IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

What Brought Down The Light Poles?, merged

GaryR55
post May 26 2008, 02:12 PM
Post #1





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 2
Joined: 26-May 08
Member No.: 3,440



I have no issues or quarrel with the evidence showing the Pentagon was not hit by a plane, but by a missile delivered by a plane that overflew the Pentagon. However, I'm still confused as to what downed the five light poles if it wasn't the plane or, I assume, the missile, either. Obviously, something brought those light poles down. What was it?

Gary
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
9 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
grizz
post May 26 2008, 02:42 PM
Post #2


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



Welcome to the forum, GaryR55.

Though is is pretty clear that the Pentagon was not hit by a plane, the missile theory is quite inconclusive.

For the latest on the light poles, refer to this thread:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=9632
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Killtown
post May 26 2008, 03:28 PM
Post #3





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 170
Joined: 10-May 08
Member No.: 3,317



QUOTE (GaryR55 @ May 26 2008, 01:12 PM) *
what downed the five light poles if it wasn't the plane or, I assume, the missile, either. Obviously, something brought those light poles down. What was it?

These:

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SPreston
post May 26 2008, 03:50 PM
Post #4


Patriotic American


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 518
Joined: 14-May 07
From: Where I am standing on the RUINS of the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY
Member No.: 1,045



QUOTE (GaryR55)
What Brought Down The Light Poles?

A few FBI agents and/or Secret Service agents working under cover of darkness the night before. Since the Secret Service had the Pentagon area all wrapped up for the Presidential visits, they had to know about it, since the light poles were within their security area and jurisdiction. Nobody could possibly be working within their secured area without their permission; not even the FBI.

The FBI under Director Robert Mueller
\

This post has been edited by SPreston: May 26 2008, 03:55 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GaryR55
post May 26 2008, 05:49 PM
Post #5





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 2
Joined: 26-May 08
Member No.: 3,440



Thanks, guys. That's pretty much what I suspected. Either that, or small charges planted in the pole bases to knock them down on cue.

Gary
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Killtown
post May 26 2008, 05:56 PM
Post #6





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 170
Joined: 10-May 08
Member No.: 3,317



QUOTE (GaryR55 @ May 26 2008, 04:49 PM) *
or small charges planted in the pole bases to knock them down on cue.

I think if that happened, blast residue would be seen on the base of the poles.

What did it for me to think the poles were simply laid down by hand was we are told they were knocked down from a plane going a whopping 530mph. Imagine what the grass would look like from the force of these pole knocked down by a 530mph object. You would think you'd see noticeable indentations in the soft grass/ground from when the heavy metal light poles struck it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Leslie Landry
post May 26 2008, 08:36 PM
Post #7





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,107
Joined: 2-May 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,264



Heres my question...why would they want to ripe out 5 light poles for no reason...and make people believe that the "plane" didnt go exactly from the flight path mentioned? what do you believe their reasoning behind this is?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SPreston
post May 26 2008, 10:43 PM
Post #8


Patriotic American


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 518
Joined: 14-May 07
From: Where I am standing on the RUINS of the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY
Member No.: 1,045



QUOTE (Leslie Landry)
Heres my question...why would they want to ripe out 5 light poles for no reason...and make people believe that the "plane" didnt go exactly from the flight path mentioned? what do you believe their reasoning behind this is?

What plane? The light poles were removed the night before and replaced with prepared light poles to set the stage and convince the suspicious and unwary and foolish that an aircraft actually flew down the hill and actually hit the light poles and actually hit the Pentagon. But the 9-11 planners dared not use a real aircraft because it might crash and burn before it reached its target or miss its target entirely or fail to create enough damage and destruction to eliminate the targeted Pentagon personnel and records. Why would a hijacker attempt a difficult 535 mph crash through the light poles and into the 1st floor at a reinforced area, when he could easily crash the aircraft into the unreinforced roof and accomplish 10 times the damage and deaths?

But the actual decoy aircraft is now proven over the Navy Annex and this official Flight 77 FDR flight path is proven impossible and could not have happened. All the damage and destruction and deaths inside the Pentagon were accomplished with planted explosives and planted evidence and planted witnesses with scripts and the American people were conned.

The Decoy Aircraft flight path that does work, assembled from all the CIT eyewitnesses. (click photo)


Edward Paik sloppily drew the flight path on a clipboard outside in the A-One Auto lot same as my flight path


Edward Paik starts at 68:10
http://www.megavideo.com/v/EYQHPMS80c98689...a8.5599820962.0

Sorry. From over the Navy Annex, this official flight path is just downright IMPOSSIBLE.


All Arlington County eyewitnesses please come forward and describe to the American people what you saw.


This post has been edited by SPreston: May 26 2008, 10:47 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Leslie Landry
post May 26 2008, 11:30 PM
Post #9





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,107
Joined: 2-May 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,264



QUOTE (SPreston @ May 26 2008, 10:43 PM) *
What plane?


I understand the plane used is in question, that is why i wrote it like this "plane" tongue.gif. Thank you for giving me your thought on my question. I have my own thoughts...i just wanted to hear what people had to say about it.

I really believe that a plane did fly by the pentagon. Do i believe it hit it? no. with the damaged that was caused, it is impossible...at least not the plane that they claimed to have hit it.

This post has been edited by Leslie Landry: May 26 2008, 11:39 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post May 27 2008, 12:04 AM
Post #10



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (Leslie Landry @ May 26 2008, 06:36 PM) *
Heres my question...why would they want to ripe out 5 light poles for no reason...and make people believe that the "plane" didnt go exactly from the flight path mentioned? what do you believe their reasoning behind this is?

Hi Leslie,

Regarding "why" the perps would want to- I believe that would be related to the [WTC, but misdirection works worldwide] post at:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=12538
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
KP50
post May 27 2008, 05:03 AM
Post #11



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 843
Joined: 14-May 07
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 1,044



QUOTE (Leslie Landry @ May 27 2008, 12:36 PM) *
Heres my question...why would they want to ripe out 5 light poles for no reason...and make people believe that the "plane" didnt go exactly from the flight path mentioned? what do you believe their reasoning behind this is?


Here are my thoughts. They needed 4 plane crashes but no wreckage - other than in carefully leaked photos. Take a look at the Pentagon and check out where you can crash a jet (or simulate a crash) with no wreckage on view. It has to be the bottom 2 stories as anywhere else will have wreckage showing between the rings. To be low enough to hit the Pentagon there, it has to take out the light poles.

Staging the light poles is so far-fetched an idea as to convince many doubters that there must have been a plane - it even convinces a few who claim it was an inside job.

So why didn't the plane fly right over the staged flightpath? To avoid there being any witnesses who saw it clearly too high to hit the light poles. Everyone still saw a plane and the inconsistencies in tales could be attributed to the trauma of the event.

Just my New Zealand 2 cents worth.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Leslie Landry
post May 27 2008, 08:54 AM
Post #12





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,107
Joined: 2-May 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,264



QUOTE (KP50 @ May 27 2008, 04:03 AM) *
Here are my thoughts. They needed 4 plane crashes but no wreckage - other than in carefully leaked photos. Take a look at the Pentagon and check out where you can crash a jet (or simulate a crash) with no wreckage on view. It has to be the bottom 2 stories as anywhere else will have wreckage showing between the rings. To be low enough to hit the Pentagon there, it has to take out the light poles.

Staging the light poles is so far-fetched an idea as to convince many doubters that there must have been a plane - it even convinces a few who claim it was an inside job.

So why didn't the plane fly right over the staged flightpath? To avoid there being any witnesses who saw it clearly too high to hit the light poles. Everyone still saw a plane and the inconsistencies in tales could be attributed to the trauma of the event.

Just my New Zealand 2 cents worth.


Very Interesting Idea. Why do you think they didnt just "set Up" the Poles in the path they were intending to take?
Also...are there any witnesses to seeing these poles out before hand? there Had to of been. I know Where i live..the moment something like is seen..we have every person driving by, calling the police reporting what they seen.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ricochet
post May 27 2008, 11:54 AM
Post #13





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 746
Joined: 25-April 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,225



QUOTE
calling the police reporting what they seen.


People are funny that way. Out of all the "eyewitness" accounts of seeing an airplane crash into a building, not one of them claims to have called 911 on their cellphone or landline to report it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Leslie Landry
post May 27 2008, 12:53 PM
Post #14





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,107
Joined: 2-May 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,264



QUOTE (Ricochet @ May 27 2008, 11:54 AM) *
People are funny that way. Out of all the "eyewitness" accounts of seeing an airplane crash into a building, not one of them claims to have called 911 on their cellphone or landline to report it.


Just a question, how do you know they never called 911? do you mean just from the eyewitness statements you have read?

I as well have not read in statements that they called 911 but this information could have just been left out as in the statements i have read...they seem to edit most of it out and only put in a few lines for each person.

If the poles were knocked out during the night..that means those people who drove past would have saw this. No one reported the poles being damaged from hours before? was the road closed off from the night before?

This post has been edited by Leslie Landry: May 27 2008, 12:57 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SPreston
post May 27 2008, 01:02 PM
Post #15


Patriotic American


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 518
Joined: 14-May 07
From: Where I am standing on the RUINS of the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY
Member No.: 1,045



QUOTE (Leslie Landry)
Very Interesting Idea. Why do you think they didnt just "set Up" the Poles in the path they were intending to take?

Because the staged light poles are set up along the path they prepared inside the Pentagon. At some time, the 9-11 planners had to determine the path their official Flight 77 757 aircraft flown by official patsy Hani Hanjour would take. They had a nice open pathway free of tall buildings between I-395 and Columbia Pike. So they chose that flight path and designed the explosives and damage path on the exterior and interior of the Pentagon to match it. They determined that there would be five light poles within the wingspan of that flight path, so they determined to have them 'knocked down' by the wings to strengthen the psyops CON.

Nice wide open flight path between the Navy Annex and I-395. Perfect place for a CON. (Click photo)


QUOTE (KP50)
To be low enough to hit the Pentagon there, it has to take out the light poles.

Staging the light poles is so far-fetched an idea as to convince many doubters that there must have been a plane - it even convinces a few who claim it was an inside job.

So why didn't the plane fly right over the staged flightpath? To avoid there being any witnesses who saw it clearly too high to hit the light poles. Everyone still saw a plane and the inconsistencies in tales could be attributed to the trauma of the event.


The 9-11 planners faked the official flight path and the official FDR loop southwest of the Pentagon. They also faked the FDR and the 84 RADES data 4 years later. They totally had the MSM under their thumb. No problem. A done deal. Another CON of the American people. They did not expect anybody to start up a private investigation.

Then they flew the actual decoy aircraft over the Navy Annex on a roughly parallel flight path just four hundred or so feet north of the official flight path, so there would be lots of witnesses to an aircraft flying low near the Pentagon. Any actual south-side witnesses would see the actual aircraft flying a little bit higher and a little bit farther away and be fooled. The Hollywood special effects explosions would convince them the aircraft had hit the wall. If any remembered otherwise, then the FBI already on scene could have a stern talk with them or even 'disappear' them if necessary. You don't think OUR government would 'disappear' people for National Security reasons? The 9-11 planners had their FBI prepped and onsite ready to confiscate any evidentiary videos and photos to maintain the CON and of course they had their good old reliable MSM 'witnesses' there with their prepared scripts. No problemo, except for those danged citizens who could not keep their noses in their own business.

Faked FDR loop which never happened. (Click photo for the flight path which really happened)




This post has been edited by SPreston: May 27 2008, 02:24 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SPreston
post May 27 2008, 01:18 PM
Post #16


Patriotic American


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 518
Joined: 14-May 07
From: Where I am standing on the RUINS of the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY
Member No.: 1,045



QUOTE (Leslie Landry)
Just a question, how do you know they never called 911? do you mean just from the eyewitness statements you have read?

I as well have not read in statements that they called 911 but this information could have just been left out as in the statements i have read...they seem to edit most of it out and only put in a few lines for each person.

If the poles were knocked out during the night..that means those people who drove past would have saw this. No one reported the poles being damaged from hours before? was the road closed off from the night before?

It does not matter whether witnesses called 9-11 or did not, because the FBI confiscated all Arlington County 9-11 call-ins and transcripts (here) for 9-11 and 9-12-2001 and probably later. Those have never been released to the public. So we will likely never know who called in and did not call in unless CIT accidentally discovers them.

All the light poles


The Pentagon area was under Secret Service security for the Presidential visits on 9-10 and 9-11-2001. As you can see, some of the poles on the grass were not very visible from the road. They could have been covered with a green tarp. Or unloaded from a white van when needed. Or hidden behind a wall. If you were driving through there at night seeing signs warning you not to stop, would you have noticed light poles apparently missing from their positions and called it in in the early dark morning hours? Who would you have called? 911? The Pentagon? The FBI? The Secret Service? The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) who takes care of the light poles? Would there have been somebody there at 4 in the morning? Why would you care? Surely VDOT could handle it without public interference. They are just light poles.

This post has been edited by SPreston: May 27 2008, 01:27 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JackD
post May 27 2008, 02:40 PM
Post #17





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 295
Joined: 13-November 06
Member No.: 238



All the light poles



three possibilities emerge about the poles

1) they were in fact knocked down by wings or fuselage of a plane....
... arguments against: the bases appear plasma-cut, not jagged and sheared, the tops are bent over oddly, pinched.

2) they were planted on the site.
arguments against... too many people would notice.. takes big conspiracy.. etc.
esp lloyd england cab pole (pole #1) -- which is in the middle of the road.. the other poles were at least off the road where theyd be less visiblie

3) third scenario: called "plane crash simulation drill at west side of pentagon" -- poles and lloyd's cab were part of a high-fidelity crash simulation drill of plane-into-building.. the NRO was running, in fact, a plane-into-building drill that morning at its facilities...
this creates a plausible reason for having props, actors, lloyd, cab, etc at the scene... smoky burning trailer outside... etc.
there is no other direct evidence for "pentagon drill goes live" but it does provide a rationale for the staging of equipment, etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Leslie Landry
post May 27 2008, 03:16 PM
Post #18





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,107
Joined: 2-May 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,264



QUOTE (SPreston @ May 27 2008, 01:18 PM) *
It does not matter whether witnesses called 9-11 or did not


All i was saying is if there was witnesses to this..you would think there would be reports made.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Killtown
post May 27 2008, 03:26 PM
Post #19





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 170
Joined: 10-May 08
Member No.: 3,317



QUOTE (JackD @ May 27 2008, 01:40 PM) *
All the light poles

They look laid down. If a 530mph object knocked them down, the poles would have make gashes in the grass. But after all, it is the Penta-Lawn!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Leslie Landry
post May 27 2008, 11:42 PM
Post #20





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,107
Joined: 2-May 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,264



QUOTE (JackD @ May 27 2008, 02:40 PM) *
3) third scenario: called "plane crash simulation drill at west side of pentagon" -- poles and lloyd's cab were part of a high-fidelity crash simulation drill of plane-into-building.. the NRO was running, in fact, a plane-into-building drill that morning at its facilities...
this creates a plausible reason for having props, actors, lloyd, cab, etc at the scene... smoky burning trailer outside... etc.
there is no other direct evidence for "pentagon drill goes live" but it does provide a rationale for the staging of equipment, etc.


Thats definently a great point and makes alot of sense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd November 2019 - 01:35 PM