| Viewing Single Post From: Hey there | |
|---|---|
| Arcterus | Jan 27 2009, 01:40 AM |
|
The witness testimony is most certainly backed up by physical evidence. Please read my article if you haven't already. I talk a lot about the physical evidence.
Damn straight! I think this is the attitude that any serious 9/11 Truther should have.
I haven't had a chance yet to fully analyze the other sources, but I watched all of The Pentacon, and I must say it was terribly unconvincing. I never thought I'd say this, but I thought it was even worse than 9/11 In Plane Sight. The artistic part of me had trouble watching it...I know they said they weren't filmmakers but Jesus, the headroom with that first guy was driving me crazy. Putting my filmmaker compulsions aside, I feel I watched it with an open mind and I saw nothing conclusive for me to alter my opinion on what happened at The Pentagon. There are a great deal of problems with the documentary, and I'd be glad to elaborate those problems in a well-polished essay should I have the time, but for now, I'll note the two major problems that should be fairly obvious and, with enough in-depth contemplation, will lead you to the other problems as well. 1. The Pentacon suggests that these four witnesses have more validity in their claims than well over 100 other eyewitness testimonies that, unlike these four, correlate with the physical evidence. Besides being a pretty rich leap of faith, these four eyewitness testimonies are taken five years later, as opposed to the other testimonies which were taken shortly after the attack. 2. The Pentacon ONLY used their witnesses for evidence which corroborated their conclusion. They call their testimonies "smoking guns" and "devastating to the official story". Every single one of the four said they saw a plane. One of them, who was the only one to claim any kind of credit in flight identification, said he instantly noted it as an American Airlines plane. Not one of the witnesses claimed to see two planes. 3 of the 4 witnesses claimed to see the plane hit the Pentagon, the fourth of whom was too far away to see the impact in the first plane. So what does The Pentacon conclude? Just about anything that contradicts their witness testimony EXCEPT for the flight path! For one of them they even directly point out he must have made a mistake. Another one made a dreadful mistake in being outright wrong about the position of the taxi and the status of certain light poles, instantly putting his testimony in doubt. Furthermore, all the testimony relating to the flight path does NOT CORROBORATE with the physical evidence. Yet, despite these glaring errors, they make us only of portions of the testimony that correlate with their theory. I'll still take a look at those other two sources, but if this is the kind of stuff you have to offer, I won't be expecting any major recants from me anytime soon. |
 |
|
| Hey there · Welcome Newcomers! | |
1:34 AM Nov 30
