Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pierre
What if what hit the Pentagon was something scary'er. A more sophisticated weapon. A weapon that could penetrate tens of metres of reinforced concrete. Wouldn't it be better to stick with the story of a plane, a credible story that every one would believe rather than admit the Pentagon was a victim of a sophisticated missile attack?
|
And this is another classic example of conspiracy theory nonsense. It asks lots of leading questions, but doesn't supply any answers, just tries to make itself sound credible.
If these terrorists were capable of doing such an act, why did they bother with hijacking planes in the first place? Couldn't they have done the same to the WTC?!
Quote:
|
In regards to flight 77. Flight no.s and passenger manifests could easily be created.
|
By those blokes with the Black Helicopters, of course.
Quote:
|
When you look at the photographs I do not believe that a plane that has already hit the ground then into the building could make a hole like the one in photographs.
|
And you are an expert on Air Crashes? Or have you just seen some documentaries on TV? (Most of which don't feature aircraft hitting buildings!)
Quote:
|
You believe what you want to believe.
|
Some people will believe whatever they want to believe *no matter* what evidence is stuck in front of them. Most of them, however, are not conspiracy theorists.