[miss_silver]

lol

Sinner, you are a joker

Just did several research on flight 77. What struck me odd is those images compared to the angle of flight 77

From the same point of view, the way materials of a 100 tons plane should move and what destruction they should cause in a crash against a building like the pentagon reinforce this impossibility.

Taking as references images of crashes against buildings, (in Holland, the Concorde of Air France), it seems evident that the scene of the Pentagon and surroundings after the crash (the lawn intact, ...) is not the scene of a 757 crash.

The approach of a 757 towards this building leave a lot of questions unanswered (realism of the approach trajectory, position of the impact point, no track of the landing gear (which gets down automatically near the ground) on the grass, ...).
And if it was not a 757 ?

This would explain why these frames have been "lost" : they are those on which one can recognize that it this not this airliner which hit the pentagon. The first to claim for this thery was the french journalist Thierry Meyssan : according to him, something (a missile, a remotely piloted fighter) was directed on the pentagon, in order to increase the gravity of the attack of Bin Laden on 9/11, the pentagon being a military target. Four hypotheses can be formulated and argumented : the "cruise missile theory", the "foo fighter" theory, the "remotely piloted fighter" theory and the "suicide pilot" theory.
The cruise missile theory

What we could see in this hypotheses if the FBI and/or DOD released the complete video. What could it be ? Hypotheses : it is an AGM 86 cruise missile.

Keep wagging that dog

Like I said earlier, it's amazing that a 300$ camcorder can do a better job filming true event than security cam at the pentagone