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?
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.
Deliberately withheld evidence IS evidence of conspiracy.
What would the cameras show, including the one on the garage/filling station that they took? Well, it might show a plane, for instance! That would shut down the conspiracy theorists, wouldn't it?
If the Prntagon's camera positions were sensitive then they could move them. What is the problem?
In spits of your constant assertions, we see no evidence of a plane entering the building. You have put up ridiculous arguments like the plane would be shattered into a thousand pieces but the people inside would not be that strong so they would be shattered into a thousand pieces!
Then we have your knife like airliner floor slicing its way through stone and leaving a fairly circular hole through a Pentagon inner ring.
Evidence of what? Conspiracy for what?
There is already a video that shows a plane, but the conspiracy theorists are devoted not to see it as anything other than their fantasy. Other videos would simply be dismissed as "more conspiracy".
But why move them at all? Presumably they are already selected for overlapping coverage from ideal locations (if they exist).
Do you even listen to yourself? If a plane, made of metal stronger than the strongest bones in our body, is going to be disintegrated by impact, then it follows absolutely that human flesh will be shredded. The plane's final motions had multiple witnesses---are you going to claim they are all liars, operating to a common plan?
The main deck would be the main penetrator, but the fuselage would be along for the ride until it is stripped off. Which way do you want it? That the whole fuselage penetrated intact? Or that it never penetrated at all? You don't seem to grasp the concept that a collision of this kind involves structure coming apart.
Give it a rest. The evidence is very clear. You just don't like it...for reasons I can only ascribe to personal preference. Why you would have a preference for how a disaster occurred is very strange, since the proper human reaction is to prefer that it never happened, but that is not an option in this case.
I had an exchange with someone who was convinced it was a Scud missile. A complete ignoramus. Didn't understand in any way how a Scud travels to its target. Just as most people don't understand that even a cruise missile does not follow the flight path they imagine. The power of ignorance overwhelms evidence, I am sorry to say. A poor suit for anons to wear.