Lets try again since you must have missed the post. Wow...see, when you go off script and can't just cite a link, you step in it; big time. I force you to write your garbage scenarios down. So when there is a plane crash, there are always light poles involved? Oh my goodness. All the plotters would have to say is that the plane didn't fly at a low enough angle to hit the poles so you don't have those potential loose ends of people: Planting poles on the road Planting poles on the grass off the street Damaging a cab on purpose to say it was hit with light poles (why add that into the mix...you certainly didn't need to have a damaged car ON TOP OF having poles that didn't need to be hit You said the car "maybe" was towed to the scene. So now if you don't add in the taxi (which you don't need) and don't add in the light poles (which you don't need), you don't need to add in the towing truck, the guys to unload the truck (which you don't need either). You said there "could have been" plants on the highway as well. You never quite explained why there would have to be these plants but...hell, its your fantasy. You don't need to include them either. You said that if they had reported--the plants which you wouldn't need if you didn't involve the poles, the taxi, and the tow truck which they didn't need--you wouldn't have to buy off the press either since the stories wouldn't have ever been told to start with Remember, all of the above is what you alleged to have happened. You painted yourself into the corner by saying the stuff was planted. Nobody did that to you; just you and your own hand. My question is why involve the light poles at all when you can just change the angle of the aircraft. So that was your explanation for the poles being involved, to make people think that there was a plane wreck; as if the radar tracking (which you haven't explained in your own words) wasn't enough, as if the multiple eye witnesses from twoofer sites (which you haven't explained in your own words) wasn't enough, as if the aircraft wreckage that you say was planted, get this, before or after the explosion at the Pentagon wasn't enough...now you're adding in light poles for some reason, a cab for some reason, a tow truck to take the cab there for some reason, guys to plant the poles, for some reason...okay. Before we go further, please confirm that this is where you stand; Someone fired a missile at the Pentagon, staged the light poles, the cab, and the wreckage to make us think the country was under attack and to make us think that AA77 hit the pentagon. That is your stance; is it not? I have some follow ups but I want to force you to stand by the mountain of bizarre garbage scenarios you have formulated. The above writing in red; does that accurately depict what you say happened on that day (we haven't gotten to the tracking, the witnesses and a few other zingers)? Just a simple yes or no will suffice.