It’s impossible to fit a square peg in a round hole. It’s equally as impossible to fit a large 757 airliner through a small hole like left in the Pentagon wall after 9/11.

And this is just one of the many examples that the official 9/11 story makes no sense. In fact, it makes about as much sense as trying to keep jamming that square peg into that proverbial round hole.

However, while the feds fiddle with pegs that don’t fit, the 9/11 debate rages on across the country, mainly among the fringe truth movement groups whose numbers are small.

And this is precisely where politicians want the debate to remain, away from the public’s ear, since so far they have been dealt a winning 9/11 hand, knowing any serious measure to bring justice has been effectively cut-off.

So this week the fringe 9/11 movement takes its “forces and soldiers of truth” to Tampa and Miami, Florida, staging a five day assembly starting Dec 7 with the intent to spark a larger public debate and bring the “enemy within” to justice.

Millionaire Jimmy Walter is footing the bill and hosting the event with speakers to include Dave von Kleist, Joyce Riley, Morgan Reynolds, Eric Hufschmid, William Rodriguez and others. There is an $11 entry fee and it will be interesting to see the turn-out, including the media coverage which in the past has been sporadic at best for 9/11 truth events.

Although the speakers bring to the table interesting facts discounting the official story, Rodriguez will be the most compelling, telling his tale of hearing explosions in the basement prior to the airplane hitting the North Tower.

But one person in attendance not on the speaker’s list is commercial pilot and aeronautical engineer, Nila Sagedevan. And the reason he should be speaking, at least about the Pentagon crash, is because once he gives his technical rendition of why the government story is bogus, it’s like someone finally held up, for the whole world to see, the round peg fitting perfectly into the round hole.

In the past, many pilots and other experts have tried to communicate the impossibility of the flight pattern taken by an inexperienced Arab terrorist in the cockpit, but none have done a better job than Sagedevan, telling the story from an expert’s pint of view but communicating so the layman has no trouble understanding.

Recently, Sagadevan spent two hours on Greg Szymanski’s radio show, The Investigative Journal, on the Republic Broadcast Network at www.rbnlive.com, leaving the audience nodding their heads in agreement that the Pentagon crash couldn’t have happened the way the government contends.

“Let’s look at it plain and simple,” said Sagadevan in an extended telephone conference this week from his home near San Diego. “The government wants us to believe that a person who couldn’t even solo a small Cessna took over the controls of a Boeing 757 jetliner and performed complicated maneuvers even myself or other experienced pilots could have never performed.

“It’s just not going to happen and, from my point of view, is impossible. If this was fabricated by the government so was the rest of the 9/11 story.”

But staying on point, Sagadevan wanted to further illustrate the absurdity of a small, inexperienced 5’8” Arab terrorist, taking over the controls of the jetliner from a burly, well-trained former military pilot.

“You mean to tell me, the supposed terrorist overpowered the pilot, who weighed more than 185 lbs and trained in the military. And then after that overpowered the co-pilot in the same manner, a person who also weighed upwards of 185 lbs,” said Sagadevan, emphasizing experts aren’t needed to explain the absurdity of this portion of the government story.

“I am not sure if anyone has been in the cockpit of one of one of these big jets, but I will tell you there isn’t much space. How in the world would one man pull out two big pilots in cramped quarters while, at the same time, maintaining control of the airliner. Again, it’s just not going to happen.

“In the beginning right after 9/11, like most people, I believed most of what I heard about 9/11, not really giving much thought to a government conspiracy. However, about a year ago when I began gathering information related to my expertise as an aeronautical engineer and pilot, I began to see clearly how the government story regarding the four flights, their paths and their pilots didn’t make sense.

“Now I am firmly convinced after looking at an enormous amount of evidence, as well as using well-establishing aviation principles, that something else crashed into the Pentagon since it couldn’t have been a commercial jetliner.”

Besides calling attention to the impossibility of a untrained pilot performing complex flight maneuvers and navigation, Sagadevan said the flight path taken near the Pentagon was also impossible for a large jetliner to perform without crashing before reaching the Pentagon.

“First of all, the supposed pilot would have been overwhelmed just looking at the complexity of the cockpit controls,” said Sagadevan. “He would have had no idea what to do, but we are led to believe that he was able to turn the jet around, head back to Washington D.C. and then bank at high speeds and at a low altitude, hitting a target which would have looked as small as thimble from the air. Again, it’s impossible and you don’t really need an expert to make this final determination.”

Sagadevan was quick to point out one of the main problems with the government story is the low trajectory of the airplane, flying at high speeds and roughly only 20 feet off the ground for a long distance, another impossibility defying the standard principles of aviation.

“The evidence indicates that the airplane was flying low before it reached the Pentagon lawn since several light poles were sheared off several hundred yards away form the building,” explained Sagadevan. “With that in mind, the plane was traveling at about 400 knots at about 20 feet off the ground for a long distance prior to hitting the Pentagon.

“This in itself is an impossibility since the airplane would have been kept from hitting the ground by a cushion of air termed 'ground effect.' No pilot in the world would have been able to control the plane while maintained that air speed at 20 feet off the ground for that long a distance. Again, it’s just impossible but here I will admit that an expert is needed in order to explain the standards of lift and drag associated with flying a large airliner.

From the beginning of the supposed hijacking of Flight 77 and to its eventual crash into the Pentagon wall, Sagadevan presents a compelling case, essentially crushing the official story. He also mentioned the what's also overlooked is the 'jet wash' from the airplane would have caused tremendous ground damage on the approach, something not evident in the aftermath of the Pentagon crash.

“I really don’t understand how anyone could give the government’s story any credibility after seeing the original pictures taken of the small hole left in the Pentagon wall by whatever flew into it,” said Sagadevan. “I am not totally sure what the military used but one thing for sure, it wasn’t a 757 jetliner.”

Sagadevan is referring to the tiny circumference of the hole left in the Pentagon wall, illustrated on pictures taken right after the crash scene, but immediately taken out of circulation and never widely distributed by the news media to the American people.

“I think if someone just looks at the hole left and then looks at the size of 757, experts aren’t needed to determine it was an impossibility that a big jet hit the Pentagon wall, especially when there was very little wreckage visible after the crash,” added Sagadevan.

Regarding the Pentagon crash, as Sagadevan aptly points out, there are “so many holes in the story” that it becomes, as the English say, rather a laughing matter, making one believe even the bungling Inspector Clouseau, made famous by Peter Sellers, could crack the case wide open if given half a chance.

But the problem is Inspector Clouseau, Sagadevan and every other independent investigator haven’t been given the chance, leaving the case to be investigated and tried in the court of public opinion, a place where politicians like it and know they are safe from prosecution.