Video Of A Plane Hitting Light Poles Options

[Domenick DiMaggi...]

thoughts?

[tnemelckram]

Summing up what everyone has already posted, I think the video is meaningless.

The question is not whether some kind of plane hit some kind of light poles poles somewhere at some time and then could still hit some wall some distance away. It's whether AA77, a Boeing 757, was on a path to hit a certain five aluminum light poles several hundred yards from the "target" wall of the Pentagon building in Arlington Virginia on 9-11-01 at 9:37:44 AM. The only credible evidence says that it was not on the path to begin with and the rest is irrelevant.

Dmole correctly notes that the F-4 is military and requires sturdier construction. Here's a little more:

1. Military planes have hard points on the wings for ordinance mounts.
2. There were two general types of F-4's - one navalized and the other land based. The navalized version had beefed up wings and carriage to withstand the added stress of carrier landings.
3. The F-4 was a particularly sturdy and long-lived plane.

EDIT TO ADD: Dmole posted more about the F-4 here:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10777034

Here's another twisted, irrelevant interpretation: The video doesn't disprove that although a fly over was intended, a plane could have been damaged by hitting the poles, which caused it to crash instead, which foiled the fly over plan.

This post has been edited by tnemelckram: Sep 23 2009, 12:17 PM