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.
Originally posted by longhaircowboy
Mister_narc you seek an unbiased opinion of the cabbies account well here goes(I have no leanings in either direction):
I don't see any correlation between the plane hitting the light pole and the explosion. He didn't say the plane caused the explosion. Just that there was an explosion. And he didn't specify whether it was the first or second explosion. He said the plane hit the pole which hit his cab. He heard an explosion. I don't get the sense from the account that the writer was implying anything other than what the man said. Btw I'm a writer(poetry mostly).
Originally posted by Lyte Trizzle
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Compare the diameter of the base of the pole with the pavement striping.
If the stripes are about 4 inches wide, how big is the pole?
Here is a typical spec sheet for this type of light pole.
gosh.
when i look at the spec sheet you provided the specs and diagram for the base of the pole match pretty perfectly with the exposed base we can see in this pic.
i sure don't see how that could possibly be the rubber grommet piece that would actually connect the top arm to the post.
this is clearly the actual post itself without the top arm and NOT just the top arm piece.
look at how long it is.
are you really trying to insinuate that this is merely the top arm piece of the post only?
Originally posted by HowardRoark
You can see the top arm of the pole behind the car in this shot.
Originally posted by Lyte Trizzle
and do you really maintain that the damage (lack of rather) to that hood could possibly be the result of a pole that long hitting it after being knocked down by a 757?
[edit on 19-1-2006 by Lyte Trizzle]
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Originally posted by Mister_Narc
That Gulfstream hit one measly pole and went down shearing off a wing spewing debris and fuel 100 yards. But the AMAZING flight 77 Boeing hit *5* poles and still flew well enough that both wings did damage in the impenetrable pentagon ! Leaving NO DEBRIS, parts of a wing, engines,nothing scraped the ground, no fuel...
analysis.batcave.net...
Originally posted by Mister_Narc
Look at the base of the pole below, the left side of the base is curved in one pic, but is not in the other.
In the pic to the left it seems as though it is broken all the way to the top of the base.
Originally posted by ANOK
If that's all true Howwerd how do you explain the cabbie having to get a new car?
Originally posted by Grimm
Originally posted by Mister_Narc
Look at the base of the pole below, the left side of the base is curved in one pic, but is not in the other.
In the pic to the left it seems as though it is broken all the way to the top of the base.
Can you not see (or comprehend) that those are two different poles?
It is very clear.
Now what of your theory?
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Who knows. Maybe he had too many outstanding parking tickets on it and couldn't afford to get it out of the impound yard.
Originally posted by Valhall
Okay - what else would have the girth to whack those five poles?
Maybe it was a massively black-budget hundred foot diameter 400 mph missile, right? with wings that faked out all the drivers it roared over at about 30 feet above the ground. You actually are required to make an effort at an alternative, and feasible, scenario. You don't get to say - it wasn't a plane, but not offer any other solution to what caused the mass hallucination to all the drivers on the road, mowed down lightpoles and punched a hole in the Pentagon and made a plane of people disappear.
So what exactly is the name of the 100 foot diameter, 400 mph missile you're proposing?
Originally posted by ANOK
And Vall, nothing hit those light poles, they were planted, so was the cab. Do you get it yet?
The whole thing was staged like a Hollyweird movie set. That's why this part of the story is so important, for those who think arguing over light poles is irelevant.
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Who knows. Maybe he had too many outstanding parking tickets on it and couldn't afford to get it out of the impound yard.
Oh yeah I forgot he mentioned that in his statement Dude what can I say?
Are you just trying to be funny?
Originally posted by ANOK
Sry Val but are you paying attention here?
This whole thread is suggesting it was staged, Mister Narc pls tell me if I'm wrong...
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Cabs are notorious for accumulating unpaid parking tickets.
Most city impound lots won't release a car with unpaid tickets on it.
At any rate. Who cares?
Originally posted by Mister_Narc
Can you not see (or comprehend) that?
Originally posted by Grimm
I can comprehend that the reporter or photographer may have made a mistake in writing the story that included these pictures. But that matters little.
Several light poles were hit. Your pictures (that you claimed were the same pole), are obviously two different poles simply by looking at them.
If you make such simple mistakes in observing minor items like this, how can be possibly believe anything you say?