HIDDEN VIDEO SHOWING WHAT REALLY HIT THE PENTAGON
(www.bitchute.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (147)
sorted by:
I know...it is always the first point to that gets jumped on...so...the distance is the same...the mass is different...and no...no part resembling the 3/4 ton turbo fan of Rolls Royce engines can be found either...the engines you say are there...just aren't there and still there is still no evidence of damage near the impact from a engine either way you look at it. Even if the wings folded...Newton says the object that is motion....remains in motion...its mass dictates the engines if present would have continued forward in a straight line yet they missed the walls of the Pentagon entirely. Imagine that. You are welcome to think anyway you like, it's okay. I think differently but I'm not sorry I misidentified the engine, as it doesn't change the physic's of the event.
Wasn't there a gnarled up engine found near the World Trade Center, but it turned out to be the wrong type for those planes?
https://www.startpage.com/av/proxy-image?piurl=https%3A%2F%2Fassets3.cbsnewsstatic.com%2Fhub%2Fi%2Fr%2F2011%2F09%2F05%2Fea8300b7-a644-11e2-a3f0-029118418759%2Fthumbnail%2F640x480%2Fe37c9e986f2617b3daad7d42ad0c6684%2Fwtc_then_now_engine.jpg&sp=1663581352T20ef3851b34963ca44a149a011c31e7e62b15e34afcdba520af339651ebc360b
You're fucking delusional. There are plenty of pictures of engine and landing gear debris at the Pentagon impact site. Your middle school grasp of physics does not change the reality of the situation that a Boeing 757 fly into the Pentagon on 9/11.
Where are the pictures and proof?
you forgot to say "ACCKTUUUAALLYYY"
I mean if that's the case, why don't we get 5 or 10 planes and do it again? 1-2 planes per side should do the trick, aye? /s (sarcasm)
SMH my head.