9/11 Coincidences (Part Four)

9/11 Coincidences (Part Four)
----------------------------

The sites displayed at the end of each video in my 9/11 Coincidences series are provided so that people have a place to start their investigations. These sites are not displayed as a means of backing up any one point of view. And those sites may not necessarily be of the opinion that we should question whether a plane actually hit the Pentagon. The websites are provided so that people will view all sides of the story and then come to their own conclusions. Unlike some other videos on 9/11, the 9/11 Coincidences series does not promote the no-planes theory. If it did then you'd expect to see the subject covered in some detail. Instead all you see on the subject is the 1:13 seconds here in Part 4 that points out the fact that the government has not released an image showing the plane that hit the Pentagon. And in Part 10 a brief mention is made about the size of the Pentagon hole. This series of videos does not try to push any particular theory. It merely lays out the facts and points out the anomalies, while providing links to further info concerning what is being said about all those anomalies. This particular aspect of 9/11 is a very hot potato, and whether you think it is a red-herring or not, it deserves to be discussed instead of being swept under the carpet. It seems to me that ignoring the subject is the cowardly thing to do if you want to do a documentary that encourages people to look at all of the facts. That's why I have touched on the subject here, albeit very briefly, so that people can at least think about it, and then go to sites like "WhatReallyHappened" and "911InPlaneSite" and other sites, to decide for themselves. That's the fair way to do it. If I had ignored the Pentagon aspect of 9/11 then many people would accuse me of being some kind of shill. It is a very tight and thin rope that you have to walk when expressing your thoughts on the whole 9/11 subject. And the more facts you bring up, the greater the chance of upsetting someone because they don't agree that those particular facts have any relevance. The purpose of Part 4 is to briefly say :

"Look, there are some anomalies that raise questions about whether a Boeing jet really did hit the Pentagon. It is not by any means conclusive but here are a couple of facts supporting that line of inquiry... Now go and do some investigations for yourself, and here's a couple of sites that you might find useful for further opinions on this topic..."

NufffRespect