9/11 Pentagon Not Hit By Airliner Question.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

My wife and I are halfway through loose change 2nd edition and it is quite compelling. Quick question though. I've done my share of research into the events that day but don't recall the angle put forth of why the plane could hit 5 lightpoles but another plane hit one and crashed etc...

I found that quite interesting and logical to question how could it have done that and then still remained on its path to the pentagon etc. The problem I have though is that as compelling as that is, I don't recall loose change mentioning an alternative theory of what knocked down the light poles then? What did rip them from the ground? The missile couldn't have done it, what is the prevailing theory of what did then?

I ask cause I am quite fascinated with that part of the investigative information in the video, but in order to confidentally question how the boeing did it I have to have an alternative explanation of what brought them down.

Thanks for the help DU!

[Twist_U_Up]

1. 2 planes

http://bedoper.com/eastman/witnesses/index.html

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

2. That Doesn't Seem To Make Any Sense In The Context.

If one plane couldn't have done it without crashing and burning how could a second one have done it? Where's the wreckage of the second plane? Or why would they need one plane to slam into light poles just because, and then another to fire a missile at the pentagon?

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean within the mystery of the poles being knocked down and their relevance.

[greyl]

3. Don't forget that the plane DID crash.

It would be illogical to suppose that light poles would have knocked the plane significantly of course.
It is also illogical to assume that the plane hit it's exact target.

[rman]

4. LIHOP/MIHOP is based on the holes in the official story,

not on an alternate explanation of what happened.

ie not knowing what exactly did happen to the passengers on the planes doesn't change anything about lack of wreckage at the Pentagon, and not knowing exactly how WTC7 came down doesn't change anything about the impossibility of natural collapse for that building.

Much of what's in various 9-11 videos as to what possibly did happen is not "investigative" but speculative.

What exactly did happen is unclear, what is clear however is that the Official Story doesn't hold water.

Only a thorough independent investigation can reveal what actually did happen. Suspicion is the basis for investigation.

[spooked911]

5. This is a interesting question that I wondered about as well.

There are two explanations for the light poles besides that a 757 knocked them over:
1) they were pre-rigged with small explosives to knock them over (to paint the picture of a plane knocking them over)
2) some advanced military weapon was used to knock them over-- e.g. Tesla cannon

There is a problem with even the idea that the lightpoles were knocked over by a 757, was it done either by a) the plane hitting them or by b) the jetwash (turbulence from the jet). The problem with (a) is that the poles should have seriously deflected the plane if not caused an explosion. The problem with (b) is that closer to the Pentagon, there was no evidence of things getting knocked over or around by turbulence.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. Sorry, But Both Your #1 and #2 Are Far Too Illogical For Me

I see a lot of holes in the official explanation and some sound theories put forth that better explain them. In this case, however, the possibility that a plane did hit those light poles and yet not crash prior to reaching the pentagon is still far more likely and logical than that they were knocked over by explosions or a tesla cannon. Far more logical.

So neither of those two hold any water whatsoever, but I'm hard pressed to think of anything else other than a plane. I'm gonna have to think this one through more (as it conflicts with my wanting to believe a missile was involved or that the boeing didn't truly hit the pentagon.)

[petgoat]

8. Your #1 and #2 Are Far Too Illogical

They are entirely logical if you assume that 1) the powers-that-be wanted to fake a 757 flying into the Pentagon and 2) Tesla cannons are available.

They are only illogical if you assume that 1 and 2 are not true.

If you avoid assumptions, then you have to admit that you just don't know and anything's possible.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

9. No. No. It Still Would Be Totally Illogical.

It isn't about assumptions, it is about common sense, reasoning and deduction.

Regardless of me believing the official explanation is bogus and there is some other explanation for the pentagon, the use of a tesla cannon is still preposterous and absurd to anyone with the ability to use common sense, reasoning and deduction.

There has to be another explanation, period.

[spooked911]

11. Okay, I am not saying a tesla cannon was used. I was just saying that

is one of the theories out there. I also happen to think the tesla cannon idea is a little far-fetched, though as petGoat says, hard to rule out.

I think the idea was they wanted to make it look as though a large plane flew over and knocked the light poles and so they rigged it up to look that way. How they did it, I can't say. It's definitely a good question and one I've been stuck on.

My personal theory is that it was done with small pre-planted explosives at each respective light pole.

There is one other possibility-- that the light pole story is false. On one website there was a testimonial from a reporter who went to the Pentagon shortly after the incident, and this person said NO LIGHT POLES WERE KNOCKED DOWN. So we can't rule out that the light poles were knocked down after the fact, for some bizarre reason.

I'm sure there were planted witnesses for instance who said a plane hit the pentagon, and perhaps these same witnesses were instructed to say the plane was flying so low it hit light poles.

[petgoat]

32. "common sense" is just another term for culture-specific prejudice

I don't know whether Tesla cannons are reasonable or unreasonable. But to reject the notion
as "preposterous" without information justifying that conclusion is irrational.

Do you believe that the US military does not have secret weapons?
Do you believe that secret weapons would not be used to defend the Pentagon?
Do you have some reason to believe that Tesla cannons (whatever they are) are impossible?

[Harald Ragnarsson]

6. Good questions

Also, how was this jet so low it hit the light poles, but didn't blow any cars off the road with the wash from its' engines?

[spooked911]

10. yep! exactly.

[catnhatnh]

12. From your OP....

...details please about 1 lightpole causing a plane crash? Thanks.

[libertypirate]

13. That is a compelling factiod....

Sometimes things I think are supposed to explain themselves... If you examine the poles even in the video you come to the conclusion that nothing knocked them from being bolted up right into the ground. How? Simple where are the wing marks on the poles? None to be found; and that should be the point, not an alternative theory, we don't have to have alternative conclusions for things we see errors in we just have to point to the errors...

We don't need people with more answers we need people with more questions.

[MrSammo1]

14. 5 lightpoles

They were just part of the deception.

Lucky for us.......the people behind this lie didn't realize that a passenger jet can't fly that low.

http://www.911studies.com/

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

15. Sorry, I Just Clicked That Link But Jack White's Photo Analysis Is One Of

the most incompetent, unfactual, delusional and misrepresented pieces of anaylsis I have ever come across in my lifetime, and I do anaylsis for a living. Horrible attempts at debunking the photos, just horrible.

[MrSammo1]

17. How long have you

worked for the government?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

19. How Long Has He Worked For Fisher Price's Photo Analysis Division?

My god :rofl: just horrible. Plain horrible :rofl:

[MrSammo1]

21. My god.........

that's part of your problem!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

22. Ummmmm, What Is. Ya Kinda Finished Half Thought Ya Know? LOL

Seriously, you are just failing to make sense to me now. What exactly is it you are trying to get across?

[MrSammo1]

27. myth minds........

have a hard time understanding reality.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

33. Are You A Myth Mind?

You still are failing to make any sense and I'm begining to wonder if any productivity is possible from this conversation at all.

[Old and In the Way]

16. The lightpoles...........

What I find odd is that all the poles that were hit were knocked off their bases. The tops of the poles are relatively small diameter, thin wall aluminum alloy. But the bases were have been cast, heavy wall housings with anchoring bolts that had hi-tensile strength steel nuts. If each pole was clipped by a plane wing, traveling at 500 MPH, I'd expect to see some or all of the poles still standing with sheared off tops or hanging remnants, crimped over at the impact point.

If you notice the fallen poles, the pole length is not bent/distorted at an angle to the foundation access box at their base. Wouldn't you expect the entire length of the pole to be completely bent, which would be circumstantial evidence that the stress stripped the nuts off the bolts? Seems to me that the tops of the poles would fail well before all of the steel connecting bolts or the base flanges.

And where's the wiring that should have been still in the base conduit?

[sgsmith]

18. Light poles

The top looks sheared off to me:


The top looks sheared off to me:


Looks bent to me:


OMG - I can't see any wires sticking out of the base of the pole. Of course, I can't read the license tag on the car just next to the pole. And all license tag lettering that I've seen is a lot wider than electrical wire.

Interesting. Other light poles in the area, still standing, don't have any bend in them.
http://community.webshots.com/photo/30853020/30853354YSRrpQjEjy

[LARED]

20. Cast metal is almost alway far more brittle

than other forms of metal. The light poles were most likely rolled aluminum plate or tubing, far more flexiable than the cast base they are attached to.

[MrSammo1]

23. Duh!

A 757 didn't hit the Pentagon. So it's couldn't have knocked down the poles.

It was part of the deception.

Ask the FBI that took the videos from the gas station why they knocked them down!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

26. Duh, that wasn't the point of the thread.

The point of the thread was wondering since the video Loose Change made a compelling argument against it, what is the leading alternate theory on what caused them to be taken down. If you have one that holds any water or logic whatsoever I'd appreciate it.

Unfortunately I haven't heard any alternate theory yet so I may have to look past this one until there is more compelling theory as to what did cause them to come down. No biggie in not being able to answer it though, there are a million other aspects of 9/11 I can continue to explore that do have incredible alternate theories.

[MrSammo1]

30. I just told you.........

the light poles were part of the deception.

If a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon. Which the physical evidence shows didn't happen. The poles had to be taken down by human means. aka.....the FBI. The same people who conviscated the videos from area buisnesses within 15 minutes of the deception. Seems to me they preplanned where and what they were doing that day.

[LARED]

24. A 757 weighs somewhere around 200,000 lbs

A light pole weighs about 200 or 300 pounds. A 200,000 lb jet traveling at several hundred mph hitting a few hundred pound lamp pole and expecting it to change the course of the jet is like expecting a ping pong ball to alter the swing of Barry Bonds taking a big swing.

In other words, it's not going to happen.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

25. I'm Inclined To Agree

Thing is though the video Loose Change is quite compelling and when they had the part questioning that I was eager to hear what they were going to theorize really happened, but to my disappointment they never did. I started this thread hoping some here knew what they were trying to imply did in fact knock the poles down but even within this thread there have been no credible alternatives unfortunately. Alas though, there are still 101 other outstanding questions for me to explore though that do have some really compelling alternate theories :)

[MrSammo1]

28. And limestone is how soft.........

compared to steel box columns?

[LARED]

29. Is there a point to your question? (n/t)

[MrSammo1]

31. my point is......

jets slice through steel..........but not limestone?