9:10 pm

      One report from a WTC I and II on-site architect included words that the bin Laden Construction Company had been given the contract to install the non-nuclear component of the original preset demolition system. OBL and his partners had no hand in the actual retriggering and demolition.

      Major General Stubblebine’s detailed report as to the A-3 Skywarrior AND the Global Hawk cruise missile that his evidence indicate hit the pentagon that day is worth a look. The few scraps of an American Airlines 757 found out on the lawn were delivered for the photo-op by truck from a wreck in South America.

    • QandATime Nutters  August 8, 2013 at 9:59 pm

      ” Classified Material” is Nothing but record keeping by the Culprits in Power Who at least Permitted it .

    • LC  August 9, 2013 at 12:05 pm


      Did you ever find your father’s WTC blueprints?

    • Howard T.Lewis III  August 9, 2013 at 6:19 pm

      I need to get to the mainland for any further efforts to find archived blueprints through personal contacts. The evil scum running this country at this time finds joy in cornering and torturing innocent people. The internet is so compromised so as to prohibit me from even asking questions over the telephones or web along these lines. “Paranoid bullshit” you may say. I have been worked over by pros before as a law abiding citizen. I can only prove my father’s participation to the extent that I claim. I have been in a bad car wreck which left me with broken ribs, torn muscles and stitches which I would prefer a repeat of over what was done to me on my 21st birthday. I think I can.

    • LC  August 10, 2013 at 9:20 am

      Sorry about your having an accident. Make sure you get enough vitamin-C for bone-healing.

      Something great you can do without any blueprints:

      You can prepare a personal “affidavit under penalty of perjury” about what you remember from your father’s statements made to you & to others & from your personal observations on the pre-planted WTC demolition systems during construction in the 60’s. You had discussed some of those in previous VT pages such as the one below.

      Have an attorney proof-read your affidavit to correct errors and have it recorded with any county recorder. In this country anything recorded in counties recorders is considered publication & published document. Once you got it recorded mail certified copies of it to VT and several other places which are not members of the PressTitute Zio-Mafia Media Club and ask them to publish it on their website. Other people like you would also be encouraged to do the same. Such affidavits unless challenged and proven wrong by others (like the USG) establish the actual events as opposed to bogus & debunked fairy tales of the USG and its In-bedded PressTitutes.

      This whole thing should cost you less than $150.


    • Dodd  August 8, 2013 at 11:42 pm

      Unfortunately you have to think for yourself on this one – it’s highly unlikely that the government will release any classified evidence that does not support the official story. So how exactly would you propose that a jet with a 125 foot wingspan, containing 2 engines about 35 feet from each other (with rotating titanium turbines..), is able to fit neatly into a 16 foot diameter hole?

    • Howard T.Lewis III  August 19, 2013 at 11:58 pm

      I believe general Stubblebine casually repeats his initial impression of what hit the pentagon instead of his final impresssion after analysis of a huge pile of photos takebn inside the pentagon after the fire went out and the smoke machine turned off. Do not be satisfied with the short interview with Major generak Stubblebine. Dig for and review his entire study, which goes into extensive detail including the A-3 wreckage photographed with the Global hawk pieces found scattered in the building and out on the lawn. FBI agents cleaned the lawn but souveniers escapeedd for photographic, professional analysis. Time is precious, and the details in Stubblebine’s perusal far out value gold. The office for publication of this material is/was in Seattle, near where the Seattle computer used in constructing the WTCs was situated. Other computers in NYC were used, of course

    • yes2truth  August 9, 2013 at 2:15 am

      @ boogieknight

      You have not learnt the golden rule:

      A conspiracy theory will always remain a conspiracy theory until it’s met with obfuscation and lies by the powers that be and it then becomes a conspiracy by default – simples.

      OR as my Gran used say: “One lie needs ten more lies to hide or cover up the first lie.”

      OR as Thomas said: “Unless I see the holes in His hands, His feet and His side I will not believe He is risen”

    • yes2truth  August 9, 2013 at 3:40 am

      Oh and one I forgot:

      How do we know when politicians are lying? Answer: When we see their lips move.

  15. captain obvious  August 8, 2013 at 4:01 pm

    glad you’re coming forward Stubblebine, really! it isnt “bragging”, I understood it was controlled demolitions the day it happened, called my dad and asked what he thought about Pearl Harbor New York (later I learned about the PNAC document.. whoah!). he said he wasnt worried about the incident so much as how it’d be used to make new “laws” to destroy this nation. we never got along but we sure agreed about 911.

    the top of a tower began leaning over, then “magically” got its legs taken out from under it to fall into its own footprint instead of smashing the neighboring city block, is NOT how it’d happened naturally at all!

    buildings DONT just freefall unless they’re MADE TO freefall, controlled demolitions. they dont implode neatly into their own footprint without a LOT of help, and a LOT of planning. aircraft dont make plans like that, hello?! whats amazing is the criminals who did it aint been hanged already.

    • captain obvious  August 8, 2013 at 4:06 pm

      I’ve said it many times, financial fraud investigations were zero threat to some “sand ghost bin laden”.
      IF he were a “corrupt America hater” he’d sat watching the trials with a bag of popcorn “see see!”.
      the bush’s are business partners with the bin ladens in the carlyle group, bin ladens built military bases allover the middle east. they KNEW osama was dying of marfans and kidney failure, perfect scapegoat!

    • captain obvious  August 8, 2013 at 4:28 pm

      the 911 OMISSION report, was all about covering up for the criminals who really did it,
      so they could remain in power and dismantle this nation piece by piece for profits.
      many are District of Criminals insider trading “corporate welfare” against OUR welfare..
      with privatized for profit prisons being the model for a turnkey prison grid nation.

  16. joeflaherty  August 8, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    Major General Stubblebine grew up in an era when the controllers/owners of America weren’t as emboldened as they are today. He believed in his country, and would have never imagined a foreign country pulling the strings in Washington. The traitor is inside our house, and he moves about unaware.

    Only a shill, or a complete imbecile, would hold onto the 19 Islamic extremists story espoused by the government-media complex. The only question still remaining for the American people is: When will these vile RATS be brought to justice for their horrid deeds?

  17. Chandler  August 8, 2013 at 3:11 pm

    All this lying is getting tiresome. Our government has been reduced to a cheap motel with high rental rates. The vermin have overrun the place and now the ruling class.

    Ever since the AP reported on a Bush son was to have dinner with the Hinckley family that very evening of the day Hinckley shot Reagan, I have begun to ask what real and what is fake.

    These towers, OKC where a bomb strapped to a pillar can be seen in one particular photo near the back right. Waco, the first WTC bombing. All these journalists dying at young ages: Hastings being visited by CIA the night before he died; Andrew Breitbart, Sandy Hook hoax, Boston Bombing fiasco and their amputee actors rolling around in fake blood puddles–Adam Lanza may not even have existed since his photo appears to be photoshopped showing his death one day before the shooting took place.

    What is real? What is fake? What is hoaxed? Thank you for the interview, and to Mr. Stubblebine for coming forward. Honesty is a long deceased trait.

  18. Brian  August 8, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    I have no desire to get into a debate with anyone about what hit the Pentagon, I’m tired of the debates, I focus on who did 911.

    Excerpt from the article:

    7:45 Stubblebine then saw a photo of the Pentagon showing the hole in the Pentagon supposedly made by a Boeing 757. ”Something’s wrong. There is something wrong with this picture…”

    Stubblebine and most of the a missile hit the Pentagon crowd don’t realize the well known photograph of the round hole in the Pentagon is an exit hole in another wall it’s not from the wall of the building where the plane or something hit the Pentagon. It’s not evidence indicating a plane did not hit the Pentagon.

    • Jim Fetzer  August 8, 2013 at 1:25 pm

      I think you are mistaken. I don’t believe he was talking about the C-ring hole but the hit point on the E-ring, which I show later in the article. Did you check the interview? Of course, if he WAS speaking of the C-ring hole, which appears to have been blown out with cordite, then you would be correct. But he has spoken about the absence of any wing imprint on the soft limestone facade of the building. That is the key point he has made as the leading expert in the military on photos and their interpretation.

    • Jim Fetzer  August 8, 2013 at 1:37 pm

      An early article of mine about the Pentagon has renewed interest in light of my recent debate with Dick Eastman over whether or not real planes hit the Twin Towers. It appeared in rense.com at http://rense.com/general86/911s.htm, where he was just as sloppy and irresponsible in his research then as he has shown himself to be more recently.

      Here is a link to the debate as it was broadcast on renseradio.net, http://www.renseradioarchives.com/harris/, where you can find it as the show for 07-18-13. A clean version without the breaks and commercials, where I have added my own comments about it, may be found at http://nwopodcast.com/fetz/media/jim%20fetzer%20real%20deal-eastman%20debate.mp3

    • Howard T.Lewis III  August 8, 2013 at 9:42 pm

      Just this once Dr. Fetzer, spare me. Everything else you have done in your research, including President John Kennedy’s murder and that of the Honorable Senator Paul Wellstone that I have found, I prize and feel are blessings to this country and civilization as a whole.

      The panels breached by the 757s were assembled of 1/4″ and 7/16″ stock, riveted and welded together. The cores stopped much of these jets and the fuel went flying outside the buildings for the most part. These jets knocked those panels out like a car going through a stop sign at about 300 mph. Though a passenger jet has most of its fuselage strength limited to the lower 1/3, this and the beefed up leading edges of the stand-in jets did the attack. There were no standard gauged columns in the WTCs beyond the elevator cores and the four corners of the buildings. The exterior aluminum facade was even thinner.

    • Jim Fetzer  August 8, 2013 at 9:49 pm

      What does this venting about the Twin Towers have to do with the Pentagon? Flights 11 and 77 were not even scheduled to fly that day. The planes used on Flights 93 and 175 were not deregistered (formally taken out of service) by the FAA until 28 September 2005. So how can planes that were not in the air have crashed on 9/11? and how can planes that crashed on 9/11 have still been in the air four years later?

      Pilots for 9/11 Truth have studied air/ground communications and determined that Flight 93 was in the air that day but was over Champaign-Urbana, IL, after it had allegedly crashed in Shanksville; and that Flight 175 was also in the air that day, but was over Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, PA, long after it had allegedly hit the South Tower. All four crash sites were fabricated or faked, albeit each in different ways.

      Boeing 757s were those alleged to have been used for Flights 11 and 77, so I have no idea what you think you are claiming. Anyone who believes that a Boeing 757 crashed in Shanksville or hit the Pentagon has missed the boat, big time! And if you are talking about New York, take a good look at “Planes/No Planes and ‘Video Fakery'”, for example, or my two-part Seattle presentation–and tell me what I have wrong.

    • Brian  August 8, 2013 at 2:10 pm

      My mistake I should have checked the interview, I’m used to people talking about the famous hole, actually an exit hole, being a major sign a plane didn’t hit the Pentagon. Based on his comments about the wings I think you’re right about the hole he is talking about.

      I’m not an explosives expert, but I think the damage to the Pentagon was mostly done by explosives the Mossad and their pals put into the wall during the renovation which occurred just prior to 911. I think the renovation was really performed to provide the Mossad and their pals a great opportunity to plant explosives in the Pentagon.

    • wolf  August 8, 2013 at 3:20 pm

      “…explosives the Mossad and their pals put into the wall during the renovation which occurred just prior to 911″ DOT

    • captain obvious  August 8, 2013 at 3:48 pm

      “renovations” all over the insides of the towers..DOT.

    • Howard T.Lewis III  August 8, 2013 at 9:28 pm

      Major Genera Stubblebine’s pentagon/9-11 research includes photos of sites in the pentagon showing the locations of several directional charges that were set off as ‘the plane hit’. Not a 757. An A-3 Skywarrior, of which a dozen were altered into commuter jets for the brass and then later sold to Raytheon for remote control projects. Several Raytheon remote control executives died ‘in the pentagon crash’. Pieces of carbon fibre material, finished white, were scattered in the building and outside all over the lawn. The FBI formed a line and gleaned (almost) every piece off the lawn. Almost an entire Global Hawk wing is photoed inside the pentagon. They found the paper work for the rental smoke machine you see pumping out black smoke just outside the entrance hole. An A-3 is only 14 feet tall and has a 66 foot wing span. I once had published prints of smuggled out photos of the drop-away floors added during the recent renovation. In-out baskets of paperwork and a dictionary sit unsinged scant inches from where the floors supposedly burned in half.

    • Jim Fetzer  August 8, 2013 at 9:55 pm

      My original analysis of what happened at the Pentagon, interestingly, supported the use of an A-3 Skywarrior. That study can be found on-line as “Thinking about ‘Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK”, where I used scientific reasoning about JFK as a prelude to scientific reasoning about 9/11. See http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/fetzerexpandedx.pdf It would subsequently be published as a chapter of THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY (2007).

    • sandyhooked  August 10, 2013 at 1:44 pm

      You said you had no desire to get into a debate, but then you start one?

You must be logged in to post a comment Login