This crap is beyond obvious.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (19)
sorted by:
I would consider Christopher Bollyn the most eminent investigator of these details. You may be right that the missile in question is not an ACLM, although the other possibility, the Global Hawk, has an obvious wingspan -- which is not apparent in the video.
The only engine part found inside the Pentagon was an unidentified turbine disc, but Bollyn was able to determine that it was NOT part of a Honeywell engine for a 757. You can read his findings here: https://www.bollyn.com/is-the-pentagon-mystery-disc-from-a-global-hawk-2
I would suggest that we don't know EVERYTHING about every single part ever installed on every single cruise missile, engine et al, and perhaps a one-off design for a very specific covert purpose may have unusual non-standard parts.
At any rate, before the floors of the Pentagon collapsed opening up a much larger hole, there was a very small, round entry point into the building consistent with a cruise missile...and not a 757. The fireball visible from the security camera is an exact match for a cruise missile detonation. In addition, there is a photograph of a 757-like plane exiting the Pentagon airspace immediately following the impact.
I challenge you to explain "the evidence right in front of our faces," and ignorance blinding us. Clearly, there was no debris from, or damage consistent with, a 757. On the other hand, there is good evidence of something quite nefarious.
I'm out.
According to Wikipedia (caveat...but keep with me), they identified the nose cone of the aircraft and the nose landing gear. Recovered an intact pilot's seat and two black boxes (voice and data recorders). Passenger remains were collected and identified,along with personal effects. Eyewitnesses clearly identified the crash as by an American Airlines 757. (There is no way to make a cruise missile look like a 757 by a paint job.) No explosion. Plenty of fire (lots of fuel).
The fact that Christopher Bollyn wasn't able to identify a part is no evidence of anything except his inability to identify a part. It could have been the drive disk for a ram air turbine. In any case, that is a weak thread when there was plenty of positive evidence that would have been impossible without an actual passenger-bearing aircraft.
Before you spend any more time trying to bolster your belief in the official narrative (using Wikipedia as a source?), you really owe it to yourself to watch at least the first 28 minutes of this documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzK_J6r1huI
If you're short on time, you can skip ahead to the six-minute mark and start from there.