]]>
There is NO PROOF that the plane flew over the Pentagon.
Lloyd was a pawn and like most people involved, he had no idea what was going on until it happened. The plane could have been on the south path and flown above the light poles so the fact that they were staged has nothing to do with whether or not the plane hit the Pentagon.
All this is misdirection. Endless bickering about the witnesses and total avoidance of the final conclusion which is false.
I have answered your questions now please address the most important point.
The so called "proof of flyover" is that a plane on the north flight path could not cause the directional damage (leading to and including the hole in the “C” ring). However, the flyover theory assumes the directional damage was caused by something other than the plane, such as explosives. If the directional damage was caused by something else in the flyover theory then it could be caused by something else if the plane hit the Pentagon. The directional damage has nothing to do with whether or not the plane hit, and it does not prove that a plane on the north path did not hit the Pentagon.
The North of Citgo flight path does not prove flyover.
Statistics: Posted by Chris Sarns — 10 Jul 2010, 07:09
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Scepcop — 10 Jul 2010, 03:50
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Scepcop — 10 Jul 2010, 03:46
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
I don't have any of the answers and neither does anybody else, least of all CIT.
I have been saying that this endless debate is a frikin waste of time but nobody seems to catch on. Y'all keep running in circles.
Hey, whatever blows your skirt up.
Statistics: Posted by Chris Sarns — 24 Jun 2010, 01:29
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>