Comment: Whether the plane or the

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I can't take you seriously (see in situ)

Whether the plane or the

Whether the plane or the hijackers "could" have maneuvered the high speeds and angles is covered in my links. Veteran Pilot Phillip Marshall not only believes without a doubt that AA flt 77 flew into the Pentagon:
his resume
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/guest/marshall-philip/55965
proof of his belief
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2012/09/08

He wrote a book on the training he says they received to do it
http://www.amazon.com/Big-Bamboozle-11-War-Terror/dp/1468094580

This site has more about the planes ability and Hani Hanjour's flying experience
http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/

My approach stems from trying to have a civil discussion about the facts involved in other 9/11 threads, only to have the issues ignored and to be personally attacked time and time again. Click on my name here and look through my comment history if you need proof. So I wanted to try and pin people down to discussing the issue. I want to see what the best evidence there is to support their argument that no plane hit the Pentagon, I was not getting that in other threads I tried, I was only getting personally attacked. Look at all the personal attacks in this thread even after what I wrote in the post. Do you not think this had some people scouring the internet for evidence to shove in my face?

I have honestly assessed all the evidence presented to me. I cannot "disprove" something that was never proven to begin with. If there is some piece of evidence here you believe I have unfairly assessed, what is it? and what's wrong about it?