Print Contact Articles by Subject 9-11 Archive 2011 The Missile Pod of 9/11 and the Cover-Up

The Missile Pod of 9/11 and the Cover-Up

Updated September 8, 2011

THE MYSTERY POD - The Lockheed Martin AN/AAS-38 "Nitehawk" is a missile pod system for use with laser-guided munitions.

A similar missile pod is seen on the underside of the plane that struck the South Tower (WTC 2) on 9/11.  

A white hot flash preceded the impact of each plane.  The depleted uranium warhead created a super intense heat and detonated the pre-placed explosives in the secure computer rooms that were hit by both planes.

Parts of the missile were seen exiting the building ahead of the explosion.  The high velocity of these objects indicates they were not part of the aircraft itself.  For my analysis of the missile see "The 'Huge Bullet Hole' in the South Tower and Analysis of Missile Evidence"

I am a former airline captain with over 9,000 flight hours, Captain on both the Boeing 747-400 and 737-300.  After viewing many posted videos on "Youtube" I can tell you without hesitation that clearly aircraft number 2 B-767 - was radio controlled into the building – [World Trade Center] Tower 2.  The "pod" mounted on the bottom of the aircraft, is manufactured by "Martin Marietta" Corporation in Los Angeles. The pod has been used extensively by the USAF for outfitting drone aircraft for over 22 years, and you can clearly see it in (4) of the amateur videos- just before impact, with Tower 2.
- Capt. Thomas Deatherage – Former commercial airline pilot. Aircraft flown: Boeing 737, 747. Certified Flight Instructor (single and multi-engine and instrument). 9,000+ total hours flown.


Dave vonKleist made a excellent 52-minute video in 2004 entitled 
9/11 In Plane Site in which he examined the video evidence showing a missile pod on the plane said to be Flight 175.  In the introduction, vonKleist explains the logic behind the assumption that the people involved in the cover-up of 9/11 are involved in the crime itself.  This is the reason why my book, Solving 9/11, concludes with two chapters, "The Destruction of the Evidence" and "Making Sense of the 9/11 Cover-Up", that indentify the people and groups responsible for the destruction of the crucial evidence from the World Trade Center. 

As vonKleist explained:

On September 11th, 2001, 4 events occurred within an hour and fifteen minutes of one another.  The first event occurred at 8:45 Eastern Standard Time when American Airlines Flight 11 hit the North Tower of the World Trade Center.  And then 18 minutes later, at 9:03 Eastern Time, United Airlines Flight 175 slammed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center.  And then at 9:43, it was reported that American Airlines Flight 77 had hit the Pentagon.  And then finally, at 10:00 Eastern Time, United Airlines Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Now, unless this is one incredible coincidence, is it not safe to assume that all four of these events are inescapably married to one another?  And is it not also safe to assume, that if you find one person involved, or a party involved with one of these events they’re probably involved in all of them?  Well, following this train of thought, since there was no credible claim of responsibility, is it not safe to assume that those involved, or those parties involved, or agencies, or groups that were involved in the events of 9/11, would do anything that they can to obfuscate, distract, distort, or cover up any information that might lead to their discovery?  And if that’s true, is it not also safe to assume that if you find somebody, a group, an agency, a party, that is involved in the obfuscation, distraction, distortion, or cover up of any information involved in ANY of the events of 9/11, does it not indicate possible involvement and even guilt in the events of 9/11?

- Dave VonKleist,
9/11 In Plane Site

VonKleist explains the logic of the 9/11 cover-up at minute 5:55 of this video clip. 
Video Link -

Sources and Recommended Reading:

Bollyn, Christopher, "The "Huge Bullet Hole" in the South Tower and Analysis of Missile Evidence", 17 April 2011

©2022 Christopher Bollyn | Sitemap | christopher at bollyn dot com