No, A Plane DID NOT Hit The Pentagon On 9/11! w/ Craig McKee

Overview

The video is a discussion (hosted by Jimmy Dore) with Craig McKee, a Canadian journalist and long-time 9/11 truth contributor. McKee argues that the U.S. government’s claim that a 757 jet hit the Pentagon is physically inconsistent, and therefore part of a broader deception/cover-up.

Main Claims and Evidence Used

1) “Wooden stool and book in the plane’s path”

McKee argues that a photo sequence shows a wooden stool with an open book still present at the point where the plane was allegedly supposed to strike. He claims this implies the impact/heat/fire effects described by the official narrative don’t match what’s visible.

2) Jet fuel versus materials

He repeats an argument that jet fuel can melt steel but does not burn paper, using this to claim the evidence doesn’t align with the official account of fire damage.

3) Scale and geometry don’t fit a 757

McKee claims the Pentagon facade/opening size is insufficient to accommodate a 757’s dimensions at the alleged impact angle. He also argues that major wreckage patterns (such as wings/tail impacts and large structural damage) should be present, but the scene lacks expected features.

He specifically argues that the tail and wings would have struck higher/other parts of the building than what’s shown.

4) Lack of expected “tail/wing” damage

McKee points to claims that windows weren’t broken in some areas, including an observation that foam sticking is inconsistent with extreme impact.

5) “Damage path” and flight path inconsistency with eyewitness testimony

McKee describes the Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) as interviewing witnesses who allegedly produced a flight path different from the government’s official path.

He argues that the government’s precise route is necessary to explain specific damage claims (such as five light poles being hit). If the plane wasn’t on that exact route, he says the damage sequence becomes hard to reconcile—implying staging or fabrication.

He uses multiple eyewitness accounts—especially Pentagon police officers and a witness near the Arlington National Cemetery/Naval Annex area—to claim witnesses reported the plane banking/turning right rather than traveling straight as required by the official story.

6) Security camera footage limitations

McKee argues that relevant Pentagon surveillance cameras were unavailable/turned off, leaving only limited imagery—which he claims is too poor to clearly show a 757.

7) Criticism of the light pole / taxi (Lloyd England) story

McKee disputes the account that a light pole impaled the taxi and produced specific damage inside the car. He argues the alleged damage is physically implausible based on the pole’s weight and expected impact dynamics, and he claims photos show the pole’s position/damage pattern doesn’t match what would be expected if it were struck as described.

8) Not convinced by “missile” theories (still denying a 757 impact)

McKee states he doesn’t think a missile hit the Pentagon. He claims there’s no evidence of multiple objects in flight, and that a missile explanation doesn’t match the “shape” of the damage/exit-hole logic he mentions.

Instead, he suggests the incident involved a decoy plane and/or that explosives were used inside the building, implying an inside-job framing.

9) Controlled-demolition/explosives implication

He argues that the damage sequence suggests explosives, drawing a comparison (in spirit) to demolition mechanisms. He claims jet fuel and fires alone don’t explain the observed outcomes.

10) Directed-energy weapon claims rejected

When Jimmy mentions a guest’s suggestion of direct energy weapons, McKee responds that he does not agree, saying the theory doesn’t move the debate forward given the other demolition/false-narrative arguments.

Overall Conclusion of the Segment

McKee’s core thesis is: no 757 plane hit the Pentagon. Therefore, he argues the government narrative is fabricated, involving staging and explosives, and that the Pentagon incident functioned as part of an excuse to justify war, consistent with his broader 9/11 inside-job perspective.

Presenters / Contributors

• Jimmy Dore — host
• Craig McKee — guest; presenter/arguer

Additional figures mentioned in the discussion

• Andy Steel (co-host of “911 freefall podcast”)
• Xander Arena (researcher mentioned regarding camera image analysis)
• William Legassi (witness/cited figure)
• Roosevelt Roberts (witness/cited figure)
• Lloyd England (taxi driver/cited figure in the light pole story)
• Keith Wheelhouse (witness mentioned)
• Kurt Weldon (mentioned regarding directed-energy weapons claim)