I've been seeing several threads about a pentagon flyover.

But there's one unanswered question, in my eyes.

"Why?"

Why would they have a flyover with an explosion instead of just remotely piloting a plane in to the side of the pentagon? :/

Pinpoint precision in reference to the true target.... Naval intelligence. ;)

devil's advocate - why a flyover at Pentagon? why not just crash a real plane?

1) need for one single "cause" of ALL pentagon damage -- a plane. end of story.
JFK -- one man, one magic bullet
RFK - one crazy palestinian, one gun
OKC - one man, one truck bomb
WTC - one plane crash, one building collapse
Pentagon -- one hani hanjour w/ boxcutter, one smoky confusing AA77 crash, damage to *cough* rings E, D (naval command, naval intel) C ring (unknown, army audit) and B ring (unknown)

2) a 757 slamming at 400mph into a reinforced building might prove insufficient or unpredictable enough to cause the desired pattern of death and damage.
a 757 is a very blunt instrument.
explosives would be more precise

3) explosives ALONE would be awfully hard to "sell" to the public

4) A plane is necessary as the 'cover story' for deaths/destruction in precise parts of pentagon.
options?

a) use AA77 hijacked plane. prob>? hard to find a good enough pilot, or suicidal enough pilot. if it missed, your whole plan is kaput. human factor very hard to control.

B) use a plane that looks like AA77, fly it remotely into Pentagon.
Now we're cooking!!

problem? debris from a plane that was not N644AA might be picked up by wrong people, checkd for serial numbers, lack of seats, bodies, US mail, etc

c) put a plane near/over Pentagon, but don't crash it into building. Use planted and friendly witnesses to "spin" the media story.
On a day when 3 other planes are documented Hijacks, it's pretty hard to deny a 4th.
explosives alone cause damage.

make the plane disappear. this is now a basic magic trick. i would find it unbelievably difficult to make plane disappear from view and memories -- but confiscation of all video would be an essential part of this -- and then making sure any one trying to insinuate a flyover was made to look as idiotic and deranged as possible.

repeat as necessary.




[B]

Absolutely.

Why a flyover?

One possibility:
The pilot remotely piloting the 757 at 400+ knots screwed up and accidentally followed the contour of the freeway and it was too late to get back on the official flight path without doing a complete flyaround, and the overseer of the Pentagon OP ordered him to flyover the Pentagon and set off the explosives on schedule, because the damage on the north of the Citgo flight path would not match the preplanted explosives. Then they screwed up the light pole through the windshield fakery on Lloyd England's taxicab and then the danged Reagan National firefighters showed up uninvited and threw another wrench into the works, and pictures were taken of the Pentagon wall before the roof was caved in. Not a good day for the Pentagon team, but they are bluffing their way through the bungled operation anyway. :D



]

Two main targets; the Naval Telecommunications Operations Center group coordinating the Navy’s response to the attacks on the world Trade Center and their personnel and files, and the $2.3 Trillion missing Defense Department funds and their auditors and investigators and files. Bombs went off within the Pentagon at 9:32 and at least 5 minutes before the Flight 77 official crash time of 9:37, which itself had been moved forward from the original official crash time of 9:43 (11 minutes earlier) as they realized their timing sucked.
Mission Accomplished. :rolleyes: clock 1 - clock 2
Are we to believe that these clocks were 5-6 minutes slow in a military installation where personnel considered time as precise?

I don't think you need a flyover, but, consider the ASCE building impact statement that maps out the Pentagon damage -- you DO NEED a "south-side" alleged impact.


Note that for the "official report" that shows a diagonal path of greatest damage (including alleged "exit holes" of aircraft) -- the 'official flight path' is the only one that lines up the damage pattern properly, from E ring to D ring (naval command) to C ring (army personnel?)

Merc and Lyte's "North side" flight path, even if it ended as an impact -- would NOT extend the damage pattern to the C ring, creating the "punchout holes" --

I conclude therefore that the adherence to a "south side flight plus impact" is in order only to prop up the official story, or cast doubt on the doubters.

Whether Merc and Lyte have established a case for a flyover, i am less than 100% convinced.
But it is NOT NECESSARY to establish the flyover.

the North Side Flight Path -- even with impact -- would not create the ASCE damage map.

only a south side flight -- or pre-positioned explosives, which killed people in the basement as well -- would provide a plausible explanation for the damage.

You post Doctored photograhs. And you say other people are being untruthful.

Simply amazing. :wacko:

Done to illustrate a point. Nobody was ever supposed to believe those colored lines were on the original photos.
;)

The Pentagon is an open and shut case. There were dozens and dozens of witnesses, plane debris, body parts, black box, downed light poles, the transformer was hit. What more do you people want. Anyone who can't figure this out needs their head examined.

Watch this.
http://www.thepentacon.com/

I've seen that crap. Like I said before......

The Pentagon is an open and shut case. There were dozens and dozens of witnesses, plane debris, body parts, black box, downed light poles, the transformer was hit. What more do you people want. Anyone who can't figure this out needs their head examined.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...?showtopic=6158

So why do you think the witnesses placed the plane north of the Citgo?