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.

 

Pentagon Attack Cab Driver Lloyde England's Virtual Confession of Involvement In the 9/11 Black Op

page: 10
43
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by timewalker
 


Purely an issue of foreshortening, angle, and resolution.

After heavily scrutinizing every single image and video of the cab and pole that exist we are 100% convinced that they always show the same pole & cab in the exact same staged scene in the exact same location.




posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420

That is when Lloyde and his wife gave their consent.


Really? Lloyd said you can start audio recording me now, but then somehow he didn't know he was being recorded?


The point is that lloyd saw no camera being pointed at him so he ASSUMED he wasn't being recorded but that assumption doesn't guarantee recording isn't occurring nor does that assumption END the interview.

Once Lloyd gave consent, the entire INTERVIEW was fair game for recording until they ENDED it. The interview began at lloyds house, continued in the car on the way to the next portion of the interview at the taxi cabs location, on the way back to the house and concluded at the house. Are you saying the interview was OVER while they were in the car?
No court of law or anyone with knowledge of the law would make that assessment.

Nowhere in the language of the law does it say they must ask consent each time the camera or a recording device has been "put on pause" stopped or engaged. It need only be done prior to the interview.



[edit on 7-5-2009 by Orion7911]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 



Originally posted by jprophet420

Thus, an oral communication is not protected by Chapter 6 unless (1) the speaker exhibits the expectation that his conversation will not be intercepted, and (2) the circumstances justify the expectation of noninterception."


Right. that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. G ****** G


You still don't understand that language, do you?

Let me try once more...

The issue in that case was whether an individual, who was not a participant of the conversation of others, could permissibly eavesdrop by electronic means without the participant's consent. The court's analysis said that first you had to determine whether the participants expected their conversation to be private, and second, you had to determine whether that expectation was reasonable under the circumstances.

If both questions are answered yes, then the law requires at least ONE participant's consent. Once that consent is obtained, it doesn't matter where the conversation is overheard or recorded, even if the conversation takes place in your bathtub.

Conversely, if either question is answered no, then NO CONSENT IS REQUIRED.

But the real problem with your quoting of this case is that it doesn't apply to the circumstances found in this thread. The recording was done by a participant to the conversation. That is all that is needed under federal and Virginia law. End of story.

The fact that the subject didn't know he was being recorded by the guy he was speaking to is irrelevant-- as was their location during the recording.

Does that help you now?


[edit on 7-5-2009 by loam]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by msdesertrat i was thinking the same thing, that some unfortunate accident may happen to him. no matter how much he rambles on and at times and makes no sense, he is a marked man but he doesn't seem afraid, evasive yes
 



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by echodogene
 


He isn't a "marked man" at all.

He only leaked the truth a little bit when he didn't know he was being recorded.

The rest of the time he lied.

He's not afraid because nobody else has challenged his story in all these years.

He has been considered a "victim".

He knows he has very powerful people that have propped him up to support THEIR lie so the last thing he was worried about was a couple of independent journalists.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Craig, this is the first semi-admission that we have seen except for Silverstien's "pull it" remark. Definitely a landmark discovery. Up until this interview of yours there were still questions in my mind whether it was some kind of strange optical illusion where they saw the plane but this pretty much is the final nail in the coffin.

9/11 was planned by just like the guy says "people with money" and they were not Arabs. Thanks for your monumental work and please keep it up!



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthquest
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Craig, this is the first semi-admission that we have seen except for Silverstien's "pull it" remark. Definitely a landmark discovery. Up until this interview of yours there were still questions in my mind whether it was some kind of strange optical illusion where they saw the plane but this pretty much is the final nail in the coffin.

9/11 was planned by just like the guy says "people with money" and they were not Arabs. Thanks for your monumental work and please keep it up!


It doesn't matter what Lloyde says. Even if he completely refutes every word of his interviews, it won't alter the physics of the situation.

Even if all 13 witnesses do an about turn on their accounts, the strange damage on Lloyde's cab will not become physically possible.

The damage on Lloyde's cab is only possible if there were people OTHER THAN 19 ALLEGED HIJACKERS involved with the FORE KNOWLEDGE of the event.

"All evidence that official explanation of 911 events is incorrect, is in the official report itself"

Now, come to think about it, to carry out the crime of this magnitude, it is not an stretch of imagination, that there may be more people involved. Why should anyone have problem with this notion.

I wonder why some people have a very violent reaction at the very mention of this possibility.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 06:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Craig!!! That's you? I just have to thank you for putting this up here. I've seen your video many times on youtube and have directed more people then I can tell you to it. I had no idea I was talking with the man who made these videos. Much respect...this is what real investigation and perseverance looks like folks.

Stellar Job and Great catch in regards to Lloyd and his wife especially!

Regards, Ltru



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Great stuff Craig, as usual. S+F

I do have a question though. I know your doing your investigation, and 1 or two men is small numbers in terms of getting to the bottom of this, but has the thought crossed your mind that secretly recording Lloyd, and getting him to admit this was "planned", might just put the mans life in jeopardy?

I think back to the worker, cant remember his name, but I believe he let you examine some of the damaged pole housings(the bottom, and gave you some good inside info, only to weeks later turn up dead uner mysterious circumstances. Am I totally off on that? I dont have the greatest of memories and thiswas many months ago.

Sometimes I worry. But I guess your putting your own neck out there just as much if not more, and you have two police officers as solid Northside witnesses, whom I believe are still on the job, since I haven't heard otherwise.

Either way there's really no other way to get the truth out you have to be willing to sacrafice alot. I commend you for that.

I also agree with you that Lloyd is playing senile old man when he knows he's on tape, then he's sharp as a whip when he wants to be. Yea he may not be all there, but really who is these days. I think he knows whats going on though, he's definitely not walking around in a cloud.



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Nola213
 


Yes of course I have thought of that just as I think about the 1,000's of innocent people slaughtered on that day facilitated by this mans participation.

Just as I think about the many 10's of thousands more innocents slaughtered since and still being slaughtered to this day during a fraudulent global war that is facilitated by his continued lie.

Just as I think about the world my potential children and grandchildren will have to live in based on this heinous deception and the possibility of ANY OF US being slaughtered during the next false flag event.

I'm well aware this isn't game.

I know this is a matter of life or death.

But I am not about to limit myself when reporting facts exposing the deception for the safety of one man who has been proven by the evidence to be a component of the deception, willing or not.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 02:54 AM
link   
Indeed Craig has seemingly put his arse on the line far more than most and what makes him far more dangerous to the ptb/perps than "truthers" like alex jones, is his academic approach and well-mannered articulation.

I've always considered AJ to be a liability to the "movement" due to his inflammatory style and radical presentation that actually does more harm imo.

Now If Lloyd is indeed aware that he's lying to protect the perps as the evidence overwhelmingly suggests, then I don't have that much sympathy for his role.

In fact, in a deeper sense, no matter what the case, the BLOOD of 911 is also upon Lloyd and truth be told, I think victimizing him is an injustice to EVERY SOUL sacrificed since Lloyd holds the key to bringing the perps to justice being the FIRST real witness that has virtually admitted being a part of the conspiracy.



Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by Nola213
 


Yes of course I have thought of that just as I think about the 1,000's of innocent people slaughtered on that day facilitated by this mans participation.

Just as I think about the many 10's of thousands more innocents slaughtered since and still being slaughtered to this day during a fraudulent global war that is facilitated by his continued lie.

Just as I think about the world my potential children and grandchildren will have to live in based on this heinous deception and the possibility of ANY OF US being slaughtered during the next false flag event.

I'm well aware this isn't game.

I know this is a matter of life or death.

But I am not about to limit myself when reporting facts exposing the deception for the safety of one man who has been proven by the evidence to be a component of the deception, willing or not.




posted on May, 12 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Orion7911


In fact, in a deeper sense, no matter what the case, the BLOOD of 911 is also upon Lloyd and truth be told, I think victimizing him is an injustice to EVERY SOUL sacrificed since Lloyd holds the key to bringing the perps to justice being the FIRST real witness that has virtually admitted being a part of the conspiracy.




Very very well said.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nola213

I think back to the worker, cant remember his name, but I believe he let you examine some of the damaged pole housings(the bottom, and gave you some good inside info, only to weeks later turn up dead uner mysterious circumstances. Am I totally off on that? I dont have the greatest of memories and thiswas many months ago.



Just to clarify about this....

You are talking about Chirstopher Landis and people can read the story about our experience with him here.

He wasn't the one who gave me a tour of the light poles but he did give us the entire collection of high resolution 9/11 images from photographer Jason Ingersoll.

Most were already distributed by the DoD but some were previously unreleased.

His was the Operations Manager for Safety Service Patrol. He was in charge of road closures for road safety issues including light pole maintenance.

He did commit suicide very soon after we returned to Arlington and obtained the interviews with all the citgo witnesses but there is certainly no proof of a connection.

I will say that he seemed nervous when we met him and clearly did not want to offer any additional information to us about the light poles.

If anyone was in a position to know about something odd going on with the light poles before or after 9/11, he would have been the guy.

Since then we have filed many FOIA requests with the VDOT regarding any documentation or maintenance records as to the location of the light poles and when they were replaced.

They claim they have nothing.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

posted by Nola213

I think back to the worker, cant remember his name, but I believe he let you examine some of the damaged pole housings(the bottom, and gave you some good inside info, only to weeks later turn up dead uner mysterious circumstances. Am I totally off on that? I dont have the greatest of memories and thiswas many months ago.



That was Christopher (Kit) Landis at the VDOT (Virginia Department of Transportation) who was the Operations Manager for Safety Service Patrol. He allegedly committed suicide, which is a favorite tactic of tyranical governments and blood-thirsty intelligence agencies who wish to rid themselves of a troublesome person.

Ingersoll Images Likely Reveal the Staging of Light Pole 1



We also talked with Christopher Landis who heard the plane and even had to go inside the damaged pentagon that night when he delivered the lighting. He had the entire Jason Ingersoll 9/11 photo collection with plenty of unreleased photos and he actually burned us a copy! That was a great score. So then we went outside and examined the poles. We were told they are 40 feet tall and 250lbs. After physically examining them and taking pictures all of us determined that there is no way that it was the large pole that pierced Lloyd the taxi driver's windshield after being hit by the 757. It had to be the smaller arm that holds the light or else there simply could be no truth in Lloyd's account.

Pentagon Research Team's Findings In Detail




posted on May, 12 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Ok, yea thats right. Now I remeber the story more clearly.

Yes I guess you all are right that IF Lloyd was a willing participant he has blood on his hands. But what if he wasn't a "willing" participant. His wife being FBI or ex FBI/CIA I forget, the Children of the Matrix book, Lloyd's behavior in your first interview with him seemed like he was brainwashed. He seems a bit more clear now, but dances around his position that morning when you show him pictures from Ingersroll film.

It's all so very strange. I dunno if this guy was a willing participant or not, but he definitely knows more than he's saying. I think he's scared. But hell like you said Craige, it isn't a game, your scared I'm sure as well. I think Lloyd is torn at this time whether or not to come forward.

Hell even if he does, they got him checkmated as a lunatic in most peoples minds anyway.

But keep on trucking Craig, I wish you the best. I never once thought that you didn't consider the things I mentioned in my earlier post(well maybe a tiny bit, but not really). It sort of all just hit me after watching the opening video to this post, how deep this thing most likely goes.

So I was just more or less pointing these things out, and makeing sure others, heck even mysef to a point here realize that your not just mucking around, and "harrassing witnesses". It's easy to sit in the comfort of ones hoe and post on a web forum, but to really go out there, and really start pushing the issue..., your putting yourself in harms way to seek the truth wherever it does take you, and it's a noble thing and it's dangerous. I commend you for that.

and SPreston, I totally agree with what you wrote as well, as far as guys like Alex Jones go, it's a completely different thing.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Nola213
 


Lloyde does not behave as someone who is scared or remorseful for his actions.

He exhibits a bit of pride in his involvement as is evident from a variety of media interviews he has done in the past and his clear eagerness to step forward and talk to anyone about his experience.

A coerced individual would close the blinds and lock the door.

The notion that he was "mind controlled" doesn't really fit with his behavior either since he has been caught deliberately lying and switching his story for the camera.

The north side evidence implicates Lloyde. There is no way around this fact. The remote possibility that he may be purely innocent and unaware of his true actions on 9/11 due to some exotic mental manipulation technique does not change the fact that he is implicated by the evidence.



posted on May, 12 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Heres a great clip Craig made in the vdot Pole Yard... notice the WEIGHT of the pole hes attempting to lift.
www.youtube.com...

Was that the same size as the one that Lloyd claims hit his caby?

And we're supposed to believe such a pole wouldn't have created any hood damage as it stuck out of his car and rested on the dashboard or that it hurled through the air after a 90 ton aircraft struck it which pierced lloyds winshield while he was driving 40mph without causing injury to lloyd?


oh yeah, lets not forget how the pole is perfectly bended when in fact it should have been crimped in a chaotic fashion upon impact.

LLOYD! YOU ARE A LIAR.



Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by Nola213

I think back to the worker, cant remember his name, but I believe he let you examine some of the damaged pole housings(the bottom, and gave you some good inside info, only to weeks later turn up dead uner mysterious circumstances. Am I totally off on that? I dont have the greatest of memories and thiswas many months ago.



Just to clarify about this....

You are talking about Chirstopher Landis and people can read the story about our experience with him here.

He wasn't the one who gave me a tour of the light poles but he did give us the entire collection of high resolution 9/11 images from photographer Jason Ingersoll.

Most were already distributed by the DoD but some were previously unreleased.

His was the Operations Manager for Safety Service Patrol. He was in charge of road closures for road safety issues including light pole maintenance.

He did commit suicide very soon after we returned to Arlington and obtained the interviews with all the citgo witnesses but there is certainly no proof of a connection.

I will say that he seemed nervous when we met him and clearly did not want to offer any additional information to us about the light poles.

If anyone was in a position to know about something odd going on with the light poles before or after 9/11, he would have been the guy.

Since then we have filed many FOIA requests with the VDOT regarding any documentation or maintenance records as to the location of the light poles and when they were replaced.

They claim they have nothing.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Sorry for dragging up old thread - just watched the video


So over the years I've swung both ways on the Pentagon attack. The evidence from CIT is pretty hard to dismiss and the confession by England made my jaw hit the floor


My problem is this; why go to all that trouble - fly the plane in, time a missile/bomb so it looks like the plane hit, fly the plane away with a C130 in close proximity, plant light poles and a taxi, etc, etc.....when it would have been far, FAR easier to actually just fly the plane into the Pentagon
Doesn't make any sense - their method creates unnecessary risks like something going wrong with such a complex plan, or witnesses catching the whole thing on film. They flew planes into the WTC just fine and they even flew the plane to within a few feet of the Pentagon - so why all these extra steps to keep the plane in one piece?

So I'm still torn on this. It's a conundrum to me.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   

posted by Curio
Sorry for dragging up old thread - just watched the video


So over the years I've swung both ways on the Pentagon attack. The evidence from CIT is pretty hard to dismiss and the confession by England made my jaw hit the floor


My problem is this; why go to all that trouble - fly the plane in, time a missile/bomb so it looks like the plane hit, fly the plane away with a C130 in close proximity, plant light poles and a taxi, etc, etc.....when it would have been far, FAR easier to actually just fly the plane into the Pentagon
Doesn't make any sense - their method creates unnecessary risks like something going wrong with such a complex plan, or witnesses catching the whole thing on film. They flew planes into the WTC just fine and they even flew the plane to within a few feet of the Pentagon - so why all these extra steps to keep the plane in one piece?

So I'm still torn on this. It's a conundrum to me.


Just think carefully about it. The 9-11 perps dared not use a real plane on the Pentagon. Don't know where you get a missile. There was no sign of a missile at the Pentagon.

There would be no guarantee that the alleged 'hijackers' would not chicken out and scrap the mission.

There would be no guarantee that the passengers and crew would not take their alleged 'boxcutters' away from them and kick their scrawny little butts and scrap the mission.

There would be no guarantee the 90 ton aircraft would penetrate the steel reinforced wall at the target area even at 530 mph.

There would be no guarantee that it would be able to pull up quickly enough at 530 mph at the bottom of the hill and not crash and burn on the lawn in front.

There would be no guarantee it could survive an impact with five 337 pound light poles at 530 mph.



There would be no guarantee that it would not bounce off the lawn due to ground effects at 530 mph and not crash into a more vulnerable part of the Pentagon and not kill far more people including Dummy Rumsfeld snoozing at his desk and a few dozen important high-ranking officers.

There would be no guarantee that it would not bounce off the lawn due to ground effects at 530 mph and miss the Pentagon entirely, having to circle around for another try and looking really stupid to the world at large. How would the 9-11 perps politically finesse that screw-up?

So they faked it. The real aircraft flying much slower did not have to fly through light poles, and the real aircraft did not have to fly closer to the ground than 50 feet, and the real aircraft did not have to hit anything. Piece of cake.

Just fly its pattern at a much slower safer speed, blind the eyewitnesses with a flash/bang effect, blow the Hollywood Special Effects explosives at the wall, and fly the plane away. Control the area with Secret Service and FBI security, fake the light poles, fake the damage inside with planted explosives, grab all area videos and camera equipment, fake the few planted aircraft parts, fake the DNA, and turn loose the bought and paid for media witnesses. Have the FBI threaten and bully a few recalcitrant witnesses and no problemo. Sell the story to the sheeple.

Should be simple.

But they forgot to search out and permanently silence all area eyewitnesses and some doggone patriotic American citizens decided to check if there were any eyewitnesses who might have viewed events a bit differently.

Uhhhohhh. Major booboo by the 9-11 perps. Next time; arrest all eyewitnesses who do not toe the official line and eliminate them. I mean they already knew who they were, and they were interviewed in 2001, so who screwed up and let these unruly eyewitnesses go public? Why were these people even alive and speaking against the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY?

Just cannot get decent help anymore when you really need them.



posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Curio
So over the years I've swung both ways on the Pentagon attack. The evidence from CIT is pretty hard to dismiss and the confession by England made my jaw hit the floor


So I'm still torn on this. It's a conundrum to me.

Yes, it is a conundrum.

Lloyde England and his lightpole story present a huge problem for official government story believers.

They can not logically debate it. They don't know what to do with Lloyde's testimony. They don't know what approach they should take, as the whole scenario was never 'officially' mentioned...



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join