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: 23
3
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Even if it was moved, is the taxi still not just a taxi?
Another thing, how many reasons can one think of for reasons to move the taxi?
I mean, c'mon man, there must have been emergency vehicles all over the place, right?
Perhaps the taxi was moved to allow passage to these emergency vehicles??
I'm sure, that in all of the chaos, there must have been traffic accidents, and the like all around the area at that time.
Also,it is not clear to me, the reasons for this scrutiny of the taxi in the first place.
Is there an inconsistendy in some government provided photos, compared to photos taken by a bystander, or is there an inconsistency between photos taken by two indepentent sources, or have the pictures in question been taken by the same photographer?
I was browsing this thread late last night, and some things got me wondering, just curious.




posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 01:46 AM
link   
I still find it amusing that there are these apparant glaring inconsistancies, yet you can see in some of the photos that the broken glass is in the same positions.



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 01:58 AM
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:


[...]


Which contradicts this:


[...]


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




Not really, as you can see from this image, the red lines representing the actual view as in the screenshot, placing the cameraman to the right of the wall and the green ones representing what you are suggesting.



[edit on 2-3-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by agent Wsmith

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.



Hmm gee.


Well then I must be NSA then.



What a load of crapola.


"Predicted"?

I would more say he inserted his opinion back in 2003 when all this had already be surfacing.



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by larry994
Even if it was moved, is the taxi still not just a taxi?




Yes. With little damage from a 25 ft, 293 lb light pole that was supposedly hit by a 757 going 350 mph and driver who is lying about what happened.



Another thing, how many reasons can one think of for reasons to move the taxi?



I can think of only one. The scene was staged and they were moving the taxi trying to get different photo angles, maybe the trajectory straight. Maybe the cab is digitally moved which would implicate the photographer, Geoff Metcalf, a former Green Beret. But the video shot clearly shows a guardrail in front of them and not bushes and stonewall.



I mean, c'mon man, there must have been emergency vehicles all over the place, right?



Sure, eventually.


Perhaps the taxi was moved to allow passage to these emergency vehicles??



Oh right. And the pole too. And they only moved it a few line stripes up, but still left it in the middle of Rt 27. Why not move it to the shoulder? Why not move the pole off the road? And if he could move it, why did he leave it and walk home?




I'm sure, that in all of the chaos, there must have been traffic accidents, and the like all around the area at that time.


Oddly only before. Some near close calls supposedly when it happened. But no car accidents as it happened. There were abnormal traffic jams, a supposedly stalled Jeep Cherokee, and an accident where a person had a diabetic reaction and hit a bunch of cars *before* the Pentagon strike.



Also,it is not clear to me, the reasons for this scrutiny of the taxi in the first place.



Did you read the account from the survivor fund? Read it again and then look at the photos.


Is there an inconsistendy in some government provided photos, compared to photos taken by a bystander, or is there an inconsistency between photos taken by two indepentent sources, or have the pictures in question been taken by the same photographer?


Yes. The photos by Geoff Metcalf are the earliest shots after this happened. Then there is the photo on the grass, I don't know who took that. That shows the taxi moved. So does the video/video still. So maybe Geoff Metcalf was in on the staged photo-op and the other photographers came after it was moved and got the trajectory shots, which they needed the taxi to be in. Or maybe the other photographers/cameraman were in on it also.



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   
How come you've logged into your other account Merc? Is it so you can ignore the fact you made a false statement as 'Merc_the_Perp', you're doing a very good job.
Perhaps you could address the angles, allow me to refresh your memory:


Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
This:

[...]

Is CLOSE to being represented here:

[...]

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


But is better represented here:


[...]


Which contradicts this:


[...]


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




Not really, as you can see from this image, the red lines representing the actual view as in the screenshot, placing the cameraman to the right of the wall and the green ones representing what you are suggesting.




Ironically you'd make an excellent politician, with your ducking and diving.
I especially like how you use your alternative posting account as a smoke screen hoping that your boo-boo will get forgotten, reminds me of press releases designed to obscure whenever something bad for the Government makes the news.

[edit on 2-3-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 09:39 AM
link   
That doesn't prove anything expect that you're handy with photoshop.

And your green lines prove it is not possible to get that shot with the taxi behind the bushes.

Thanks for your contribution.

[edit on 2-3-2006 by Merc_the_Perp]



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   
You realise you said:


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


and now say:


And your green lines prove it is not possible to get that shot with the taxi behind the bushes.


Or is the chopping and changing between your alternate accounts confusing you? Never mind, at least you agree with me now you were wrong.

EDIT:

Oh I do apologise, I misunderstood, you were pointing out that your version of the overhead shot matched better than the other guy's. Well I can see why you would say that as his fits the evidence at hand - so of course a modified one which appears to throw the evidence in disrepute was required so you nobly stepped forward. Word up dude...


I don't fight you because I'm working for or on the side of the New World Order, I just refuse to let the world fall to such a bunch of ninnys who are just as bad as what they claim to be fighting.
The problem is that the majority of people I've seen on both sides (including myself), and with an exception of a very small number of people, are all the epitome of human nature at it's worst. You are as willing to deceive and mislead people as easily as the people you claim to be protecting us from. You and the majority of humans deserve everything that's coming to you, it's a shame that there are a significant number that won't deserve it.

[edit on 2-3-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
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.


says you.


they made up september 11th/1940 as the bad guy's date of birth, too(coincidentally, 9/11/1945 was the groundbreaking ceremony for the buiding of the pentagon, a masonic symbol of protection). the wife banter/television ambient info is constantly discussing about the onset of FASCIST laws which UNDERMINE THE CONSTITUTION TAKING AWAY BASIC RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS based on recent TERRORISM.

did you know that ronald reagan sat beside steven speilberg watching 'close encounters of the third kind', and turned to him and said something like, 'you don't know how close to the truth this is'. i wonder if he doesn't know.

i WOULD buy the idea that scriptwriters are remote viewing the future as a whacky theory. i find it easier to believe the illuminati makes it happen, somehow, as part of one of their 'rules', ie. you have to show the people what you're plan is. i think this may be in concordance with some higher karmic universal law that our programmers and controllers don't want to mess with.



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
You realise you said:


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


and now say:


And your green lines prove it is not possible to get that shot with the taxi behind the bushes.


Or is the chopping and changing between your alternate accounts confusing you? Never mind, at least you agree with me now you were wrong.

EDIT:

Oh I do apologise, I misunderstood, you were pointing out that your version of the overhead shot matched better than the other guy's. Well I can see why you would say that as his fits the evidence at hand - so of course a modified one which appears to throw the evidence in disrepute was required so you nobly stepped forward. Word up dude...


I don't fight you because I'm working for or on the side of the New World Order, I just refuse to let the world fall to such a bunch of ninnys who are just as bad as what they claim to be fighting.
The problem is that the majority of people I've seen on both sides (including myself), and with an exception of a very small number of people, are all the epitome of human nature at it's worst. You are as willing to deceive and mislead people as easily as the people you claim to be protecting us from. You and the majority of humans deserve everything that's coming to you, it's a shame that there are a significant number that won't deserve it.

[edit on 2-3-2006 by AgentSmith]



Right Comprehendo.

That's what this meant...


Is CLOSE to being represented



Once again you've proven what a great detective you are.

Stop trying so hard. If you want my autograph just ask for it. There is no need to stalk me.



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I just handed out a bunch of unilateral big-quote warnings in this thread.

We don't need multiple duplications of the same content over and over again. Please be mindful of what and how much you quote.

Thanks.



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
Stop trying so hard. If you want my autograph just ask for it. There is no need to stalk me.


Oh I'm sorry, I thought I was here like 3 years before you! My apologies.
Is everyone that doesn't agree with you a stalker, or are you just suffering some sort of delusion about your popularity?

I'm still wondering why you said that the photo would have to be taken from behind the bush when it didn't? You seem to be avoiding this at all costs - please explain. Why is your version which doesn't fit in with evidence the accurate representation but the one that does fit in with the evidence wrong? Is it because it doesn't entertain your ideas? Do you have to make things up to try and prove your point? Doesn't having to do so make your point null and void?

[edit on 2-3-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 02:35 PM
link   
you guys need to give up the skepticism on the pentagon crash, seriously. My brother was coming out of arlington national cementary on that morning and witnessed the plane come in and hit the pentagon. I doubt the gov got to him to and brainwashed him haha. Sorry guys but no matter what footage you show me, ill zstick to what my brother saw.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Truth_is_undeniable
you guys need to give up the skepticism on the pentagon crash, seriously. My brother was coming out of arlington national cementary on that morning and witnessed the plane come in and hit the pentagon. I doubt the gov got to him to and brainwashed him haha. Sorry guys but no matter what footage you show me, ill zstick to what my brother saw.


well, not really. unless you can show pictures or video. 'you' are just a couple words on a discussion forum, and your brother is even further removed from verifiable reality, from my standpoint.

sceptic overlord's brother saw it, too. same thing. (no offence intended, SO, this is pure logic).

can you get your brother to join up and tell us exactly what he saw? did he see light posts get knocked over? did he see the other jet? the helicopter? the taxi? the traffic jam? the reaction of the people? a real eyewitness would be great, here.

(visions of serpo dance through my head)

[edit on 13-3-2006 by billybob]



posted on Mar, 27 2006 @ 10:12 PM
link   
This thread is so crazy.

There's too much that does not ring true.

Take this:



Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp


"For most of my drive I had been totally focused on my radio and was extremely aware of the events that were unfolding in New York. Even though the radio reporters were cautious, I was already convinced from the first strike that it was not just an unfortunate pilot error." "Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road (Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station that I never knew was there. My first thought was 'Oh My God, this must be World War III!' "In that split second, my brain flooded with adrenaline and I watched everything play out in ultra slow motion, I saw the plane coming in slow motion toward my car and then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport. In the nano-second that the plane was directly over the cars in front of my car, the plane seemed to be not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me. It was far enough in front of me that I saw the end of the wing closest to me and the underside of the other wing as that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground. I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes. And I remember thinking that it was just like planes in which I had flown many times but at that point it never occurred to me that this might be a plane with passengers."

--Penny Elgas north on I-395 to DC, "stuck in late morning rush hour traffic -- almost in front of the Pentagon"


Penny Elgas sits on the FDIC Advisory Committee on Banking Policy, alongside of Jean Baker, who just happens to be the Chief of Staff at the Office of President George H.W. Bush.

Funny thing about Peggy Elgas





Try that "Funny thing" link Merc gave above.


This woman closely linked to Bush claims she had a piece of flight 77 land INSIDE her car.

Did any other witnesses report being showered by debris? No.

But this woman reckons a piece of the plane ended up on her back seat because it fell through the SUNROOF.

How big is a sunroof? It was a bullseye dropped from a plane flying by at 400mph.

The one piece of plane falling from the air goes straight through her sunroof without her even noticing at the time.

Not only that but she claims it was from damage caused by the plane hitting a streetlight (funny it's not mentioned above).

If she is talking about the Taxi Driver's streetlight (the one that only damages windscreens and planes, but not cars bodywork) her sunroof, like the taxi and the streetlight must have been under exactly the same trajectory as the plane.

Quite an amazing coincidence would you say?

What did she do with the bit of plane? Did she hand it straight in to the authorities? No. She made a "patriotic box" for it and gave it to the National Museum of National History.


Now who really believes this story?



The link again (includes photos):

americanhistory.si.edu...

And the story:

Driving on a highway adjacent to the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, Penny Elgas stopped as she saw a passenger jet descend, clip a light pole near her, and then crash into the Pentagon. Arriving home, Elgas found this plane fragment in the back seat of her car (she theorizes that it dropped through the open sunroof). Feeling that it was her patriotic duty to preserve the fragment as a relic, she crafted a special box and lined it with red, white, and blue material.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
important thread.

i'm a bumpin' it in hopes some who haven't seen it will now read it.

there is a movie, now, by CIT called 'the first known accomplice?'....


Google Video Link



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 08:38 PM
link   
If we only knew then how relevant and this thread would end up being.

Thanks for the bump and update for everyone Billy!



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
The taxi driver admitted off camera he was involved in the 9/11 scam. This particular topic is debunked. And other savage blow to the 9/11 official story. If we can't debunk 9/11 with evidence like this, then we're dealing with egos that are well and truly fixed in their place which is entirely different and irrelevant to the subject matter.


www.youtube.com...


Taxi driver admits involvement in 9/11. Debunked.

It may seem like a very blunt conclusion, but if somebody wants to prove me wrong, please do. I'll go wherever the facts take me.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 01:36 AM
link   
a reply to: IrnBruFiend

I saw the YouTube video earlier this evening, then found this thread to find out what the North vs East approach was all about.

After reading the first few and last pages of this thread I opened Google Earth... (I realize some of you will say the government made Google alter the satellite images and Google-Car images - Oh well, some people are just set in their ways).

On Google Earth I noticed that the stonewall on the bridge is not straight at all - it has a gradual curve (like a crescent) which bends the wall away from the metal guardrail at every corner of the bridge.

...This is how in the video screengrab (showing the taxi-cab almost head-on) you can see the back of the guardrail, but not the stonewall (which curves away before that point).

Now my personal opinion is that the old man (Lloyde England?) is either going senile or was winding-up the YouTube "interviewer". He and his cab were on the bridge the whole time and never moved.


As for the damage sustained: there appears to be a smallish dent on the driver side near the bottom of the A pillar. He did say the light pole would've gone right through anyone in the back or the passenger seat. We've - sorry, I've - never seen the inside of his cab, so there could be major damage inside. (Pure speculation: if the light pole pierced the floor it could've broken the driveshaft or gone right through the rear seat base and smashed the differential. Either way would make it undriveable and would solve the riddle of the lightpole's "missing kinetic energy".)

Note: ignore the 3D geometry that Google has "extrapolated" for the bridge stonewalls/sides - it is straight, wheras the satellite image and panoramic images clearly show are curved.




posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 06:55 AM
link   
a reply to: KissMyWookiee



Now my personal opinion is that the old man (Lloyde England?) is either going senile or was winding-up the YouTube "interviewer". He and his cab were on the bridge the whole time and never moved.

What ? You mean conspiracy believers have misinterpreted or fabricated evidence?
I'm floored! Let me catch my breath!

If you take each nuance of 911 that believers say is proof, some person had to fake it.
The cab 1 person.
Each piece of the plane planted around the Pentagon 20 people.
Every driver on the expressway who saw the plane 50 people. (How were they there at the same time?)
The planted engines and landing gears 20 people.
The list goes on and on.
And no one has talked after 13 years.

Hell the president can't get a BJ in the oval office without congress finding out. And that only involved 2 people.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join