It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 Pentagon: The Mystery of the Moved Taxi

page: 22
3
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mister_Narc
Next.


Nice dissmissal.


But, your answers are pretty sketchy.

Some of the witnesses are "fabricated accounts"
The hundreds of witnesses...only one is a potential whistleblower (and of course HE is 100% believable but all the rest are not)
The missile or no missile has no explaination why it was not seen
There is one anomaly granted, with the plane scheduling (like paperwork is always 100% especially on a day of madness)
The poles were "pre-bent" and fabricated and the carried into place...which nobody saw (love that one)
Traffic jams faked
The people all around the Pentagon (hundreds of them) are all plants
The emergency crews too it seems were plants
And finally the write off of the idea...why wouldn't they just use a real plane.

Your comment of "next" certainly doesn't work, since you have not even answered a single point with anything 1) proven or 2) realistic (every witness was a plant and pre-fab poles nobody saw - LOL).

Of course the agenda being pushed is "I've proven it...next", which is far from the case. "Next" doesn't even cover the huge stretch of imagination it takes to believe every person around the Pentagon was a plant.

Try again.




posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
But, your answers are pretty sketchy.


so are the official answers. and yet, there is no need for them to be sketchy. they could SIMPLY show us a video of the plane hitting the pentagon.


Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
Some of the witnesses are "fabricated accounts"
The hundreds of witnesses...only one is a potential whistleblower (and of course HE is 100% believable but all the rest are not)


'if' the conspiracy 'theory' is true, then the government big brother machine could EASILY pull this off. i just watched 'enemy of the state', last night. everyone should watch it.

notice how one witness said, 'the plane clipped a taxi'. not, 'the plane clipped a light pole'.
notice how every second witness reports seeing 'the windows'(which are alternatively all shuttered closed, or are displaying 'faces') of the 'passenger jet', which is reportedly both 'small' and 'large', which then 'strikes the lawn', 'disappears into the building', 'cartwheels'.

if you see a jumbo jet hit the pentagon, and you are interviewed, do you think YOU would feel it RELEVENT to mention the WINDOWS? because MOST of the witnesses make a POINT of mentioning the WINDOWS and the PAINT SCHEME, or AMERICAN AIRLINES.



Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
The missile or no missile has no explaination why it was not seen


don't underestimate the power of media, people. people DID report the SOUND of a missile, and the SMELL of cordite.


Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
There is one anomaly granted, with the plane scheduling (like paperwork is always 100% especially on a day of madness)


it's maybe still CALLED paperwork, but it in fact realtime networked software. you can not print out boarding passes if there is a problem with the 'paperwork'.
and, thank you for that BOON, your highness. when i am king, i will grant ALL ANOMALIES FREEDOM!


Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZoranderThe poles were "pre-bent" and fabricated and the carried into place...which nobody saw (love that one)


nobody was around. apparently there were only TWO cars on that stretch of highway.


Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
Traffic jams faked


faked? it is easy to cause a traffic jam. I could go do it right now by simply 'stalling' my car across a lane or two on a busy freeway.


Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
The people all around the Pentagon (hundreds of them) are all plants
The emergency crews too it seems were plants


they are all complicit or compromised, that's right. if you've ever heard what a raging neocon sounds like
, this should not be seen as incredulous.


Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
And finally the write off of the idea...why wouldn't they just use a real plane.


i think they did use a real plane. probably an a3 skywarrior painted to look like an american airlines jet.


Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
Of course the agenda being pushed is "I've proven it...next", which is far from the case. "Next" doesn't even cover the huge stretch of imagination it takes to believe every person around the Pentagon was a plant.


you don't have a very big imagination, do you?



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
...people DID report the SOUND of a missile, and the SMELL of cordite.


I bet 99% of civilians couldn't really tell the sound of a missile or the smell of cordite. Sounds more like "fabricated accounts" to try and stir up anti-government sentiment. That is much more plausable a David Copperfield style illusion pulled off perfectly with the whole world watching in this day and age of the personal video camera.

The statue of liberty never did atually disappear, you know.


you don't have a very big imagination, do you?


I hope that's not sarcasm. Some members have a real problem with that. Not me however.


And since you are asking, yes I do have a big imagination. I can imagine that the whole world is like the matrix, but that doesn't make it true.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Did someone say the Matrix? *waves hand* there is no such thing.

Has anyone here tried organising a large group of people?

How did they explain blocking off the highway in advance of the attack to the 'real' bystanders so that the fictional ones could take their places?

What did they do with the 'real' lightpoles if they were taken down and replaced with pre-bent ones?

Why did they not make the taxi set, take loads of photo's and leave it, rather than risk being caught by changing things?

Why did they leave so many alleged obvious clues yet still manage to keep the broken glass in the same positions?

Has anyone here studied psychology and/or got an understanding of it?
Do you realise that witness statements are always inconsistant and varied?
How does having varied and inconsistant statements constitute evidence of a cover-up when the opposite (consistant, collaborating statements) would be more so?

Have you used computer systems? Have you worked in Government or organisations it sub-contracts too? Do you have an understanding of how reliable and accurate these systems are, not counting the glorified descriptions and statements in the media? Have you ever used or administered such a system? Do you know what the hell you're on about..?
Funnily enough errors, inconsistancies are never highlighted in real life, it's only situations like this that they really show up.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mister_Narc
Russell Pickering:


The aircraft struck 5 metal lamp poles on the way into the Pentagon. My best guess from relative comparisons in the area is that these were 25 foot poles with a 6 foot mast arm. The VDOT poles had what are referred to as the "T" style base. The "T" style base 25 foot pole with a 6 foot mast arm weighs 293 pounds (30'-357 lbs., 35'-398 lbs., 40'-492 lbs.). The industry standard shaft is high-strength steel with a minimum yield strength of 50,000 PSI; ultimate tensile strength of 70,000 PSI. The following link is worth looking at to see the illustrations and specs. Light Pole Manufacturer.




DESCRIPTION: The following two photos show the damage birds did to an AA Boeing 767. The top one is the right wing leading edge and the bottom one is near the root of the left wing (note the displacement of the panel). A bird is a 1-2 pound free-flying object, not a metal 25 foot, 293 pound lamp post attached to the ground.








Interesting stuff, but in no way does it dismiss the possibility that the pole could have caused damage to only the windshield. Scroll up to my post with the pictures of car accidents ... a minivan (which weighs significantly more than a pole) is in the windshield of a Modena without having damaged the hood or side fenders. If anything your post shows that no one can really determine what will happen in situations of extreme force unless they replicate them exactly.

STILL looking for an explanation of a lack of traffic ... no one seems to have an answer for this.

EDIT: grammar, again

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Fiverz]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz

Interesting stuff, but in no way does it dismiss the possibility that the pole could have caused damage to only the windshield. Scroll up to my post with the pictures of car accidents ... a minivan (which weighs significantly more than a pole) is in the windshield of a Modena without having damaged the hood or side fenders. If anything your post shows that no one can really determine what will happen in situations of extreme force unless they replicate them exactly.


the pole which crushed the van crushed everything that was in it's way. this would be true also of the lightpole. if it broke the windsheild, there should also be a dent AT LEAST on the corner of the hood where the pole would have come to rest. otherewise, what you have is a broken piece of glass supporting some 200 lbs. likely? possible?



Originally posted by Fiverz
STILL looking for an explanation of a lack of traffic ... no one seems to have an answer for this.


traffic access was obviously blocked to that stretch of highway, otherwise there WOULD be other cars trying to go around the 'wreck'.
there was nothing wrong with that car except a briken windshield. there was NO REASON for this guy to, a. walk home, or b. be out of work. the story STINKS of a BIG FAT LIE, and i would like to give a big shout out to my homey, nister narc for bringing up this important 'case of the FAKED EVIDENCE'.

p.s. the poles could have been knocked down with thermite, lol.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mister_Narc
Russell Pickering:


The aircraft struck 5 metal lamp poles on the way into the Pentagon. My best guess from relative comparisons in the area is that these were 25 foot poles with a 6 foot mast arm. The VDOT poles had what are referred to as the "T" style base. The "T" style base 25 foot pole with a 6 foot mast arm weighs 293 pounds (30'-357 lbs., 35'-398 lbs., 40'-492 lbs.). The industry standard shaft is high-strength steel with a minimum yield strength of 50,000 PSI; ultimate tensile strength of 70,000 PSI. The following link is worth looking at to see the illustrations and specs. Light Pole Manufacturer.


The base of the luminaire (lamp pole) is specifically designed to break away when struck.

safety.fhwa.dot.gov...

This is a federal highway regulation.

If the base will break away when struck down low by a car moving less than 100 mph, how fast will the base break away when the top is struck at over 300 mph?

How does that old saying go? "give me a lever long enough and a place to stand, and I will move the earth."

Does Russell Pickering know this?



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by Fiverz

Interesting stuff, but in no way does it dismiss the possibility that the pole could have caused damage to only the windshield. Scroll up to my post with the pictures of car accidents ... a minivan (which weighs significantly more than a pole) is in the windshield of a Modena without having damaged the hood or side fenders. If anything your post shows that no one can really determine what will happen in situations of extreme force unless they replicate them exactly.


the pole which crushed the van crushed everything that was in it's way. this would be true also of the lightpole. if it broke the windsheild, there should also be a dent AT LEAST on the corner of the hood where the pole would have come to rest. otherewise, what you have is a broken piece of glass supporting some 200 lbs. likely? possible?



Originally posted by Fiverz
STILL looking for an explanation of a lack of traffic ... no one seems to have an answer for this.


traffic access was obviously blocked to that stretch of highway, otherwise there WOULD be other cars trying to go around the 'wreck'.
there was nothing wrong with that car except a briken windshield. there was NO REASON for this guy to, a. walk home, or b. be out of work. the story STINKS of a BIG FAT LIE, and i would like to give a big shout out to my homey, nister narc for bringing up this important 'case of the FAKED EVIDENCE'.

p.s. the poles could have been knocked down with thermite, lol.


There was no pole hitting the minivan ... it was the van ITSELF that was in the windshield of the car. It looks like it managed to ride up the hood and smash into the windshield somehow. Without severely damaging the hood or surrounding body. Yes I still believe that the pole could very easily smash only the windshield. If you were to take the pole and drop it from 10 feet above directly down into the windshield (so that it's axis points from the ground to the sky) it will easily leave everything else untouched. So it is POSSIBLE it can happen in any situation. It is impossible to prove or disprove though without recreating the exact conditions, so that is all I will say on that topic.

As far as the traffic thing goes, I don't mean after the accident. Most of the eyewitness accounts stated that they were stuck in traffic when the plane flew over. You would think that there would be pictures of fender benders and cars bumper-to-bumper due to a huge plane flying into the pentagon. Think about a gaper's delay when a cop has someone pulled over on the interstate in moderate traffic. But in all the pictures I've seen so far, cars are spread out much further (in fact in the taxi pic there isn't even another car in the frame). I just find that very strange for a supposed "traffic jam". Not saying that one can build a conspiracy theory around it, but no one has been able to come up with a good explanation for that yet.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Fiverz]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz
As far as the traffic thing goes, I don't mean after the accident. Most of the eyewitness accounts stated that they were stuck in traffic when the plane flew over. You would think that there would be pictures of fender benders and cars bumper-to-bumper due to a huge plane flying into the pentagon. Think about a gaper's delay when a cop has someone pulled over on the interstate in moderate traffic. But in all the pictures I've seen so far, cars are spread out much further (in fact in the taxi pic there isn't even another car in the frame). I just find that very strange for a supposed "traffic jam". Not saying that one can build a conspiracy theory around it, but no one has been able to come up with a good explanation for that yet.


Do you mean lots of traffice like the pictures below from just after the attack? I don't see why there should be any crashes though as the traffic may have been stationary, so you'd have to be pretty stupid to floor the accelerator to go sailing into the car in front.







It's also worth noting what the photographer says on his site:


I took these pictures less then 1 minutes after I watched the american airlines 757 airplane crash into the pentagon on september 11 2001. I left shortly after the picture were taken in fear of further attacks.
www.criticalthrash.com...


I imagine many others will have done the same.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by Fiverz
As far as the traffic thing goes, I don't mean after the accident. Most of the eyewitness accounts stated that they were stuck in traffic when the plane flew over. You would think that there would be pictures of fender benders and cars bumper-to-bumper due to a huge plane flying into the pentagon. Think about a gaper's delay when a cop has someone pulled over on the interstate in moderate traffic. But in all the pictures I've seen so far, cars are spread out much further (in fact in the taxi pic there isn't even another car in the frame). I just find that very strange for a supposed "traffic jam". Not saying that one can build a conspiracy theory around it, but no one has been able to come up with a good explanation for that yet.


Do you mean lots of traffice like the pictures below from just after the attack? I don't see why there should be any crashes though as the traffic may have been stationary, so you'd have to be pretty stupid to floor the accelerator to go sailing into the car in front.







It's also worth noting what the photographer says on his site:


I took these pictures less then 1 minutes after I watched the american airlines 757 airplane crash into the pentagon on september 11 2001. I left shortly after the picture were taken in fear of further attacks.
www.criticalthrash.com...


I imagine many others will have done the same.


Excellent. I haven't seen any of those pics ... all the ones I saw had one or two vehicles in them. That's all I neeeded ... my mind is at rest



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 03:14 AM
link   
there's no one in a lot of those cars. one picture has zero people in it. one minute after, he left.
everybody left in one minute.
now, the boys on over at the cab, took a few seconds of their time to move the pole that hit the cab before the plane hit the pentagon. gotta love american ingenuity!
the pole, was only interested in the glass.
after watching a plane fly into the pentagon, the cab driver was inclined to walk home. other people feared further attacks, and left in one minute. the cab driver and the volunteeer firemen, though, thought that after moving the pole off the car with super-human effeciency and purpose, would leave the car behind, and then they dragged the other end of the pole some fifteen to twenty ft. across the pavement.

no skid marks.
not even a scratch in the paint. (sorry, i don't buy your miraculous damage line. it's not JUST the cab. it's the spools, and the window frames, and the whole face of the pentagon that do not have damage which matches the story, either. nor the 'pentalawn'. nor the 'punchout'.)



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 03:39 AM
link   
I couldn't let this one pass:


Originally posted by billybob
'if' the conspiracy 'theory' is true, then the government big brother machine could EASILY pull this off. i just watched 'enemy of the state', last night. everyone should watch it.



Enemy of the State isn't a documentary you know. It is a deeply stupid (though quite enjoyable) Hollywood blockbuster written by professional script writers who made it all up.

If you start basing your version of reality round dumb Hollywood films you are going to start believing all sorts of crap. Such as: robots from the future are trying to alter history and hunt you down...or that there are a bunch of super powered mutants living in a big house and that a man who can manipulate magnetism is trying to kill them.....or even something as stupid as the US Government launched a cruise missile at the Pentagon in broad daylight and then got hundreds of people to claim it was a passenger jet....while at the same time falisfying the deaths of all the passengers and Pentagon workers etc etc

Nah, forget that last one, it's just too silly. Even Hollywood or the scriptwriters of 24 wouldn't think of putting a scenario as outrageously unrealistic as that into one of their creations.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 04:53 AM
link   
No disrespect, but if you left your computer (and your movies) for 5 minutes and took in the real world around you and the people within it, including the way different people behave in different situations then you would not think it so strange or unlikely billy.
I highly recommend at least reading up about psychology, it's most enlightening.

[edit on 17-2-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
there was NO REASON for this guy to, a. walk home


Apart from the fact that he had witnessed and been an unwitting victim of one of the biggest crimes ever perpetrated ?! Surely the whole area around the interstate after the impact would have been a federal crime scene ? The positioning of his car, the broken lamposts and debris on the road all contained vital evidence from which investigators could piece together what happened that day.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 12:44 PM
link   
i'm certainly happy that everything is hunky dory, peachy keen in your worlds.
i, however, cannot look at hard photographic evidence, without finding the plethora of discrepencies that either don't support, or directly contradict the official lie.
i am analysing the actual visible evidence, while naysayers try and beat home the idea that it would be impossible to fake because there would be all kinds of discrepencies in the evidence, and the faking itself would be 'too hard'. well, if you worked for me i would get right in your face and shout, 'BABIES! I DON'T WANT LAME EXCUSES AND CRYBABIES WHINING, "WHANH, IT"S TOO HARD, BOOHOO", I WANT YOU TO DO IT RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEIR EYES, AND THEN MAKE THEM BELIEVE THEY SAW SOMETHING ELSE! CLEAR? YOU PEOPLE ARE THE VERY BEST. ACT LIKE IT, DAMN IT!'

hello? mcflies? if you don't think the police could be ordered to lock down the area around the pentagon, and plant a few hundred fascist zealots fake witnesses and fake the whole thing, then you have a lot less faith in the abilities of your secret service, military and police than i do.

the question then becomes, if i'm just a loon, why do you guys feel the need to team up and tell me how wrong i am? why not just leave me to bounce around the rubber room?

the evidence doesn't match the story, sorry. rail on, ostrich people.

oh yeah, and fatherlukeduke. you're wrong. they are not just movies. they are allegoric lessons. my good friend, jesus, used parables a lot to get the truth across, too.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   
If something of that scale had taken place there would be hundreds of reports of the whole thing being closed off well in advance, which it would need to have been. It's frankly just not realistic when there are far easier ways to carry out the attack realistically, like remote control planes even.
Like I've said before, think how you would organise it bearing the following in mind:

1) Plausible deniability
2) Budget
3) Resources

Number 1 being the key. Why make something so elaborate when it's not necessary? It's like you guys think you're being left clues for you to solve, I half expect the Mystery Machine to come cruising in with Scooby and the gang any minute. Yes I'm mocking you - because it's pretty stupid!
There's no point being intelligent (which I admit you are Billy, if it's any consolation) and coming up with elaborate scenarios if you lack common sense.

You have to use common sense and plausible explanations for these things otherwise you go into the realms of explaining it using the Matrix, or space aliens from another dimension did it to prevent leakage of their presence or somthing. Maybe the real Stargate was in that section and the Goa-uld (who are actually real) did it. It's not impossible, it's just not probable. Same as the whole staged idea I'm afraid.



posted on Feb, 28 2006 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz

Interesting stuff, but in no way does it dismiss the possibility that the pole could have caused damage to only the windshield. Scroll up to my post with the pictures of car accidents ... a minivan (which weighs significantly more than a pole) is in the windshield of a Modena without having damaged the hood or side fenders.



Sorry, not the same at all. That small utility vehicle looks like it reversed back into the Modena and rolled up on top into the windshield. If it was going fast enough I can understand why there wouldn't be any serious dents on the hood.



If anything your post shows that no one can really determine what will happen in situations of extreme force unless they replicate them exactly.



I guess. But I think I know what would happen. There is a greater chance the pole is going to do damage the hood, roof, and or fender. A 25 ft, 293 lb light getting hit by a supposed 757 going 350 mph is a lot more unpredictable and would be more proned to hit a lot more car than windshield.



STILL looking for an explanation of a lack of traffic ... no one seems to have an answer for this.



So am I. Been working on this one for a little while. I think it holds a key to what really happened. I think Rt 27 was closed, had detours, or specially designed traffic jams, complete with phony car accidents and the like.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

The base of the luminaire (lamp pole) is specifically designed to break away when struck.

safety.fhwa.dot.gov...

This is a federal highway regulation.

If the base will break away when struck down low by a car moving less than 100 mph, how fast will the base break away when the top is struck at over 300 mph?

How does that old saying go? "give me a lever long enough and a place to stand, and I will move the earth."

Does Russell Pickering know this?



I don't know what you're even going on about. If the pole was breakaway wouldn't that make Lloyds story even less likely to be possible. Seeing as how fast the pole would be traveling.

Regardless of being a break-away or not. It was bolted to the ground. It was attached to the earth. Unlike the '1-2 lb free flying object'. It's a 293 lb opposing force. 5 of them. And no damage to the wings, And a big ol' honkin' generator trailer. And there was no engine left over, only a generator trailer move a few feet to the right.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 01:01 AM
link   
This:




Is CLOSE to being represented here:



From here:
eric.bart.free.fr...


But is better represented here:


photobucket.com...


Which contradicts this:





...the cameraman would be behind the stone wall and the bushes.



posted on Mar, 1 2006 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
This:




Is CLOSE to being represented here:



From here:
eric.bart.free.fr...


But is better represented here:


photobucket.com...


Which contradicts this:





...the cameraman would be behind the stone wall and the bushes.





I was searching on a few related 911 tpics and found this earlier today www.abovetopsecret.com...

Who is that random guy? Did he predict the disinformation three years ago?

Thats f-ed up.




top topics



 
3
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join