The downed light poles at the Pentagon were staged in advance.

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 19 2007 @ 12:21 AM
link   
The downed light poles at the Pentagon are arguably the most convincing evidence that a 757 caused the physical damage that day.

But now that we know the plane was on the north side of the CITGO station it is clear that they got there somehow else.

This is compounded by the fact that it is physically impossible for Lloyd England's story to be true.

This may seem like a complex task but it would actually be quite simple for the suspect in question to accomplish.

First realize that the area is the literal backyard of the suspect and one of the most highly secured areas in the nation.

It's right by the heliport where the President travels from quite often and in fact he had left from there the day before and was scheduled to return there that afternoon!


Heliport firefighter Allan Wallace:


Our first helicopter flight was around 10AM. But we were expecting President George W. Bush to land in Marine One around 12 Noon, returning from Jacksonville, Florida. (He had actually left from the Pentagon the day before.) Needless to say, neither flight arrived at the Pentagon that day because of the terrorist attacks.
source


This means that they had all the excuse they needed to "secure" the area in preparation for his arrival and this would even be quite routine and expected for the people in the area since the President travels from there regularly.


The poles could have been removed in the middle of the night on any night prior to the event in what could have been made to look like regular late night road work.

Then the pre-fabricated damaged poles could be put in place perhaps at 4:00am on 9/11 or even later in the day while they were "securing" the area for the President's scheduled arrival.

4 of the 5 poles were hidden off to the side on the grass.


I'll address pole 1 in a bit.

There isn't a reason that any of them would cause a reason for alarm or notice by any of the morning rush hour traffic even if they could be seen.

Pole 2 was completely hidden and poles 4 and 5 were down on slopes.

They were all on Pentagon property/jurisdiction/control which could have been on serious lock down due to the President's scheduled arrival.



But the bottom line is that EVEN IF someone did happen to see a pole on the ground and remember and EVEN IF they put 2 and 2 together after the fact and called the FBI obviously nothing would have happened.

But they most likely would NOT put 2 and 2 together because the light poles were an insignificant tiny blip on the most historically tragic day in U.S. history.

The average public has absolutely no clue about the light poles at all and even many in the movement aren't aware of them.

The poles have not been covered in a single official report either.

This seemingly impossible scenario to stage would have been child's play to do in their own backyard for the same perpetrators who pulled off a covert triple controlled demolition in downtown Manhattan.

Light pole one was likely staged after the fact and a detailed photographic look into this scene is available here.


But as a summary the possibly pre-damaged cab could have been towed or driven to it's spot where they partially blocked traffic and placed it. Minutes later feds rolled up and surrounded the area and completely blocked traffic.

These images show you how much control they had of the scene after blocking traffic and surrounding the area as well as how the cars on the other side of the highway going northbound wouldn't see anything because of the HOV lane that was already closed and had two sets of guardrails:





These images were all taken within 17 minutes maximum after the event. Traffic was already completely blocked and the entire scene was controlled.

They could have done anything they wanted and it wouldn't matter because the Pentagon was burning and nobody would care or notice the feds and the cab and the pole even if they could see them. But they can't.

Pole 1 could have been pulled from the shoulder, maybe from behind the bush, over the guardrail from the other side, or even unloaded from a truck all in about 30 seconds.

We do know it was moved before all these images were taken due to the scratch on the road:


This plain clothed federal agent with the red tie who was likely driving the white Saturn was a central figure in this scene:



The notion that the poles were blown with explosives or knocked down by the vortex of a second plane or a missile is simply not possible primarily due to the physical damage of the poles revealing that they were somehow pinched at the top:




This could not have happened from explosives or the vortex of anything.

But it could have been easily pre-fabricated in advance:



Compare the damage to this same style "break-away" base of a pole from the same area that was blown over by wind to pole #4's base:


The 9/11 base is perfectly symmetrical and sooty as if it were removed with a torch while the wind blown base is more random like you would expect if it were broken by a sudden force like wind or a 90 ton jet.





























[edit on 19-10-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]




posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 12:54 AM
link   
I am currently studying pole 1.. very very closely. I'll let you know if my simple mind can spot something.



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Here's some things you've probably looked at and thats all you needed to do, but I'm just bringing these up since I don't have the answers to them.

Pictures DSC_0421

1. Look at the reflections on the car. Hopefully that will tell you something somewhere.

2. You'll notice, I think, that the scratch on the road goes BEHIND Lloyd's cab and that would've been a long drag to put that.

and

Picture DSC_0420

1. See the scratching starting to curve upward towards the back of Lloyd's car.

2. Severed Lightpole.. maybe penched like your others may have been.

Its getting late right now, but this is a few that I just wanted to bring out.

[edit on 23-10-2007 by BigMoser]



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 07:06 AM
link   
What's the actual point of this conspiracy theory? The government created an elaborate plan to locate the plane on the other side of a gas station and scatter some broken light poles on the ground, for... what exactly?

edit: By the way, this is how any piece of metal tubing breaks when it's bent past it's limit.



[edit on 10/23/2007 by mythatsabigprobe]



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 08:42 AM
link   
The jaws of life give a very straight cut, possibly curved depending on the exact tool used - in either case it is very uniform and not at all like the break in the tubular steel of the pole. Also that fail cannot be compared to the fail in the base in the other picture as that has a square cross section and the pole has a circular one.



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Now_Then
 


Obviously nobody can know the exact tool that was used to fabricate the "pinch".

Perhaps it was something similar to the jaws of life or a special attachment that you don't know about.

But you are incorrect in regards to the base.

It is the exact same style from the same area.

Here is a wider image:




(ignore circle)



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


It was a complex operation of deception within which there were many mistakes and clues that prove it.

We are investigating details and showing you how their story does not add up and has many fatal contradictions.

We are merely reporting the evidence. It is not our responsibility to answer the question of why the evidence is what it is.



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   
And the idiotic media still doesnt take it seriously... CNN ridiculing truthers here.



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I looked at the photo sequence link for the light poles. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the photos regarding Light pole 1 are taking from different distance and angle that would make it impossible to see the light pole. The photos also have a time for when they were taken, but I do not see a time stamp on the photos themselves. Who's word are you taking for the time of the photos.



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by wsamplet
 


I am not claiming that it definitively proves that light pole one wasn't placed yet.

However I don't think you can definitively prove that it would not be visible in the image in question unless you did a complex study of the angles, distance, and exact location of photographer etc.

Regardless....the images give you a peak into the scene minutes after the event and show you how it COULD have been staged without people noticing or asking questions.

As explained.....we obtained the entire collection of original images taken from Jason Ingersol from the late Christopher Landis at the VDOT.

The images start 7 minutes after the event. Recently we spoke with Jason Ingersol on the phone and he claims he was outside shooting images within 5 minutes of the event but obviously that could just as easily be 7 minutes.

I explained what is different about the actual time stamp on the photos.

Read it again.



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I don't need to do anything fancy to see that the photographer changes his perspective when shooting the first picture of the light pole being visible. In the shots where you can't see the light pole he is either too far away or at an angle where it is blocked by the utility box. This does not imply that they had a chance to plant items without being seen, only that the photographer had an obstructed view.

Stretch Plastic Man, Stretch!!



posted on Oct, 23 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by wsamplet
In the shots where you can't see the light pole he is either too far away or at an angle where it is blocked by the utility box. This does not imply that they had a chance to plant items without being seen, only that the photographer had an obstructed view.


Wrong sarcastic man.

The fact that the photographer changes his perspective does not prove that the utility box would completely block the pole.

Again....I am not claiming it is definitive but it is possible evidence that the pole was not there yet.

Plus the images show you how people traveling north bound would not have been able to have a view of what was happening underneath the guardrail.

Particularly due to the double wide HOV lane and double guardrail between them.



Nobody would ask questions about a couple of feds who blocked traffic, surrounded the scene with their cars, and moved around a pole.

If you don't understand how easy it would be for them to stage whatever they want in all the chaos you are simply in denial.



posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 12:57 AM
link   
It seems that one of the most difficult things for people to understand is how they could have planted the 5 downed light poles without being noticed.

A better question to ask would be why would anyone notice a planted light pole on the road to begin with?

The answer is simple.....you wouldn't.

The light poles could have all been laid out in advance off to the side and then maybe put into place shortly after the explosion during all the chaos when everyone (including firefighters) were evacuated for fear of a 2nd plane.




But here is direct evidence of the lack of attention a downed light pole on the highway near the Pentagon would get.

In "Eye of the Storm" and earlier in this thread created Oct 2007 we referenced images of a light pole from the area that was downed by wind as photographed by undercover CIT member 22205, our Arlington asset.




The images were used in the presentation to contrast the difference between the breakage in the bases and demonstrate how pole 4 from 9/11 has suspiciously uniform damage in comparison:


What's amazing is that he actually took the images 2 years ago in December 2006 yet the pole STILL remains on the side of the road and was even photographed by the google maps "street view" cam!







Google only recently published the "street view" in Arlington and it's an amazing resource.

This pole is right up the highway 1/3rd of a mile from Lloyde's location on 9/11 and less than a 1/4 mile from VDOT who is in charge of light pole maintenance and salvage.

The 9/11 poles planted in advance only needed to go unnoticed for a single night and as I said they could have easily been hidden off to the side on the shoulder like this before the event and pulled out to their final places shortly after the violent event during all the initial chaos while the Pentagon burned.

Easy schmeezy.



posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
i never really noticed before, but check out how close pole number one is to the overhead road sign and the VDOT traffic cam tower(which is taller than light poles by far).

imagine yourself flying in at 500 miles per hour, and flying so accurately through the light poles, that you just BARELY miss the road sign and the VDOT tower. at those speeds, it is impossible to react and 'steer around' objects in your path.
so, if the official flight approach were true, it would be miraculous on yet another front, that the plane managed to so narrowly miss the road sign and the VDOT tower, yet knock down the light pole immediately adjacent. it would be like parking your car in a narrow garage at 80 miles an hour after driving around a huge sweeping curve on the verge of loss of traction.



posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by billybob
 


Yeah it would be quite the maneuver to be sure billybob.



Of course we already know from physics and mathematics that the required G Forces necessary to pull up and be low and level due to topography and obstacles prove it completely impossible anyway.




So the evidence proves the light poles were planted and common sense along with the additional evidence of this light pole on the side of the road in front of the Pentagon for 2 years demonstrates perfectly how planting the light poles in advance would have been no big deal to pull off.


[edit on 1-12-2008 by Craig Ranke CIT]



posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
The downed light poles at the Pentagon are arguably the most convincing evidence that a 757 caused the physical damage that day.

But now that we know the plane was on the north side of the CITGO station it is clear that they got there somehow else.


We know that ALL of the physical evidence and eyewitness reports, as well as the complete lack of any flyover eyewitnesses, demonstrates that any claims of a NoC flight path are mistaken.

But you already know that, Craig, which begs the question of why you are spamming this forum.

It's over for CIT. Time to shut her down.



posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 12:00 PM
link   

posted by Craig Ranke CIT
What's amazing is that he actually took the images 2 years ago in December 2006 yet the pole STILL remains on the side of the road and was even photographed by the google maps "street view" cam!




Google only recently published the "street view" in Arlington and it's an amazing resource.

This pole is right up the highway 1/3rd of a mile from Lloyde's location on 9/11 and less than a 1/4 mile from VDOT who is in charge of light pole maintenance and salvage.


That pole is right next to the roadway and should have been reported a thousand times. VDOT should have removed it right away. But there it is and apparently nobody even noticed it. After all it is only a light pole; there are hundreds of them around; and who cares? That is somebody else's job to worry about light poles. So what if there is plenty of light from the other light poles?

Besides that is a high security area and there are more important things to worry about than light poles on the ground.



posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   
excellent thread, I have always be intrigued as to how the lightpoles got to where they were if indeed the approach was from the north side of CITGO. Keep up the great work don't stop, there are many of us here that really appreciate your research.

[edit on 1-12-2008 by Insolubrious]



posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 12:49 PM
link   

posted by Copernicus

And the idiotic media still doesnt take it seriously... CNN ridiculing truthers here.



The Mainstream Media is far worse than mere idiots. They have become the enemies of the American people. We should treat them accordingly.




posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Let me help everyone out while Craig Ranke and his supporters try to desperately evade the fact that CIT has no evidence that any jet flew over and away from the Pentagon.


Light poles struck

Some of the most delusional "no plane" conspiracy believers think that the five light poles knocked down by flight 77 – in full view of hundreds of people – were "planted" there and were not hit by the plane.

A section of light pole narrowly missed taxi owner Lloyd England when it impaled his windshield.

The following excerpts are from longer quotes in the witness lists linked above.

Steve Riskus: "I could see the "American Airlines" logo...It knocked over a few light poles in its way." Mark Bright: "...at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down." Mike Walter: "...it clipped one of these light poles ... and slammed right into the Pentagon right there. It was an American Airlines jet." Rodney Washington: "...knocking over light poles" Kirk Milburn: "I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles." Afework Hagos: "It hit some lampposts on the way in." Kat Gaines: "saw a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles." D.S. Khavkin: "First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles." Wanda Ramey: "I saw the wing of the plane clip the light post, and it made the plane slant. Penny Elgas: A piece of American Airlines Flight 77 was torn from the plane as it clipped a light pole. It landed in her car. Now in the Smithsonian Institution's 9/11 collection. Lincoln Liebner: "It was probably about thirty feet off the ground, clipping the lampposts. I could clearly see through the windows of the plane. It was maybe going 500 miles an hour - when it just flew...into the Pentagon ... less than a hundred yards away."

Bizarrely, the video Loose Change, which has been revised twice (purportedly to correct errors) still claims that "Flight 77 managed to tear 5 light poles completely out of the ground, without damaging either the wings or the light poles themselves." Do the poles in these photos appear to be undamaged?


Also, for the record:



104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.

26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.

2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.

7 said it was a Boeing 757.

8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.

2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.

4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.

10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).

16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.

42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts.

2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.

15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.

3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.

3 took photographs of the aftermath.

Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."

And of course,

0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.

0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away.

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...





new topics
top topics
 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join