Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Viewing Single Post From: Why Pentagon damage is incompatible with a missile
bobloblaw

Bitterman
Jul 5 2008, 11:16 PM
That's why you can't keep defending the "that's how it would look like, because you haven't seen it done before!" argument any longer. The wings would have caused some knd of damage, sure I can't demonstrate it or show you pictures but that's not the point.

Tell me how you can account for the wings to HAVE actually struck the building and actually cause NO damage whatsoever! None! Like magic!

I can chip the fuck out of the side of the pentagon with a small boulder, but a plane traveling at X hundreds of miles per hour doesn't leave a scratch??

Answer me this, hamba. You actually believe that?

Anyway, once you're done realizing you're a moron, and something goes click for you, or you just carry on because you don't really care anyway.

Either way, you shouldn't be debating this because this is moot as long as the plane is NoC, which it was and if so, then of course no plane hit the pentagon!

Anyone getting this or not?
WTF?

No wing damage?

Have you actually looked at the impact photos, Bitterman? Or is this another scenario like the one with Sean Boger, where you had no idea whatsoever that your precious NoC witness actually stated that he stood firm and watched the plane impact with, fully enter and then explode inside the Pentagon.

Have a look at these photos and then have a good, hard, long think about who the moron is here.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

No wing damage.... Why do you make up shit like this?
Offline Profile Quote Post
Why Pentagon damage is incompatible with a missile · Pentagon