Well, the witnesses speak for themselves. 100% of the witnesses who saw the plane and have been interviewed on location place the plane north of the Citgo, north of Columbia Pike and directly over the Navy Annexe. Now yes it's true that witnesses can be fallible and subject to memory flaws, but it's not conceivable that all the witnesses are wrong in the same way. This is why, when it comes to the science of vetting eyewitnesses, corroboration is the scientific method in every law of the land. Imagine a criminal case involving a serious traffic accident and you're on the jury. 13 eyewitnesses independently corroborate that the accident happened on the north side of the intersection and not one places the accident on the south side. Where would you conclude the accident happened?
If you listen to the witnesses you will understand that the North of Citgo flight path has been corroborated over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.
And if you accept the north path you have to accept the flyover because all of the physical damage is consistent ONLY with a straight line, South of Citgo (and south of Navy Annexe and Columbia Pike) flight path. There is zero physical damage consistent with an impact from the North of Citgo angle angle.
By the way, welcome to the yahooka forums but I have to confess I'm a tad weirded out by the fact that you seemed to join a cannabis site for your very first two posts to challenge Yours Truly on a 9/11 thread. I guess it's the good old fashioned conspiracy theorist in me.
