That video appears to show an explosion some time after the initial attack, whatever it was.
There is a great video by pilots for truth which examines the flight data info, and suggests that the airplane did not hit the Pentagon. It suggests that a winged missile was dropped by the large aircraft, which never got below about 300-400 feet.
It suggests that a winged missile was dropped by the large aircraft
How big were those wings, Paul? A hundred feet from tip to tip? Because something knocked down lightpoles spaced that far apart at least. And something created a plane shaped hole in the Pentagon about 90 feet across. Those missile wings must have been made of unobtainium to do that. ROTFLOL!
I'm not one who troubles myself with the opinions of those who support the official story, so there's no point in your derisive remarks. They merely reveal your lack of confidence in the substance of that which you say.
According to pilots who know a lot more than you about flight data recorders, the plane never hit the Pentagon, and most of the evidence suggests their conclusion is accurate.
Each of us chooses what we will believe. You choose to believe the myth told by the Bush administration. I don't.
I'm not one who troubles myself with the opinions of those who support the official story, so there's no point in your derisive remarks. They merely reveal your lack of confidence in the substance of that which you say.
So in other words, you don't have an explanation for the downed lightpoles.
Nor the rather sizable holes in the Pentagon. Like these:
Left side and center hole damage
central hole and right side damage
Right side damage.
Collage of what the damage looked like pre-collapse
I don't think I'm the one lacking confidence here, Paul.
According to pilots who know a lot more than you about flight data recorders, the plane never hit the Pentagon, and most of the evidence suggests their conclusion is accurate.
And that would be the Pilots For Truth? All 36 of them? Even though some aren't even pilots? ROTFLOL!
One thing I know about commercial pilots having had a step-father who was a captain for Pan Am; they are chronically worried about their job and maintaining flight status. Strong political forces have uprooted people from their jobs in usually safe venues such as academia for speaking out against the lies of the official story, so you know that any airline pilot that violates official canon would be targeted for dismissal and blacklisting ruthlessly.
Thus I find your taunting airs disingenuous and insincere. No sale on your taunting of people because they are successfully made fearful of their jobs by the powers that be.
There isn't anything you can post I haven't already reviewed and considered. I didn't arrive at my conclusions lightly or quickly.
I have one major advantage over you. I've actually worked at NORAD headquarters inside Cheyenne Mountain, so all your piffle as a loyal Bushie means absolutely nothing.
It was an inside job, and only the president, the vice president and the secretary of defense could have seen to it that no aerial interference by NORAD occurred.
How do you reconcile the differences between the FDR data as released by the NTSB and the downed light poles which were not in the flight path according to FDR data?