More Mutating Claims

I have always found the "Anti-Missle Defenses at the Pentagon" argument to be an interesting example of truther logic, that something must be true based entirely on their emphatic belief in it. So much that I actually wrote a short paper on the subject. Now it becomes a perfect example of the way their claims mutate, start out in one form and are repeated until things are added. This is from a letter to the BBC from John A. Blacker, a member of the "Scholars" for 9/11 "Truth", who is supposedly suing the Beeb for... I am not quite sure what his legal basis is, but he wants to sue them regardless. Anyway, he attacks the BBC for leaving out this important piece of "information":

No mention the Pentagon had missile batteries which should shoot down any aircraft that is unauthorised entering its airspace, and that both the outer and inner systems failed to activate – yet you interviewed the actual transport plane pilot who knew full well the Pentagon was missile armed and mentioned nothing of this when referring to what he claimed he observed.

Outer and inner systems? There is no evidence whatsoever that these defenses exist, and now he has magically found out that there are two levels of non-existent defenses. And how does he know that the pilot knows about the defenses? Hundreds of planes fly into DC every day, and yet they have never produced a single pilot with any knowledge of air defenses at the Pentagon, not even from the nutter group "Pilots for 9/11 Truth". Are we to believe that they are keeping silent about this too?