PentaCon is not a Hoax, page 1

That was a standard, generalized, uninformed reply from someone who clearly refuses to critically analyze the facts.

The physical evidence is extremely dubious/anomalous/questionable which is why we embarked on this investigation to begin with.

Lack of plane debris, anomalous hole, foundation undamaged, no damage where the vertical stabilizer would have hit, the list goes on and on.

And we KNOW that eyewitness testimony can be unreliable. We even say that in the movie but when specific claims are INDEPENDENTLY CORROBORATED that seriously changes very quickly.

You like everyone else who randomly attacks eyewitness testimony in general to dismiss the information in The PentaCon ALWAYS conveniently ignore that cold hard fact.

Think about it.......we read an email exchange from back in 2003 where Lagasse said he was on the "starboard" side of the plane which destroys the official story. People blew it off thinking he might have confused starboard and port and because it was just one account and it was simply an email.

We talk to the manager of the citgo station in person in 2006 and she tells us about her employee Robert Turcios who saw the plane. SHE told us that Robert saw the plane on the north side and that this has always been his story. We instantly thought about Lagasse's email to Dick Eastman and red flags went off like crazy.

But it was merely an old ambiguous email and a 2nd hand account so it didn't mean much but if they were true it was CORROBORATION and it meant a lot.

So we talk to Robert Turcios and he CONFIRMED that he saw it on the north side.

Now it becomes evidence.

Once I got Turcios' and Lagasse's accounts on video and they both confirmed without a shadow of a doubt that they really for sure both independently saw it on the north side and that Lagasse really did mean he was on the starboard side of the plane when he said it back in 2003.

Now it becomes strong evidence.

It's clear these people are not hazy on this simple fact.

Plus don't forget.......

LAGASSE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE THE PLANE THROUGH THE BUILDING ON THE SOUTH SIDE!

That means he would have had to fabricate his entire account.

Now the fact that Brooks ALSO independently and definitively saw the plane on the north side makes it proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Now it becomes extremely strong evidence.

But it doesn't stop there!

Edward Paik ALSO corroborates them since he has the plane crossing over to the north side of Columbia Pike on an angle headed straight for the north of the citgo.

That makes it undeniable proof.

And neither you nor Arabesque nor anyone else can provide a single account that directly contradicts them.

NOT ONE!

Go ahead. Post one. Prove me wrong.

[edit on 7-6-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]