Merged What knocked over the lightpoles, if not AA77?

[Bell]

The discussion about the lightpoles in this thread, was knocked over (pun intended) to AAH.

SPreston said:

Would you be suspicious if this 124 ft 10 in wingspan aircraft flew through the 40 foot tall 337 pound light poles without knocking them down? Well maybe not; but most Americans might be. They needed to stage the light poles for the aircraft. Just seeing them laying there on the boob tube caused many people to erroneously assume that the aircraft knocked them down. But that was not possible was it? A simple magician's trick. The actual aircraft was to the north out of reach.

Regardless, the five light poles were laying on the ground, looking staged, and the aircraft was flying nowhere near them. You are aware that there is a definite damage path through the Pentagon interior aligned with the light poles aren't you? And surely you are aware that a NOC flight path does not align with the official flight path, aren't you? Don't you think the 9-11 perps would at least want the illusion that the official flight path and official damage path lined up?

And also:

Ummm. Not this one. It was cut right at the strengthened bottom with a saw or plasma torch. Didn't they stage the parts really good? Lovely. The alleged 535 mph wing hit it hard enough to sever the main pole in two; but everything just settled down gently next to the base and sitting on the guardrail, ready for the perfect photo op. Doesn't that lamphead just look perfectly placed? Don't you feel proud? These script followers are good.

Sooo... what knocked over the lightpoles, if not AA77?

 

[Quad4_72]

Sooo... what knocked over the lightpoles, if not AA77?

Simple. My coverup team did it in a matter of seconds. I am surprised no one saw us in the very crowded area especially at that time of day. We are so sneaky.

 

[Thunder]

Dick Cheney huffed..and he puffed..and he blew the light poles down?

 

[Bell]

I forget to post this argument in the OP:

Actually hitting the five 337 pound light poles likely would have sheared off the wings, dropping the aircraft on the lawn short of the wall.

 

[WildCat]

I forget to post this argument in the OP:

Only in truther land are the wings of a 757 fragile enough to be sheared off by a highway light pole! One wonders why wings don't fall off from the far greater forces acting on them while flying at 500 mph.

 

[Bobert]

WOW he actually believes this?

I see also that he believes that the NWO was concerned about killing "thousands" at the Pentagon but didnt seem too concerned about the 3000 plus they kileed at the WTC's.

 

[jhunter1163]

A 337-pound breakaway light pole isn't going to shear off a 50,000 (assuming it's full of fuel) pound aircraft wing. Just another inconvenient truth for Ranquisamo and their fanboys.

 

[Lennart Hyland]

This drunk dude:

 

[Bobert]

Ok so why does the PFTT cartoon show flight 77 appear to crash into 2 trees before the well timed and perfectly executed pull up?

 

[Bell]

I see also that he believes that the NWO was concerned about killing "thousands" at the Pentagon but didnt seem too concerned about the 3000 plus they kileed at the WTC's.

Not trying to be a smart ass, but in New York about 2600 people were killed.

 

[stateofgrace]

Originally Posted by SPreston
Actually hitting the five 337 pound light poles likely would have sheared off the wings, dropping the aircraft on the lawn short of the wall.

Wow, seriously wow. Have you any idea and I mean any idea at all?

I would love to see the maths on this number. Any chance at all you will offer any?

 

[apathoid]

Sooo... what knocked over the lightpoles, if not AA77?

Another vote here for the plasma torch! Or maybe it was the Death Ray set on "LOW" or maybe even some nano-super-thermate bolts wired with proximity sensors(good thing there were pigoens that morning!)

 

[X]

"strengthened bottom"?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't light-poles designed with bottoms that break easily under lateral forces for safety reasons?
Sort of like this setup?


I'm curious to know, as well, what knocked over the light poles if not AA77.
Maybe Lloyde England ran into them all...

This whole topic is stupid.

 

[apathoid]

This whole topic is stupid.

To rationalists yes, its retarded. But all the Pentagon flyover geeks and other assorted "no plane at the Pentagon" people will have us believe that the lightpole damage was staged.

Of course, in a real conspiracy this idea is so patently stupid it would never get off the drawing board. I think deep down the Penta-geeks know this, but they have to at least attempt to explain away the lightpoles.

 

[BCR]

There were poles knocked over

 

[eeyore1954]

A 337-pound breakaway light pole isn't going to shear off a 50,000 (assuming it's full of fuel) pound aircraft wing. Just another inconvenient truth for Ranquisamo and their fanboys.

And even if it could have would it have materially impacted the flight path in the last 1000 feet.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Only in truther land are the wings of a 757 fragile enough to be sheared off by a highway light pole! One wonders why wings don't fall off from the far greater forces acting on them while flying at 500 mph.

also in trutherland, removal of wings cancels all forward momentum

 

[Brainster]

What knocked over the lightpoles?

The lightgermans!

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

The light poles were removed in advance, damage pre-fabricated, and likely placed the night before the event.

Full hypothesis here.

But did you know that there has been a light pole on the side of the road near the Pentagon that has gone completely unnoticed for years?

CIT has presented direct evidence proving how little attention a downed light pole on the highway near the Pentagon would get.

CIT's Arlington asset took these images of a pole that was downed on the highway over 2 years ago and they have been used to show the anomalous damage to the base of pole #4 from 9/11:

The comparison has been used to contrast the difference between the breakage in the bases. The uniform damage to pole four is rather suspicious in comparison:

But again these images were taken 2 years ago in December 2006 but the pole still remains on the side of the road to this day.

It was even photographed by the google maps "street view" cam.

This pole is only dozens of feet away from the downed 9/11 poles and it's therefore also right near the VDOT who should have been the ones to clean it up. Even they haven't noticed it!

The 9/11 poles planted in advance only needed to go unnoticed for a single night. This evidence proves there is nothing amazing or ridiculous about this.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't light-poles designed with bottoms that break easily under lateral forces for safety reasons?

They are, but, as far as I understand, only when hit low. A vehicle hitting the pole would cause the bolts to shear, but I imagine a hit higher up would be like trying to pry those same bolts out like prying a nail out with a hammer (only significantly more difficult, because of the threading).

SPreston posted a picture of one of the downed street lights that appeared to have snapped off below the bolts. Now, either the bolts couldn't break because of the height of the impact and the force instead caused the base to snap off much lower, these particular street lights were actually designed to fail in the way that they did, or they were deliberately severed as part of some stupendously complicated plot and in a way that only uneducated dolts would find suspicious.

The first two options seem much more likely to me...

Of course, in a real conspiracy this idea is so patently stupid it would never get off the drawing board. I think deep down the Penta-geeks know this, but they have to at least attempt to explain away the lightpoles.

It's almost sad to watch them sacrifice their sanity in an attempt to preserve their dignity. It just doesn't work...