For example, several of us are of the opinion that the level of direct evidence proving the Controlled Demolition of WTC7 in the form of videos that constitute physical evidence of free-fall, sequenced cutter charges/squibs, and shockwaves, etc., constitutes a stronger level of direct evidence than that for the flyover (Pentagon), which is inferred from eyewitness testiimony of a NoC flight path, but which does not have any direct physical evidence, such as videos, to back it up (even though we accept that flyover is the logical conclusion).

Rather than conceding this point to us, you seem to keep taking offense to this and hitting us with the hammer of "IT'S NOT LOGICAL TO SAY THAT!!"

I never replied to your claims about WTC evidence that way.

I have said that I respect your choice to lead with that evidence and I am not trying to convince you to do otherwise.

It is your personal choice to lead with whatever evidence you feel constitutes the strongest proof.

I personally feel that the Pentagon is better for campaigning for a few other reasons that we don't need to get into right now because that is not what this thread is about.

But as long as you now agree that the evidence we present proves a flyover then as far as I am concerned we are on the same page.