More proof a plane did not hit PENTAGON

more proof ,,tons of evidence disproving the official story,this is just a little more.2 star major general who is was an analyst for the government says no way on top of top military and commercial pilots..

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• pentagon
• false
• flag
• terror
• world
• government
• convergence

[TheDraconiankiller]

Wow 45 thumbs down.. Wow truth just hurt doesn't it!

[stayinstock]

@nobaccos Don't get mad at me.Be mad at yourself for believing the missile theory.There are pictures of the wreckage all over the internet.

There are no pictures of missile wreckage.Plenty of people saw the plane.A lamp pole hit a cab.

Where's the proof of a missile?

[screwsalliemaedebt]

what about the light poles down and the taxi cab hit by light pole. How is that explained here?

[skipsassy1]

At 550 mph no trace is left he is so wrong and a lier at best. All material is "destructable" what an idiot. As an aviator at those speeds look at nuclear weapon fires fools. At close to the speed of sound multi-ton would be dust folks.....I live in D.C. a friend of mine saw the jet hit the God damn buildiing ok!!!

[gnexus01]

@stayinstock Actually the website only supports that a plane hit the Pentagon, it claims the twin towers where brought down basically by a controlled demo (which just nonsense). Atleast that's how I understood it. Another good site to direct the moron's to is Debunking911 d0tcom

[stayinstock]

Sometimes to prove what it is,you first have to prove what it's not.

A missile would have less wreckage left behind.A missile doesn't have engine parts,landing gear,wheels. A missile wouldn't leave light poles down, damaged a generator.Look at missile damage pictures in Iraq.You tell me what kind of wreckage a missile leaves.It's not that damned hard to find real missile damage to compare it too.

[stayinstock]

@gnexus01 He asked for proof of a plane.The best way to prove it is show him the pictures and ask him to pick out the missile.

The wreckage speaks for itself.

I didn't expect him to read anything written on the site,just look at the pictures.

The fact that metal is wrapped around the columns is proof it wasn't planted.It would take weeks at the least to form the metal around those columns.

To me that's undeniable proof it was more than a missile.

The rest is added proof.

Agreed?

[gnexus01]

@stayinstock It was plane that hit all 3 buildings. I'm not denying that.

[inspectorcritic]

It was a freaking missile they had hid in their yard for years the CIA and Gv accounting ask if they could use my date 911 to launch their own grudge of losing 2.3 trillion dollars.

[stayinstock]

@gnexus01 What are you talking about?

I didn't promote any site.

He wanted proof of an airplane.That site has the pictures all in one place.I really don't care if the site is NIST,or Conspiracy. It's the pictures that I am interested in.

Like I said.Those pictures are proof of a plane. Anything else has no visual,physical,or forensic evidence.If you have a better way to answer his question,by all means,please do.Or if you have evidence of a missile.Show me.

[gnexus01]

@stayinstock  You promote your site and yet your not any better then the conspiracy theorist out there. Try reading up on Debunking911.