Jamie McIntyre original statement 9-11

[youstupidmoron]

The guy is talking about how much damage there was and how he saw plane wreckage, how is this evidence of no plane? Both engines were found, the landing gear, bodies, luggage, seats, hydraulic lines, wiring, even sections of the instrument panel. Then there's the fact that ALL the witnesses saw the plane. Truthers are idiots but fun to laugh at!

[grandmastershek]

Nice quote mining

[Whorulesnow]

An airliner did not hit the pentagon. We need to investigate 9/11. The "official" story is a complete lie.

[greenskeeper7]

Ever seen that F-4 test hitting the concrete barrier?? No identifiable aircraft parts...

[brianwesley28]

@greenskeeper7

Why was there one hole before the facade (forgive the duality pun) fell apart at the Pentagon? A large twin engine airliner, regardless as to make and model, does not have a penetrator nose. One would have expected to have seen two holes from the engines, had it been an airliner, as opposed to one hole that they said was from the nose?

[pockmarkedbuttocks]

where DID all those people go? where ARE the planes? Are they all still alive? This would make a good movie...

[Hellenbach13]

@pockmarkedbuttocks there is no hard evidence planes were used that day. None.

[seedebgo]

What happened to all the people that were on those two flights? The one that went into the pentagon and the one that crashed in a Pennsylvania field? Don't you find it amazing that the show Lost came out after this happened. Showing the world what a plane crash site actually looks like.

[PolandSoldOutInYalta]

...which would indicate that the entire plain has melted before it even hit the pentadevilgon...no, let them devils have it their way, 10 airplanes hit them up in the ass..........fuckin liars! of course NO one will know the truth for the next 50 years or so...yr kids and grandkids will be talkin about the WORST gov. EVER!

[clayrains]

There's one aspect of this that you're all missing. McIntyre said he went "right up to the side" of the Pentagon and that he had just done a "close-up inspection" of the entire site. He claimed there was no large wreckage, "not a wing section, a tail section or fuselage." Four years later, he claims there WAS large wreckage, specifically saying that there was a fuselage -- and that he photographed it all. So which is it? Was he lying on 9/11, or lying four years later?

[riceowlex]

I just wrote Jamie Mc and told him what a piece of shit I thought he was and is!! Can't help it, it's late and the insanity of this and the fact that there hasn't been an investigation pisses me off something fierce! We need to have a "Peoples Investigation"

[muzicmaker2001]

Where are the two 9 ton engines, bodies, luggage, wings? Why is another circular hole deep inside of the rings of Pentagon. If it disentigrated on impacted, why the other hole inside? Look at the lawn. Even helicopters can damage the lawn. Wake up. There is no plane.

[orangefu]

"(no debris) that would indicate the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon..." I still don't get your point braadspitt. Nevertheless, if the plane landed short, the debris would still be SOMEWHERE. Where is it?

[EdGein06]

haha that just makes him and youself another ant in the colony

[braadspitt]

A perfect example how misleading it can be if you take a quote out of its context.

If you include the preceding question it becomes clear that Jamie McIntyre was asked whether the airplane landed STRAIGHT INTO the building or if it landed SHORT of the building. That's why he emphesizes the word'near' in his first sentence.

In other words: John McIntyre explains here that the plane flew straight in the building instead of landing NEAR the building.