Dwain Deets Endorses CIT's National Security Alert, and the Flyover Conclusion

So, who is Dwain Deets?

Glad you asked.

Dwain is currently retired after 37 years with NASA, where he worked as an aeronautical engineer and flight director for Aerospace Projects. In other words:
"Dwain Deets is that Rocket Scientist who understands complicated & technical things."

QUOTE:

"Although my involvement in the 9/11 issue has focused primarily on the problems with the "collapse" hypothesis for World Trade Center Building 7, my background as a retired NASA aeronautical engineer has often brought questions my way regarding the airplanes, including, of course, the flight that allegedly struck the Pentagon.

Examination of the official flight profile raised serious technical questions in my mind -- questions which led me to the view that it is highly unlikely such a profile could have been flown as reported. In other words, it seemed to be physically and aeronautically impossible.

My skepticism proved to be well-founded when I watched National Security Alert, the most recent video from the Citizen Investigation Team, or CIT. More importantly, I now realize that the flight profile data released by the government was a spurious smokescreen, and that the answer to the question of what really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 comes from applying logic, with very little involvement of aeronautical principals.

To be more precise, the answer comes from eyewitness accounts collected from individuals who had clear views of where the plane flew in relation to the Citgo gas station across the highway from the Pentagon. Several of these witnesses were recorded by the Center for Military History or by the Library of Congress shortly after 9/11/01. CIT followed up on this testimony, doing investigative video interviews at the various sites where each person made their observations, or, when this couldn’t be done, by audio recording.

In a nutshell, these key eyewitnesses independently agree that the plane flew north of the Citgo gas station as it headed toward the Pentagon. It is clear from viewing their interviews that it is simply not a reasonable consideration that all of the witnesses presented are incorrect about this simple detail. The plane was most definitely on the north side of the station.

The problem with this is that the official flight path requires the plane to have flown to the south of the station. The observed damage is wholly inconsistent with an approach from the north-side. This not only includes the damage inside the building leading to the round hole in the C-ring, but also five light poles which were supposedly hit by the airplane which were also in alignment with a south-side path. Given that the plane was on the north-side of the station, these light poles simply could not have been knocked over by it.

The only possible conclusion, if logic is your guide, is that the plane did not hit the Pentagon and did not cause the damage; that the south-path downed light poles were staged; and that the internal damage was done by other means, specifically internal explosives.

I am aware of efforts by a few to censor and marginalize the work of Citizen Investigation Team. Some have stated it’s because they feel the notion of a flyover at the Pentagon would be bad for the truth movement even if true because it would be off-putting to the public at large. This is contradictory logic since the very notion that 9/11 was an inside job is off-putting to the public. I strongly feel it’s important to follow evidence wherever it leads us and stand firmly against any effort to hide or control information that exposes the 9/11 deception.

I thank CIT for bringing this story together in a clear manner, and I endorse CIT as the best source of information on this matter. Furthermore, I agree with their conclusion -- the plane flew over the Pentagon."

-Dwain Deets

Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Creator of www.7problemswithbuilding7.info