old300D - 2/20/2006 4:59 PM
Nothing I've read suggests that only the outside was damaged, however the wings would have made significant damage to the exterior, which didn't happen. Snopes maintains they folded and followed the fuselage, but physics simply doesn't work that way -- the wings would have come forward and left huge gouges all along the front wall.
As a matter of fact, the Pentagon is quite tough, and it is unlikely that the soft nose of a plane would make through 3 rings of the building.
Snopes makes only hand-waving arguments that seem quite weak. It certainly doesn't address any of the assertions I've made. I also understand the Pentagon is equipped with anti-missile batteries which should have made an aerial approach impossible...
Okay, let's assume you are correct. In fact, let's make no assumption whatsoever.
How do we know that anything happened to the WTC, the Pentagon and some fallow field in Pennsylvania? Unless were were actually present on the ground we cannot know for certain and even then, perhaps somebody could perpetrate an illusion. I think the way that we "know" is a sort of group consensus. So many people believe it that we believe it. Like religion used to be, but now we know we are too modern to be duped or twisted by society's pliers.
So for some reason we buy into the WTC and not the Pentagon thingy.
Why not the Pentagon thingy? How do you convince several thousands of people that something happened which actually did not happen? Some must be convinced, not merely brought into the conspiracy. Others could be brought into the conspiracy.
How many members of the 9/11 Commission are actual conspirators and how many are dupes? How do you tell which group a given member belongs to?
What was it that caused the explosion at the Pentagon? How did that conspiracy come together?