Originally posted by SPreston


1. The aircraft should have dug in a wingtip and cartwheeled across the lawn

2. 55 feet of the starboard wing should have buried underground or broken off

3. The starboard engine should have buried underground or bounced across the lawn

4. The port engine should have struck the building up in the middle of the 2nd story

5. The about 55 ft long port wing should have struck across all four storys of the facade

6. All 5 light poles would be completely missed

7. Hani Hanjour might have been able to spit on the generator as he went by

There should have been dozens of eyewitness and media reports of AA77 flying over and away from the Pentagon, yet there are none. Nor have you produced any. Nor have you presented any verified evidence that AA77 flew over and away from the Pentagon.

Ooops!

NOW, how are you going to explain that major problem you have, SPreston?

I saw this TV show once and this psychic helped find the murderer by visiting the crime scene. They actually found the guy using her information. Has a psychic ever visited the site to try and 'see' what really happened. There so was so much turmoil there I bet she would be able to pick something up. Of course this would not be proof but might point the investigation in the right direction.

Originally posted by SPreston

posted by jthomas
There should have been dozens of eyewitness and media reports of AA77 flying over and away from the Pentagon, yet there are none. Nor have you produced any. Nor have you presented any verified evidence that AA77 flew over and away from the Pentagon.

Ooops!

NOW, how are you going to explain that major problem you have, SPreston?

Perhaps you neglected to read the post. LaBTop and I were discussing the FAA video released on 9-12-2008. Were you unaware of this little gem? Well anyway it flys over the Naval Annex, banks North of the Citgo and then crashes into the Pentagon 3rd and 4th floors in a steep bank with the right wingtip almost touching the ground. Sound familiar to you?

So, you now agree that AA 77 hit the Pentagon?

If not, when will you provide your "flyover" eyewitnesses I keep asking you for?

The CIT flyover theory is that AA77 or a substitute plane flew over the Pentagon north of Citgo and there was no other plane at the Pentagon and what damage there was to the Pentagon was from planted explosives.

I consider this to be the basic conspiracy theorist default theory for when all other theories fail.

I agree with the CIT flyover theory as it is verified EXCEPT I think there is sufficient evidence that an A-3 Skywarrior firing a missile ahead of it south of Citgo hit the Pentagon at the same time. There were explosives planted inside the Pentagon.

As far as I know, my theory is right and any other theory just bewilders the 9/11 truth movement.

Whilst I accept the Pentagon police officers testimony that they saw a plane as large as a commercial jet fly towards the Pentagon on the NORTH side of the Citgo gas station, no one has explained to me what it was doing there in the first place.

If the 9/11 plotters went to all that trouble of creating the illusion that Flight 77 hit light poles and then the Pentagon from the South side of Citgo by using a Sky Warrior that fired a missile a split second before impact, why did they bother to have a large plane fly over the Pentagon at the same time, thereby creating a huge risk that witnesses to it might come forward to contradict (or at least complicate) the official story? What use was that plane to them? Just to cause argument in the 9/11 truth movement in the ensuing years? I hardly think so. If it were the real Flight 77 (supposing one actually existed), why not just fly it into the Pentagon, as they wanted people to think the hijackers had done?

It has not helped their cause that the CIT has failed to explain the real purpose of the plane seen by the Pentagon police officers.

CIT doesn't have to explain why a plane flew over the Pentagon north of Citgo. All CIT needs is proof that a plane did fly over the Pentagon north of Citgo, and I think CIT has the proof.

The way I see it, the AA77 plane flyover north of Citgo was not really needed. The show would have gone on if it had not showed up. The mainstream media would have told people that the A-3 Skywarrior was AA77. But it was advantageous for the perps if it did show up for people thinking that AA77 was indeed at the Pentagon. The fact that there were two planes at the same time helped them, not hurt them. Some people saw each plane and they all thought it was AA77. If AA77 hadn't flown over the Pentagon and had accidentally crashed into the Pentagon, that would have been advantageous for the perps because they would have had actual wreckage they could show and the mainstream media would have cooperated with them.