I'm not a researcher

[Horse with no Name]

Nor do I claim to be. However, I hold those here in such a high esteem that are.
Now...here is question.
I finally got my DVD of "Confronting the Evidence" yesterday regarding 911.
All I can say is WOW.
Now...my question is regarding Flight 77.
If this plane was taken down in Ohio (the fact that it was Ohio couldn't have been a coincidence), then a drone took the flight number, and slammed into the Pentagon.
Okay...the bodies from the Pentagon were taken to a base in Maryland--then transferred to the base in Dover where the other bodies from Ohio were transferred.
Isn't it "odd" that when the BRAC announcements came...that the Dover base was being rewarded with a high increase...at the same time shutting down major bases in New England.
Anyway...not sure there is anything in those coincidences...just thought worthy of 2 minutes to type them.

[spooked911]

1. Glad to hear you saw the light! Please come to the September 11th

forum, there's a lot of good info and research there (it is in the "politics and political issues" section)

Also, it is far from clear what exactly happened at the Pentagon, though I personally think it wasn't hit by flight 77.

[MercutioATC]

7. This is the one time you'll see me agree with spooked...

;)

If you're interested in the topic, there's been a LOT written in the 9/11 Forum.

[expatriot]

2. self-delete

decided not to participate.

[Dogmudgeon]

3. About 9-11 theories

Most of them are just wrong.

A few are right.

Herein lies the problem: Which of the theories are right, and which are wrong?

That's why I don't knock the 9-11 theorists. They're looking at all the evidence and following as many leads as they can. Which is much more than the "official" commission ever did.

Just don't expect to get answers anytime soon. A lot of careers are at stake. To say the least.

--p!

[rman]

10. The official govt theory being wrong is plenty significant

It's like, when a criminal is lying to the police about where he was, when he was there, what he did...
Depending on circumstances it won't be to hard to demonstrate that he is lying - incosistencies and impossibilities in the criminal's story would be a strong indicator. The fact that the police does not (yet) know where he really was, when he really was there and what he really did, doesn't mean the criminal's initial story should be believed to be true.

[BeFree]

4. Me neither

"I'm not a researcher"
"Nor do I claim to be. However, I hold those here in such a high esteem that are." So do I.

When it comes to 9/11 having an open mind is all important. The few 'facts' thus far presented by the media and government can't help but to make an open minded person feel as though a great and mysterious coverup is under way.

[WoodrowFan]

5. and all the eyewitnesses are lying

yeah, ok, whatever. :eyes:

[truth2power]

6. It's possible the eyewitnesses didn't see what they thought they saw.

The recollections of eyewitnesses are sometimes flawed. It isn't that they lied.

[MrSammo1]

9. The physical evidence

refutes the statements of some of the witnesses.

Physical evidence wins!

[rman]

11. there are conflicting eyewitness reports

ie wrt the Pentgon some claim to have seen a passenger jet, others claim to have heard the sound of a jet fighter or missile, some claim to have heard two explosions, some claim to have smelled cordite.

[MrSammo1]

12. the question is

How can so many people get a 757 wrong?

A truck bomb? A helicopter crash?

Something is rotten in Washington!

[MrSammo1]

8. The problem is

There is no evidence that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

No trace of a jet's vertical stabilizer can be seen on the pre-collapse wall.

[MercutioATC]

13. That's simply not correct and we've been over this dozens of times.

Unless you're going to use the bizarre "replacement plane" theory...

[funflower]

14. Why would "they" use a replacement plane if they were going to "down"

77 anyway? Why not just fly it into the Pentagon as reported in the news?