Flight 77, the supposed plane that hit the Pentagon on 9/11 was a Boeing 757. It is the same plane that President Trump flies in.
A Boeing 757 uses one of 2 different engines: Either a Rolls-Royce RB211 or a Pratt & Whitney PW2000
Here is a diagram of a Rolls-Royce RB211. It says the opening of the turbine of a RB211 is 84.8 inches in diameter. (7 feet)
https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/3-s2.0-B0122274105003562-gr7.jpg
Here is a photo of President Trumps plane (757), look at the size of the opening of the plane turbine and the person standing next to the plane. Look at the center hub of the turbine, compare its size to the person standing next to the plane.
Here is a photo from the Pentagon on 9/11. Look at the round object behind the person on the left. That is the center hub of a turbine from the object that hit the Pentagon. Notice anything wrong?
Lmaoooo. You full of shit.
This is getting so predictable, it is almost sleep-inducing. No ability to refute => turn on the name-calling machine and fling.
We all know you are full of shit. Your arguments hold no water. Everything you say is making the excuse as to why it wasn’t a missile. Can you disprove it was a missile? Because we can prove it wasn’t a Fuckjgn airliner.. hey do the feds still pay time and a half for overtime? You gonna get a fat check this week !!
Simple: (1) Multiple witnesses on the ground and in the air saw the airplane. (2) The airplane was tracked on radar from the departing airport to the Pentagon. (3) Video image was consistent with an American Airlines airliner. (4) Airplane wreckage was present. (5) Damage was consistent with an airplane crash. (6) Passengers were killed and destroyed, never to be seen again. This is all POSITIVE evidence for what happened.
There is NO positive evidence for a missile. (1) No missile was seen. Had a missile clipped the streetlight, it would have torn its wing off and gone out of control. (2) No radar signature of a missile. (3) No video image of a missile. It would have been too small to for the image that was taken. (4) No missile wreckage was found. (5) Damage excessive for a missile crash. No explosion, only a fire. (6) What happened to the passengers?
All you have is bullshit and bravado. You are trying to gaslight the whole scenario---ignore the witnesses, ignore the radar tracking, ignore the video image, ignore the wreckage, ignore the massive damage, and ignore the passenger deaths. Talk about denialism. The missile hypothesis stands on the same ground as an attack by a vampire bat: purely imaginary, no evidence.
Since you don't have any evidence or reason to think there was a missile, your belief must be in response to some psychological need. This is what is called a paranoid delusion, which is the leading edge of psychosis. It involves the complete abandonment of rational discourse, devolving into castigation and baseless insult. As a result, you fail to see how you appear in public: mental slobber.
Yawwwnnnn. You sound like a fed.
You don't know that the wing clipped a streetlight. All you know is that a broken streetlight was found - and wasn't it found through someone's car windscreen?
Do you know about Operation Northwoods? That radar would have been convincing as well. We agree, there was a plane in the area but was that what entered the building?
Also, you claim the passenger compartment of a plane is strong enough to penetrate buildings but not strong enough to protect the passengers. They just evaporated.