Well now that I'm COINTELPRO, getting either ignored or flamed at random spots as a "CIA fan" blowing smokescreens, etc. It's weird days, and
I've hit some nerves it seems.
Where I'm coming from: The case I've been looking at is entirely consistent with the impact of a 757 from the southwest, clipping five light poles,
tearing through a const. fence, smashing a generator, scraping a vent structure, and finally hitting starboard high just below the second floor slab,
removing facing and clumns for a span of 100 feet on the first floor and fifteen on the second, piercing in some form through most of three rings,
landing gear basically at the A-E Drive. The "official story," at least physically speaking.
Now new evidence surfaces that claims to turn the whole story upside down. In one way or another, whether by being 480 feet over the building or just
barely clearing it, a new double-pronged campaign (Pandora's Black Box and The PentaCon) prove altitudinally there was no 757 impact. the 757-like
damage was faked with bombs, the light poles torn off earlier and planted but they don't know or get into that.
Both new arguments agree on a northerly flight path proven by a "black box animation" of dubious legitimacy and four honest citiens. That's where
the PentaCon comes in, and my review of it that was none too neighborly. but it's my beat, I mean nothing personal, but I have to take it on. As Jack
tries to remind his critics, it's not about the whole theory, how the plane parts were planted, why no radar track after the overflight, etc. it's
about the quadruple corroborating testimonies of their witnesses. Questioning their video means questioning the witnesses. Unlike most others, I'm
willing to admit lying as a possibility. It makes me look like a mean old caveman with a jagged Q-mark in its head.
I casually offered a challenge; i could find more than four witnesses with creds who saw a plane on the official path and he could call them liars. He
took me up and challenged me, seems confident I'll find one witness only that can explicitly counter them and he's compromised, meaning a liar. I
have no doubt he's looked into it and this is how he sees it. I accepted. So some Pgon witness account analysis coming here:
Now eyewitness accounts are not my area of expertise. The whole gov. plant/fallibility of the Human mind thing. And so far, in my first round of
scans, they're different than I thought. Not as clear, more contradictory, many full of holes. But I got the old school Laibach goin' on, and so
I'll do okay.