Quote:
|
Originally Posted by turbonium
Visual Evidence
We know for a fact that all the outside perimeter videos and photos were confiscated within minutes after the hit. Over 5 years later, none of them have been released.
|
I'm sorry, but do you often spew outright lies like this? Perhaps you'd like to check the original topic of this thread.
Quote:
|
And how many video cameras would have been in normal day-to-day operation, in and around the Pentagon itself on 9/11? They are obviously claiming that only one caught anything on tape - the few frames they have released that essentially show nothing.
|
I'm amazed that none of what you say here is relevent to the heading of "visual evidence". Perhaps I was wrong in assuming that what you were about to provide was visual evidence for why the Pentagon aspect of the "story" was suspicious.
Quote:
Physical evidence
- First hand reports in the immediate aftermath said there was virtually nothing on site that indicated a 757 had crashed there - no wings, no tail section, no seats, no luggage, no engines, no passengers. Nothing but small scraps of metal which were of unidentifiable origin.
|
That's because immediately after the impact, the section of the Pentagon that "swallowed" the plane was engulfed in flames. Still, there were a number of pieces of the plane found on the lawn. I
know you can find the pictures.
Quote:
|
- Has the FAA / NTSB done a mandatory accident investigation? Have they re-constructed the plane in a hangar? If they have, I haven't seen or heard of it.
|
What about the planes crashing into buildings on 9/11 was an
accident?
Quote:
Eyewitnesses
Again, taking it as being a military operation, there is the distinct advantage of being able to support your claim with planted witnesses from within your ranks.
|
Wow. You can't do much more reaching than this...