reply to post by ULTIMA1
Chances are, not every single witness knew different models of planes. Knowing plane types is not a prerequisite for being close to the Pentagon nor
is it a requirement for living close to an airport.
Suspicion is fine, but just because all stories do not line up does not give one permission to use that inconsistency as any sort of proof or increase
the chances of a cover-up.
Yeah, there are those who witnessed an inconsistent flight path.
Yeah, there is a lady who allegedly was very close to the impact point and lived.
These sorts of phenomena in the story appear in complex events.
If some truther logic is right (because CIT witnesses saw a different flight path then the light poles could not have been knocked over etc.), then
because many witnesses saw the official flight path, then what the CIT group interviews gathered was impossible.
It works both ways.
Just because witnesses do not agree does not mean that the one's not with the official story may be dismissed as impossible in favor of people with
With truther logic anything that does not fit can be considered planted or doctored.
Over 100 witnesses will not have the same exact story.
Eyes can be in some ways deceptive.
Yes, they saw a close up plane.
No, not everyone knew the make and model of the plane.
Yes, when it came in there were downed light poles and a damaged trailer and a blown apart building face.
The idea of planting everything sounds more outrageous than actually flying a plane in.
If it was bombs, why not just have bombs be the story then. They are more concealed and thus a more unexpected and scarier weapon of terror.
But sorry, the truther argument, I have reviewed, and it is not compelling enough for me to pay attention to any longer. The official story, called a
'fairy tale' childishly by some, is what I believe.
God Bless America