What hit the Pentagon?

[nillumnoom5000]

None of the videos show a plane where there would be if it was flying through an explosion ...

The doubletree hotel video also does not show a flyover.

So why the theory of a plane flying over the pentagon? I don't get it?

nilly

[Waipio]

So why the theory of a plane flying over the pentagon? I don't get it?

nilly

For the missile strike,  the plane would provide obfuscation and alibi 

[Scootle]

Thats the thing... theres no evidence of a flyover apart from the north side stuff.

[pollenate439]

What hit the Pentagon?

Ummmmm, A JET, possibly!!

[Flynn]

What hit the Pentagon?

Global Hawk.

[pollenate439]

What hit the Pentagon?

Global Hawk.

Was it a Global Hawk that hit the Pentagon?  Didn't I hear about a news report where the anchorman stated he saw a Global Hawk hit the side of the Pentagon at one point?  Or am I just clutching at straws?

[Flynn]

Was it a Global Hawk that hit the Pentagon?  Didn't I hear about a news report where the anchorman stated he saw a Global Hawk hit the side of the Pentagon at one point?  Or am I just clutching at straws?

Evidence at Pentagon Supports Global Hawk Hitting Pentagon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyXjwcUPD8s

[pollenate439]

Evidence at Pentagon Supports Global Hawk Hitting Pentagon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyXjwcUPD8s

"Look at a blade of grass to see how small this piece is..." 

LOL!

Is this for real?

[grapecrusher1]

"Look at a blade of grass to see how small this piece is..." 

LOL!

Is this for real?

Hahaha  I was laughing too.  What nonsense.  Contrary to popular belief big things are made up of small things -- really it is true.

[scott75]

Hahaha  I was laughing too.  What nonsense.  Contrary to popular belief big things are made up of small things -- really it is true.

Good points. I admit that I'm still not sure as to what happened. The only thing I feel strongly about is that a 757 did -not- hit the pentagon.

[9/11-insider trading]

GLOBAL HAWK?

http://abriefhistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/global-hawk-1.jpg

[Wormsaregood]

The only thing that irks me about this whole concept is indeed his premise.

I have not read anything else by the man, nor do I doubt his intentions as far as disinfo or anything like that is concerned.

HOWEVER, to me, it seems like taking a standpoint of "well, you can't prove it DIDN'T" is very very strange.  It's sort of like putting the burden of proof on the accused instead of the state.  Aka.  Prove you DIDN'T steal from this store or hit this person.  It's just not the way we like to do things in America. (for the most part x_x)

At any rate, I appreciate what the author is trying to do.  However, I am concerned that the author may be more interested in combining the truthers into a more cohesive unit, that is by uniting some of the common ideas, than he is in the truth of the event. Just make sure that you dont fall into the whole "ignore that and join us!" kind of thinking that has led to a lot of bad things in this world.

[Wormsaregood]

Sorry for the double post.

So is the major argument now between Global Hawk and Pilot controlled plane?

[Scootle]

The major argument now is between whether or not the plane that everybody saw hit the pentagon hit the pentagon or came in on a slightly different trajectory and disappeared into another dimension or something.

[Wormsaregood]

lol

[Wormsaregood]

Scootle, since you've been so helpful, another question for you.

Are the implications in 9/11: Revisited still valid or have they been "debunked"? Is there anything in there that is now considered "disinfo". like the presentation by Griffin or the other guy?  I'm assuming Griffin is still considered to be a valuable ally in the truth movement, right?  I recently ordered his newest presentation on DVD. Also, I ordered American Coup and Final Cut thanks to your suggestions.

Much Appreciated.