An important note on the Pentagon debate

crispy

(148 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Nov-15-03 12:17 AM
Original message

An important note on the Pentagon debate

Edited on Sat Nov-15-03 12:52 AM by crispy

After months of research into the claims of the missile theory, small plane theory, etc., I have become convinced that the most feasible scenario regarding the Pentagon crash is that F77 did indeed hit the Pentagon. While this may come as old news to most of you, let this be a message to everyone, especially the people who still believe something other than F77 hit the Pentagon: months of (mostly) unbiased research of all aspects of the Pentagon incident, especially those denying the official story, have not stood up to the light of reason. Such alternative scenarios only seem to be the truth if key pieces of evidence are excluded. If any last vestigial doubts remain in any of you as to what hit the Pentagon, may they now be dispelled.

I am not saying the official story with regard to the Pentagon is completely true. The plane (B757) very may well have been flown by remote control, but there is no hard evidence to support it.

My "No, boys and girls..." posts over the last few days have been sort of my "last stand" - if the scenario I put forth did not stand up to the evidence and facts on hand, then the last plausible scenario would have been ruled out. While there is nothing that absolutely disproved the scenario I put forth, I came to realize it would require stretches of logic which in the end made it a less plausible scenario than the official story that F77 did hit the Pentagon. I still have questions I would like answered about the 757 scenario, but let it suffice to say that no scenario proposed thus far sufficiently accounts for the facts on hand, even if one takes into the account of planted evidence, fooled witnesses, etc.

The practice heretofore by those seeking to refute the 757 scenario has been to poke holes in the official story, cast doubts on the credibility of key pieces of evidence, and emphasize certain evidence that seemed to contradict the commonly held fact that a 757 indeed hit the Pentagon. Very few people other than myself have attempted to put forth a full alternate scenario (Dick Eastman is the only one I can think of, and his small-plane theory has been quite easily refuted). And there is a reason so few people have done so. Perhaps it is because people would rather cling to what few pieces of evidence they have that demonstrate the purported veracity of the alternate viewpoint they so dearly hold than investigate deeper and risk finding out that their viewpoint is, to put it simply, false.

I now seek to establish an informal guideline for investigations seeking to refute the 757 scenario. If you cannot put forth an entire scenario which sufficiently accounts for all or nearly all the evidence on hand, do not waste the time of posters to this board. Maintaining an unfounded cynicism with regard to the official story is detrimental to real seekers of the truth. If you persist in holding to your belief that F77 did not hit the Pentagon, put forth the evidence that proves it. Before you do that, take the time to read through the old Pentagon threads in the archives, specifically posts by anablep. Then read the "Now, boys and girls..." threads. If your scenario holds up after reading all that, then please let us know what it is. }(

I post this in the attempt to put behind us once and for all the fiction that F77 did not hit the Pentagon. If you care to demonstrate that it is not fiction but fact, please do so. But until someone provides sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the official story is in this regard false, the statement "F77 hit the Pentagon on 9/11" can and should be regarded by all members of this forum as true.

If enough people persist in irrationally believing F77 did not hit the Pentagon, I will consider putting up a website proving conclusively that it did.

Let us put this behind us and focus on less false matters.