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?
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.
And you have just proven you don't know what you are talking about. Go back to sleep.
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.
I read that the wing clip was observed. And the fate of the piece clipped is consistent with events. The airborne observer witnessed the ultimate crash.
Of course, Operation Northwoods never happened. The credibility of the scenario is only speculative. And there is no EVIDENCE that this was such an event.
I was referring to the main deck of the airplane which would have entered similarly to a knife blade. Aluminum is a lot more durable than human flesh, but a lot of structure was stripped off. Someone here (I can't recall if it was you) showed a video of a ground test propelling an F-4 fighter into a 12-foot-thick reinforced concrete wall at 200 mph. The entire airplane was obliterated into tiny pieces. Human beings are not so durable. They would have been pulverized.
Why are you trying so hard to become a mental pretzel? The facts are clear and obvious. Evil intent reeks from all this. Does it somehow offend your religion that the government is not necessarily a monolith and that it can and maybe often does tell the truth? People lie and also tell the truth. Even liars do not lie all the time; too much fictional baggage to carry around. What is important is to discern lies---by finding the truth. Not to discern truth by assuming lies. This is a pretty shitty way of respecting the dead---to declare that they never were real.
If the government has nothing to hide why have they not shown us all the CCTV footage they have and why did they collect further footage from homes and businesses that had sight of the incident?
They obviously are hiding that evidence for a reason and if they do not show us then we are going to assume the worst.
So, you think it is a good idea to advertise the location of surveillance cameras around the PENTAGON? Get real. What do you think it would provide, beyond what we already have seen? (And why would you think it?)
There is nothing "obvious." There is only your paranoia. Your thinking process is roughly: "absence of MORE evidence is evidence of conspiracy." No, it isn't. You need to get a grip on your epistemology. There is plenty of evidence. It just doesn't fit the narrative you want...which is a problem with you, not with the evidence.