First you guys can start with a plausible explanation of the Amerian Airlines wreckage found at the Pentagon.
Next, you can move on to the Air Traffic Controllers that tracked the aircraft into Pentagon Airspace but not out....explain that please.
After you explain that... The lightpoles that were knocked down will be the next hurdle. Explain how a missile would hit the light poles and the transformer, knocking it off it's moorings. Keep in mind that when a missile hits something; it explodes. How would a missile hit 5 objects THEN explode?
Plausible (i.e. believeable) explainations are required to be written by those who are presenting the argument.
I will need a good chuckle around then so I'll look in on it around 3PM MST today.
Your ignorance is really starting to bore me.
First you guys can start with a plausible explanation of the Amerian Airlines wreckage found at the Pentagon.
Since you believe so much that a "plane" did hit the Pentagon, please point out the "plane" in the following image. Take as much time as you need.
People claim that the "plane" was sticking out the side of Pentagon after impact, and yet there is not one picture or even video for that matter to validate the claim.
There was wreckage found at the Pentagon, that much you're right, but not from an American Airlines Flight 77. There was no fuselage, no tail section, no vertical stabilizer, no wings , no major identifiable parts from a Boeing 757 of any kind EVER recovered from the site. If a "plane" did hit the Pentagon, there would be a hell of a lot more wreckage then just a few scraps of metal, but we're all supposed to drink the Kool-Aid like you have and pretend that it did happen.
Great. You admit wreckage was found but not of AA77. What aircraft, pray tell, did it come from then?
Next, you can move on to the Air Traffic Controllers that tracked the aircraft into Pentagon Airspace but not out....explain that please.
It certainly possible that Flight 77 was switched when contact was initially lost and, whatever replaced it and struck the Pentagon, was not the plane that left Washington Dulles that morning.
Oh so instead of going through the trouble of hijacking one air craft, for some reason whomever was behind this hijacked two aircraft, had them rendezvous at a point, had the 2nd aircraft continue to the Pentagon while the first went somewhere else. Seems like something you would not want to put on your to-do list.
In other words, sounds really implausible.
After you explain that... The lightpoles that were knocked down
As the official story has it, the "plane" flight 77 hit several light poles as it was bearing down on its target. The thin aluminum wings hit these light poles, knocked them down, and the "plane" continued on its attack with no interruption. The problem is, it isn't that easy.
A plane going 500mph a few feet off the ground would make it almost impossible to fly, even for an experienced pilot, the ground effect alone, would create a huge problem. The topography of the area creates another problem, there are raises and dips in the ground level. For the plane to "hug" the ground would create another huge problem.
That said, this "plane", (piloted by someone who had trouble flying a one-engine Cessna),kept control of the "plane" after hitting 5 light posts.
Your job is to explain how a missile could take down the light poles, hit a transformer, then continue on to the Pentagon and then blow up.
As for what you wrote, are you saying that Hani Hanjour was an inferior pilot? You’re right. What happens to inferior pilots making high-risk maneuvers? They crash. Exactly what Hani did.
Back to the drawing board you go.
