Comment: Still cant answer ANY of my questions

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: terrible, all three of those links. (see in situ)

Still cant answer ANY of my questions

You act like this was a normal plane crash, no it was a kamikaze attack, big difference. When planes crash normally the pilot is trying to slow down and avert damage, not speed up and maximize it.
So tell me if there is no evdience an American Airlines plane was what hit the Pentagon, then what is this and where did it come from?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Fli...
or how did this get there?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Tj_Pww3f0u0/TngRaU29TFI/AAAAAAAAAd...
or this?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-S1oLT4KgUD0/TngSPGAUH0I/AAAAAAAAAd...
or this?
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ReNrx3547hs/TngRPfVst0I/AAAAAAAAAd...
or this?
http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon_6.html
or this?
http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon_19.html

I could go on but it's all from my links.

And no witnesses you say, what about all these people.
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/sgyd...

Funny to me how you call direct visual evidence in the way of pictures of American Airlines plane parts in and around the crash site, passenger dna evidence, and many, many eye witness testimonies "terrible" evidence, yet a documentary that makes claims on the impossibility of specific plane trajectory and crash effects with absolutely no proof to it, is somehow ultra-credible to you. Again this is a good debunking of that doc.
http://scienceof911.com.au/pentagon/rebutting-cit/
Check out the comment by Frank Legge (who is apparently the author of the article) at the very bottom of the page.