Viewing Single Post From: Poles & Bases: 9/11 vs. non-911

Viewing Single Post From: Poles & Bases: 9/11 vs. non-911
22205	Dec 11 2008, 03:26 AM
Arlingtonian Posts: 443 Group: Members Member #24 Joined: 01/14/08	a close comparison of a regular base vs. a specific one of the 911 bases reveals that the 9/11 base, appears to have been cut from inside at the 4 connections which normally keep the base flushly mounted using bolts mounted in a concrete foundation. this is one of the 4 female connections from the base that im referring to: as you can see, all 4 mounting brackets are missing from the 9/11 base: imo - the easiest (possibly the only) way to remove those female mounting brackets from a still standing pole, would be to open the cover, and from the inside (using an appropriate cutter, perhaps a plasma) cut away around each bolt, removing the 4 female mounting brackets: by reaching inside and doing the cutting inside the base instead of outside, you shield any sparks or light from the view. this method could contribute to going undetected especially if such a task was being done at night, where any light emitted might attract unwanted attention. whatever the reason, its clear that the 4 mounting brackets all became COMPLETELY undone from base, and this is not consistent with the type of damage that should (imo) have occured. please scroll up to the start of this threadlook at the stuff i've detailed there, for an explanation as to what i think the damage should look like based on the kind of forces that were allegedly acting upon them. * i also wanted to update this thread with some more "anomallies", like the ends of this pole not matching up: also - for referrence - the above pole and its base: a chunk of the base is missing, the 2 (foundation & base) dont match up: maybe the missing piece broke off and is somewhere in the grass, OR maybe the pole/base lying there are not the originals that were once attached to that concrete foundation. clearly the 2 dont match up (one's jagged the other flat), so there is at least a piece of the lower base missing... * unfortunately however, the technical aspect of this pole debate/discussion, is a MOOT point, because the plane flew NORTH OF THE POLES, and even the alleged-to-be-77's FDR puts the plane TOO HIGH and off course of the poles. so we can pick apart the pole irregularities, of which there are many (imo), or we can allow our understanding of the poles to evolve to the next level, meaning we stop debating in circles with pseudoids who dont wanna get it. before the actual path of the plane became clear, repeated (and necesssary) speculations and debates arose about these poles, because of the poles themselves. how they looked, where they fell, lloyde's impossible tale, these things stood out on their own as ridiculously unfitting to the incredible tale of 77's final moments. 500+ miles an hour into these poles and a steady level flight from a disappearing plane never made sense to begin with, and thats why collectively (all such threads added together from all forums), the light pole threads have been the most viewed of all pentagon topics to date. thus - on their own - the light poles fail to validate the claims attributed to them (plane impacting the upper masts), and if it pleases you guys, go ahead and keep going in circles about the physical damage to the poles. but the fact is that the pentagon light poles were staged, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT. the lack of doubt however, has more to do at this point (for me) with verified, validated, corroborated eyewitness recollections of the plane and its actual path, and less to do with why these 9/11 poles & bases look so uniformly and incorrectly broken. you see, something amazing and incredibly clarifying happened, at least for me: in person i listened to and watched over half a dozen people describe the actual approach path of the plane on 9/11 - without being led or coached, and all of them clearly and UNMISTAKABLY recalled seeing, hearing, and feeling the plane over their heads and above the edge of the ANC, NORTH OF THE CITGO, and FAR AWAY FROM ANY OF THE FALLEN LIGHT POLES. fortunately, thanx to video technology, what led to the epiphany i had, could be shared with everyone. yet strangely, some viewers can watch and listen to these same people i was privy to, and still dance around the truth. fortunately, the majority of objective minds can look at and listen to these same interviews and walk away realizing, understanding, AND accepting the implications. those of you who dont or chose not to (get it), well what can i tell ya? nothing. i've been trying for months and it aint happenin, and im actually cool with that. so please dont be confused, my aim is not to convince you psuedo-skeptical guests, but to enlighten fellow objective minds looking to have a better understanding of the evidence. all are welcome to read and even comment, but all pseudo-skeptical ring-around-the-rosies will be ignored (by at least me - but hopefully by others as well).


Poles & Bases: 9/11 vs. non-911 · Pentagon