- nicepants
-
Lagasse says the plane flew north, and he also describes the impact in detail...so it sounds like your statement isn't correct after all.
Light pole and building damage line up with southern path only. Can't have it both ways. You watched The Pentacon so you should already know this. Still playing dumb, I see.
- bileduct
-
At least two of the star witnesses (Lagasse and Brooks) for the north of Citgo flight path categorically state that they saw the plane impact with the Pentagon building.
The purpose of the flyover was to fool people into believing the plane hit.
- bileduct
-
A third witness (Turcios) claims that his vision was obscured by a mound at the last moment, but that the plane was on a trajectory that would have resulted in an impact with the Pentagon building.
That's not what he said.
- Caustic Logic
-
No flyover witnesses, the flyover having been masked by the explosion. Alright... so how many people saw it fly upward to the spot it passed thru? One we hear, Turcios, who's not in the Citgo video where he says he was at, had the mound block his dorect view of impact, but NOT his view of the pull-up, and still seems to think it impacted.
There are camera angles removed from that video. Who do you think was responsible for that? And what do you think was the purpose in removing those angles?
- Caustic Logic
-
So if a fireball can hide a momentary passover, what can hide a hundreds-of-feet up upward travel to get there? If it flew north it had to fly over and if it flew over it had to PULL UP.
Hundreds of feet?
- Caustic Logic
-
And no one of that big list but this one liar has ever said that.
What about the other north side witnesses? Are they also liars?
- Caustic Logic
-
So these witnesses, to the extent each is clear on the north path point, are either right, or mistaken (and the list is growing), somehow grossly misread. or wrong on purpose. Again, take your pic.
Do you honestly believe they could've been mistaken? Because it seems to me that your message has morphed.
| 
9:34 AM Nov 28
