posted on Nov, 9 2011 @ 11:28 AM
Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
Of course you're never going to get one definitive flightpath from a multitude of witnesses, but they all described the same area using the only
landmark between the Pentagon facade and the Navy Annex.
...and they all specifically said the Plane hit the Pentagon, which is the exact opposite of what the CIT guy is attempting to insinuate.
I think you need to listen to the interviews. There is about double that figure at the moment. There have been more uncovered since the
CIT video was released (some by people who tried to "debunk" what the witnesses were repeatedly describing to CIT).
So what if there were nine or ninety? They're still human beings capable of making errors in judgement in distances. This is because we as humans
don't have laser range finders built into their heads and don't have the natural ability to judge exact distances down to the exact foot.
All the witnesses specifically said the plane flew within the general vicinity of (in the CIT's words) "the official story" so as far as I'm
concerned they still corroborate each other AND the 9/11 commission report regardless of the petty differences in precise measurements.
And who is claiming that there was "no plane"??
Technically, French conspiracy theorist Thierry Meyssan, as he's the one who invented that whole "cruise missile hit the Pentagon" conspiracy to
sell a bunch of books. The CIT people themselves are apparently trying to convince people the plane really flew over the Pentagon and bombed it
before turning invisible, which is just as absurd.
I simply claimed that the author was a shill and that his defence of the Pentagon OCT was weak. The rest is from your own
No, the rest is from your not wanting to admit the flaws in your claims. A "shill" by definition means a person who's secretly working for someone
else while pretending to be a nonparticipant. Logically this means the "shill" knows what he's saying is false. If what he's saying is false, it
necessarily means the hundred or so eyewitnesses who specifically saw the plane hit the Pentagon (including the eyewitnesses the CIT truther are
referencing) are lying. If all those people are lying, it necessarily means they're active participants in the coverup as well.
Didn't you think your conspiracy claims all the way through yet?