Okay, I've finished watching the entire video and yes, there are certainly some compelling things about it. I know next to nothing about what happens when an airplane crashes into a building and what if anything of it is left behind. I'd like to believe the film maker is telling me accurate information but there are too many times throughout the video where he's not so I'm left wondering if I can trust what he's saying when it comes to areas I know nothing about. Why didn't the engines of the flight which hit the Pentagon survive and what about that piece of motor they did find? Those are interesting questions for sure but I have a hard time accepting as fact what the narrator is telling me.

The whole thing about the flights not really being who we thought they were and that they were actually other totally different aircraft doesn't work for me. This is the part where I do know a little bit about the goings on and I can tell you that when UAL93 left the runway that day and a data-block track was started on it in the control tower and that track was subsequently handed off from controller to controller, there really isn't any way for that track to be swapped over to another aircraft without the controller initiating it. There were times when the transponders within the aircraft were turned off but the controllers still had the primary target (reflection of the aircraft itself and not a radio signal from a transponder) to work with.

For me, the film maker over played his hand when he got into this area. As I said, there are certainly some compelling things about the video but I have to take the narrator's word when he's shown me that he gets it wrong too often.

Kevin g