While serving in the Army as a member of Alpha Company, 3rd US Infantry, Adam Eisenberg spent approximately 240 hours on site, with at least a hundred of his fellow servicemen, at the Pentagon on 9/11.
In short, he helped clean up the mess from the plane crash.
Plus, his statements that there were no plane parts at the site is contradicted by many photos showing jet debris inside and outside the Pentagon. Even if those parts were planted or belonged to a different plane, it's disingenuous for him to say that nothing of the sort was there at all sometime before the cleanup and reconstruction of the building.
I have a gut feeling that something's up with him. Whether he's genuine or not is up for everybody to deduce for themselves. Even if what he's saying is true, it doesn't mean he's telling the complete truth.
With all due respect...
Are you wanting to insinuate he's not truthful in his statements?
I'm not sure what you mean with your statement: "I suspect there's more to this Eisenberg character than some realize."
Here is an hour interview with Adam, which I suggest you listen to, before listening to the 4h marathon we had this past Saturday....
Adam Eisenberg on there being no plane at the Pentagon on 9/11
Link: https://jermwarfare.com/conversations/adam-eisenberg-no-plane-pentagon
While serving in the Army as a member of Alpha Company, 3rd US Infantry, Adam Eisenberg spent approximately 240 hours on site, with at least a hundred of his fellow servicemen, at the Pentagon on 9/11.
In short, he helped clean up the mess from the plane crash.
Except that, well, there was no plane, he argues.
Plus, his statements that there were no plane parts at the site is contradicted by many photos showing jet debris inside and outside the Pentagon. Even if those parts were planted or belonged to a different plane, it's disingenuous for him to say that nothing of the sort was there at all sometime before the cleanup and reconstruction of the building.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=h_&q=pentagon+plane+debris&iax=images&ia=images
I have a gut feeling that something's up with him. Whether he's genuine or not is up for everybody to deduce for themselves. Even if what he's saying is true, it doesn't mean he's telling the complete truth.
I think you need to start reading more of Mark Conlon's substack as you obviously seem only to be here to troll the comment section...
The PentaCon on 9/11
When a missile AND a plane did not hit a target
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-pentacon-on-911
And how do you know that I haven't read Mark's material and that I'm trolling? Because I voiced my suspicions about Adam Eisenberg?
Step 1 - No plane could have done what was alleged for Flight 77.
You can figure it out from there and your comments are suspect themselves.
No ordinary plane, anyway. And you still haven't thoroughly explained why my comments are suspect.
Stating - "No ordinary plane" - proves you're disingenuous and have not read Mark's articles.