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: 11
43
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston
Just think carefully about it.....


Thanks. You make some good points. I have to say though, some of those risks were present in NYC and they went ahead and used planes to hit the buildings there. I guess the Pentagon was a harder target to hit, true, but they still had to fly within a few feet in order to make it look believable - they were 99% of the way to actually hitting it anyway.




posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   

posted by SPreston
Just think carefully about it.....


posted by Curio

Thanks. You make some good points. I have to say though, some of those risks were present in NYC and they went ahead and used planes to hit the buildings there. I guess the Pentagon was a harder target to hit, true, but they still had to fly within a few feet in order to make it look believable - they were 99% of the way to actually hitting it anyway.


What? They were 99% of the way to actually hitting it? Surely you must be joking. They were not even 10% of the way to actually hitting the Pentagon.

To knock down the light poles and create the exact damage pattern inside the Pentagon between the alleged Entrance Hole and the alleged Exit Hole into A&E Drive, the actual aircraft used would have to fly along the official south flight path.

But it did not, did it? No, the actual aircraft used at the Pentagon flew Over the Navy Annex and North of the Citgo and high above the light poles and 1st floor target area. In fact the aircraft was flying above the 3rd floor in order to miss the light poles and overhead highway sign in its path. Even though the actual aircraft was flying much slower than the official 530 mph, it would still be going too fast to dive down into the 1st floor in less than a second.

In order to hit the 1st floor, the aircraft would have to circle around and come in much lower the 2nd pass. Wouldn't that add up to 0% of the way to actually hitting the Pentagon?

In order to knock down the light poles, the aircraft would have to circle around and line up with the official south flight path, and come in much lower the 2nd pass. In order to line up with the official damage pattern inside the Pentagon, the aircraft would have to circle around and line up with the official south flight path, and come in much lower the 2nd pass.

No, circling around for a 2nd pass was not an option. Even Mike Walters and Jamie McIntyre would have had trouble covering-up for that error with their lies.

And do not forget. They wanted to totally destroy the Towers and planted demolition explosives to accomplish that. But they wanted limited damage to the Pentagon, confined to the Wedge 1 area which had been steel reinforced and lightly populated with targeted personnel immediately before 9-11. A near miss into the roof on the east side of the Pentagon into the major Department of Defense offices killing hundreds and hundreds of key people would have been unsatisfactory. They would dare not evacuate all those people prior to, on the chance of a near miss into the roof. There was no chance of a near miss or a total miss or a crash on the lawn because they did not use an aircraft to create the damage.

However there is a chance that the remote pilot (or cockpit pilot) of the decoy aircraft screwed-up and missed the correct flight path, and ended up Over the Naval Annex instead, and it was too late to correct, and the Hollywood Special Effects explosives and flash-bang effects timed to go, and the 9-11 Perps had to go with what they had. The same aircraft flying over the Pentagon twice might have seemed too suspicious, and a hard sell even for the normally gullible sheeple.






[edit on 8/19/09 by SPreston]



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Yes, it is a conundrum.


Perhaps to you, but those of us who have a firm grasp on reality understand that the events of the day that included Lloyde England are very plausible.


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


Again, for you, perhaps it presents a problem. Those of us who have a firm grasp on reality understand the aircraft flew a flight path that knocked down the 5 light poles and continued on and impacted the building. One of those light poles ended up slamming into Lloyde's cab. What's the problem?

Unless you are prepared to jump on the P4T and Turbofan bandwagon and try to model (with cartoons and "personal expertise" and opinions and such) the *exact* and *precise* flight path (which is impossible), then I don't expect a response to this comment. Turbofan already failed at that attempt in the other thread.


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...


Once again, for you it may present a problem, but those of us who have a firm grasp on reality take Lloyde's words exactly as they were offered - the account, "warts and all", of a single individual.

You can, along with the CIT people, "read" whatever you want into his comments. Call him a liar if you like, an "agent", a "deep operative", as Aldo likes to use. I don't care. I have no problem with his account.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Great work Craig and all at CIT
, if you guys have managed to personally make jthomas stfu with his macro`d question, I will board a plane fly over the pond and buy all you guys a pint each
.

Also some food for thought as to what happens when you drive a car near a plane, say for arguments sake you are working and a Jet narrowly misses you as it sends a light pole through your windscreen, we know as well the plane was low enough and England was close enough - light pole = close enough, F.B.I. video evidence = low enough......

www.youtube.com...

Bush science appears to have reared it`s ugly head again.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
but those of us who have a firm grasp on reality understand that the events of the day that included Lloyde England are very plausible.

Casual readers to this thread should note that trebor (a self-alleged 25 year veteran DOD spook) has had many difficulties in the past trying to debate the Lloyde/lightpole story.

trebor has seriously stumbled and logically failed to present a coherent argument. You would think that an alleged career spook, like trebor claims that he is, would not want to gloss over the inconsistencies in Lloyde's account.


Originally posted by trebor451
Again, for you, perhaps it presents a problem. Those of us who have a firm grasp on reality understand the aircraft flew a flight path that knocked down the 5 light poles and continued on and impacted the building. One of those light poles ended up slamming into Lloyde's cab. What's the problem?

For you, trebor, I'll keep it simple and state three problems. A longer list might confuse you, as it has in the past.

Problem 1: There is no proof that it happened. The only person on this planet who can verify the event took place is Lloyde. No one else.

For most people, logic would dictate that this could be suspect. However, your own personal standards are somewhat more lax, trebor.

Neutral readers to the thread, when asked to prove that the event took place, here is trebor's response:

Originally posted by trebor451
I don't have to "prove" it because it happened.

Yes, neutral readers... that's the kind of logic that an alleged career spook wants us to believe.

Problem 2: The whole event does not appear in any official government reports. It is as though it never existed. You can not read an official word about Lloyde, his taxi or the light pole. This is suspect.

Neutral readers, please read this thread for a more detailed look at how suspect the Lloyde account is.

Again though, an alleged 25 year career spook wants us to believe that there was something officially mentioned about Lloyde. No, there wasn't.

Problem 3: Lloyde's own words. Neutral readers, if you haven't already done so, then you have to view CIT's interviews with Lloyde. His contradictions are stunning and raise many questions about his alleged actions that morning.


Originally posted by trebor451
Once again, for you it may present a problem, but those of us who have a firm grasp on reality take Lloyde's words exactly as they were offered - the account, "warts and all", of a single individual.

Yes, Lloyde's account has many warts. As an alleged 25 year veteran spook, trebor, you should know that Lloyde's account is suspect and that a formal series of interviews should be conducted to straighten out his story.


Originally posted by trebor451
I don't care. I have no problem with his account.

trebor, you're an alleged 25 year DOD spook and you can't see a problem with Lloyde's account? Right...

Neutral readers to this thread, you will note that when an alleged 25 year spook for the government, claims that there is nothing wrong - then due vigilance should be applied.

The Lloyde England story stinks and trebor is trying to pretend that it smells of sweet roses. As you can see, trebor's failure to prove the story true is telling. His spin on the matter is important, as he wants you to believe that 'there is nothing to see here, move along'.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Seventh
 


Seventh, I wouldn't go kissing Ranke's feet, or buying any pints just yet....

You should have a gander at this:

linky.

Exposes Ranke as a charlatan at best....something else at worst.

You will also notice a significant number of sycophants populate these threads, with a flood of repeating disingenuously selected photos and graphics, all designed to "spin" a certain story.

The real "conspiracy" here is continued shilling for DVD sales. It's all about the $$$.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


trebor trebor were you one of the spooks screwing up the planting of WMDs in Iraq for the Bush Regime, earning the Wrath of Dubya forever? Tsk tsk.

Dubya for a short while there had most of the world (well at least that portion who never used their brains) convinced that the Iraq chicken coops full of poop in the spook satellite reconnaissance photos, were Iraqi missile silos aiming WMDs at American cities.

Punishment? Is that why you have been sidelined on the ATS Forum constantly embarrassing yourself, while the other spooks get all the fun jobs?



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


It`s the norm Tezz, de-profiling significant evidence to not important and debunked by the government status, a clever ploy no doubting that, and amongst other reasons it normally reduces that evidence to not worth looking at and it slowly dies.

There is one point about this whole fiasco that is screaming INVESTIGATE THIS MORE PLEASE, and that is the B.B.C.`s premature WTC7 bulletin, I find this absolutely mind boggling that it is so easily brushed aside as another live feed goof
, a basic newscast goof... Absolutely stunning blonde weather girl is doing the early morning weather forecast on a UK`s news as it happens breakfast type show, it had been snowing hard the night before and she states..

`I had a good 8 inches last night`, that my friends is a live feed cookie cutter type mistake, however (and sorry for derailing thread a bit Craig), the way an on the spot reporting crew get on the spot reports is quite basically being on the spot, no if`s - no but`s, and of course the newsflash is neatly presented via the roving reporters tools of the trade - cameras and videos. The girl anchor was roughly a mile away at a base set up, whom had sent the data to the base station regarding WTC7?, it must be a reliable source if it was not the on the spot report team, we can safely rule this out as reliable resources would be categorized as other Journalists from different companies and or countries, no other news company in the world reported this so it`s purely the B.B.C.

Therefore it must be the on the spot live feed team, process of relaying data is via any form of medial communication, normal circumstances would be no needs for faxes back to base camp etc, as the news as it happens would be captured by film cameras and systematically broadcast to the viewers back home, it beggars belief, we have here a live news anchor girl whom knows the procedure...

Another world breaking catastrophe has happened in down town NY, we have a live news crew broadcasting the bulletin live with no video or audio content whatsoever depicting events, by the love of God this girl must have been thinking something smelt fishy here, someone had sent the report regarding WTC7, someone had authenticated it prior to being fed into the autocue, her link was killed roughly 5 minutes before the actual collapse, her bosses back home must have been swearing `I dispatch a seasoned experienced live feed crew to N.Y, a third tower collapses and there are no f****** there to capture it on film? WTF!!!!!!`.

This is not a regular mistake made by a live feed reporting set up, there is no other mistake anything like it in the history of live news, she was roughly on air for 7 minutes before being disconnected, there had also been a detailed report sent to the UK based B.B.C explaining in great detail of why WTC7 collapsed.

Debunk this by all means but when stating this sort of thing happens all the time, supply proof consisting of.....

1). It must be live feed based.

2). The mistake must include an overall backdrop that portrays normal live anchor protocols ie data - base station - autocue.

3). It must run an absolute minimum of seven minutes.

4). The event it is reporting must actually happen within 5 minutes of the incorrect bulletin.

5). It must also include explicit details of the incorrect news bulletin being sent to the home base of the news company involved.

Good luck finding this happens a lot type evidence, it does not, in fact it is the one and only time and imho is a huge weak link in the OS, and should be thoroughly investigated, we all know who owns the B.B.C.

My apologies once again for going OT Craig, sorry
.

Footnote:

The B.B.C is the biggest gatherer of news in the world, they have been broadcasting since 1950, they have an archive containing film/audio of every major world event since the start - all bar one video - the original video showing the incorrect broadcast has been lost, millions of world events only one missing news capture, what are the odds on that?, probably somewhere near 3 buildings all collapsing, 2 terrorist attacks mirroring war games occurring simultaneously involving 4 cells, 3 pilots on respective Jet flying maiden flights accomplishing their objectives, a pristine passport that avoided hell, finding the Bin Laden tape, huge stock market gamble success, and `over here guys there`s over $5billion dollars in put options still waiting` - odds of someone not collecting that amount of cash = nearly 8 years interest wtf?.

EDIT: Added option 5) to debunking essentials, and footnote.

[edit on 18/08/2009 by Seventh]

[edit on 18/08/2009 by Seventh]



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Seventh
 


Seventh, I wouldn't go kissing Ranke's feet, or buying any pints just yet....

You should have a gander at this:

linky.

Exposes Ranke as a charlatan at best....something else at worst.

You will also notice a significant number of sycophants populate these threads, with a flood of repeating disingenuously selected photos and graphics, all designed to "spin" a certain story.

The real "conspiracy" here is continued shilling for DVD sales. It's all about the $$$.


I hear what you are saying bud, but, it would be more concerning and worrying - that a guy whom is part of a movement whose soul intent is to bring a government down, gets no character defamation whatsoever.

There`s two ways to make money out of this whole affair - put options - and research DVD`s by guys whom put in thousands of hours of their time.

Nope the offer for a beer each still stands, however my old forum nemesis I would gladly buy you one also
.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Casual readers to this thread should note that trebor (a self-alleged 25 year veteran DOD spook) has had many difficulties in the past trying to debate the Lloyde/lightpole story.


It really is pretty symbolic that you keep making the same error of fact over and over again. That seems to be a characteristic of the Troother movement - shoddy attention to detail and the penchant to say things that are not true.

Where *did* you get the idea I claimed I was a "spook"?

And once again we are left with the same situation - you, tezz, and your Troother teammates are stranded on an Internet discussion board, tilting at perceived injustices like a digital Lear screaming at the storm of reality (sorry for the mixed metaphors, but that is really what your Troother movement is). You remain nothing more than wanna-be Investigansta Investigators, trapped in a court of nothing but Internet public opinion. If that is how you plan to go about changing the world or, for that matter, the status quo, good luck! You have your handful of allies here at the galactically influential ATS and on a few more Internet discussion boards out on the electronic ether, but the vast, vast majority of people who care about this throughout the world either a) don't care a damn about Lloyde England or b) understand that each and every account of a complex event will have its own unique set of anomalies that either a) don't matter when examined in the larger context of evidence or b) has no bearing on the event.

You seem to be content to do nothing but post here and over at PfT. You must forgive me if I missed the news from Down Under of Citizen Tezz asking for - nay, demanding - international pressure from the Rudd government brought to bear on the US Government for "a more detailed look at how suspect the Lloyde account is." You could get Hillary Clinton to perhaps come down for a chat. She isn't doing much more than providing ceremonial backup during visits to the odd obscure African state these days.


The Lloyde England story stinks and trebor is trying to pretend that it smells of sweet roses.


Don't blame me if you have malfunctioning olfactory lobes.

Next windmill!!!!

[edit on 20-8-2009 by trebor451]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
but the vast, vast majority of people who care about this throughout the world either a) don't care a damn about Lloyde England or b) understand that each and every account of a complex event will have its own unique set of anomalies that either a) don't matter when examined in the larger context of evidence or b) has no bearing on the event.

Neutral readers to the thread will note that trebor was not able to rebutt any of the three problems that I posed to him.

Using his experience gained as a self alleged 25 year government DOD employee, trebor has tried to his best to avoid answering the problems that I posed to him.

Ask why most people don't know about Lloyde England, trebor. This man, allegedly, was a key part of the physical evidence - yet no one on Earth can verify his story. He was never once mentioned in any official government report.

You might not think that Lloyde England's story doesn't matter, as you're trying to deflect interest away from it. You can't explain all of the anomalies that the Lloyde England story presents, so you choose to avoid it.

The rest of your spin was pointless and only showed that you lack the ability to form a coherent response about Lloyde's situation.

Please respond and keep bumping this thread to the top. People should read the awkward situation that the whole Lloyde England event presents for the official government story.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


You noticed how we each get a personal debunker?, I left loads to debunk a few posts up and he missed that and went straight for you
.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 04:40 AM
link   
Love it Tezz. It's great how you pick apart these poor replies line by line
to expose the weak attempts of debating the facts we present.

England was setup. I believe he's too scared to come forward and that
is why he lies his way out of these interviews. Only when he thought
the camera was off would he open up and imply 9/11 was a setup.

Anyway, I believe all of us are still looking for someone to give a reasonable
explanation of how the light pole ended up in Lloyd's back seat.

Here is an animation to help re-create the event. Speeds and object
sizes are not to scale. Traffic flow and Official story aircraft path are
fairly close based on the alleged damage to light poles and Pentagon.

Animation:

procision-auto.com...

procision-auto.com...



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan
Love it Tezz.


TF! Welcome back! Got that cartoon all set up yet? Did you find the precise and exact positioning of the aircraft as it passes over the highway? Did you find the precise and exact bank angle of the aircraft as it passes over the highway? Did you find the precise and exact altitude of the aircraft as it passes over the highway? Did you find the precise and exact speed of the aircraft as it passes over the highway?

Having done all the aforementioned items of discovery, were you able to find the precise and exact point on the lamp poles where the wing hit it? Were you able to find the precise and exact position on the wing (or engine cowling) where the lamp pole hit?

You *know* you need all those parameters if you are going to try and model this, right?

Well, you actually don't know that. You and Tezz and the rest of the team like to make up stuff so you can make up your little cartoons. Make up stuff and play "I'm a pretend aviation expert!". SO, go right ahead and pretend that you can create high-fidelity models that actually *mean* something when in actuality you just make stuff up!

ALL while posting on an Internet discussion board - and tezz from the other side of the world!! Aren't you folks special

Knock yourself out, bud!

[edit on 20-8-2009 by trebor451]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


Well, now that we are at a "NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT LEVEL" don't you think it is about time you released the unedited versions of your "interviews" and any version of all the other interviews you've implied that you've done?



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Using his experience gained as a self alleged 25 year government DOD employee,


I see you fixed that "Spook" deal. Rather quietly, I see, as well.


Ask why most people don't know about Lloyde England, trebor. This man, allegedly, was a key part of the physical evidence


Allegedly? A "key part of the physical evidence"??? And in your very next line you say "He was never once mentioned in any official government story"!!! Which is it, tezz!!!!! Was he a key part of the physical evidence or was he so unimportant that he was never even mentioned in the official government story? Feel free to pull in TF if you need to.

Lloyde England is an interesting side show, but is just that. His account, in an ancillary manner,fashion further underscores the 5-lamp pole-impact flight path and the impact flight path into the building - that is why you people are so hard up in proving him wrong.

Keep going. I'm sure if you work hard enough you'll find a few more converts here on ATS or over on PfT.

Wait....PfT is nothing but Drinkers of the Official Koolaid to begin with. Sorry - no new converts there.

What "anomalies", btw?

[edit on 20-8-2009 by trebor451]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Let's see if we can help Trebor with some basic thinking and somewhat
easy answers to his questions shall we?


Originally posted by trebor451
TF! Welcome back! Got that cartoon all set up yet? Did you find the precise and exact positioning of the aircraft as it passes over the highway?


Well yes Mr. Trebor, we can position the aircraft fairly accurately based
on the OCT damage path. Ummm...did you bother to look up the data for
the pole length clippings? This can tell you the impact height of each
wing on pole #1 and pole #2.

Did you happen to see the analysis of the 5 pole positions and the wing
span of a 757? No? Well gee, that will tell you within 24 inches of the
exact horizontal position of the airplane because the wingspan is just
long enough to hit each pole in this trajectory.


Did you find the precise and exact bank angle of the aircraft as it passes over the highway?


See above. With the impact points of pole #1 and #2....why yes! Can you figure it
out from here?


Did you find the precise and exact altitude of the aircraft as it passes over the highway?


Well ummm...yes. Did you miss point #2 which directs you to point #1?


Did you find the precise and exact speed of the aircraft as it passes over the highway?


Well gee...umm...kinda! Did you bother to look at the NTSB release data
of the flying aluminum bird? The last recorded speed was 462 knots.
Would you like some help converting that to MPH?



Having done all the aforementioned items of discovery, were you able to find the precise and exact point on the lamp poles where the wing hit it?



Ummm...wow...this hurts my brain. Where have I seen this question
before? Wait...oh yes! You asked it a couple of times already and it
can be answered by point #2 which points to point #1.

Points to point? Ahhh, sorry...points to response #1. Is that less confusing?


Were you able to find the precise and exact position on the wing (or engine cowling) where the lamp pole hit?


Is there an echo in here?



You *know* you need all those parameters if you are going to try and model this, right? ... Knock yourself out, bud!


Shhhh! Don't help Trebor out with the answers. Let's see if he can do
some research for once!


[edit on 20-8-2009 by turbofan]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
Allegedly? A "key part of the physical evidence"??? And in your very next line you say "He was never once mentioned in any official government story"!!! Which is it, tezz!!!!! Was he a key part of the physical evidence or was he so unimportant that he was never even mentioned in the official government story?

This is the part where trebor, a self alleged 25 year career veteran with the DOD, doesn't understand the perplexing issue surrounding Lloyde. It has been explained to trebor, many times, but he insists that there is nothing to see here, move along, move along.

trebor, you will certainly acknowledge that Lloyde was never mentioned in any official government report. Yet, the damage to the taxi was conveniently used in a trial. Slight of hand deception, by the government to imply what happened, without investigating what happened.

Furthermore, in this thread it was shown how the media and plenty of other sources have described Lloyde's situation, as though it really happened like Lloyde said it did...

You fail to see this contradiction surrounding Lloyde. You want to misdirect people around the whole issue, as you can't explain it.


Originally posted by trebor451
Lloyde England is an interesting side show, but is just that. His account, in an ancillary manner,fashion further underscores the 5-lamp pole-impact flight path and the impact flight path into the building - that is why you people are so hard up in proving him wrong.

It doesn't take a person 25 years experience working as either a spook or a janitor for the DOD to see the contradiction that you just made.

You are trying to state that the five light poles are part of the official story. Yet, your government never officially investigated Lloyde's light pole. It might as well have been a phantom light pole, as it was never mentioned.

That's why you're trying to spin attention away from it, as it doesn't fit the official script.

Casual readers to the thread, remember it was trebor who stated that he didn't have to prove the event happened because he knew that it did. That is such a frightening kool-aid kind of statement to believe and it shows the mindset of someone who wants you to 'move along, nothing to see here...'



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Oh so now Grimstad wants to get into the nitty gritty of the physical evidence without bothering to get accurate specs from the VDOT?

Of course.

That's because if he did proper research he would not like the outcome so naturally he will refuse to contact the VDOT just as he refuses to contact the north side witnesses whose accounts he is recklessly attacking.

SPreston is quite correct, we have been to the Virginia Dept Of Transportation to find out the exact specs and physically examine the same style poles and they are definitely 40 feet long.



But even if we just look at the images from that day of the pole next to the cab it's quite clear that the length of the pole is many times the length of the distance from the back seat to the dash.




Replacement pole:


Remember, Lloyde claims that the top lighter bent end of the pole was inside the cab stopped at the back seat and that the much heavier and much longer base end was suspended over the hood of the car.

Although as pointed out by Grimstad earlier, when we physically examined the taxi with Lloyde in 2008, almost 7 years after the event, we did find that there was a VERY minor rip in the back seat....but the notion that the jagged cut off bent top of this pole caused this minor rip and wedged deep enough in to suspend the rest of the over 200lb 40 foot pole over the hood is plain old silly.

Minor back seat rip:


Jagged top of the pole:


Lloyde actually said that it did NOT puncture or even rip the back seat so perhaps the small rip was already there, or else somehow caused during the salvage of the cab years later, or certainly staged by the planners with a crow bar or something in advance.

Bottom line it's clear that it did NOT wedge itself into the back seat let alone completely puncture the car and if it had, it would have been extremely difficult of not impossible for 2 men to remove by hand.

Since we're only talking about 5 or 6 feet from the back seat to the dash that leaves at least 30 feet of the HEAVY end of the pole to be suspended over the hood.

That is impossible by the laws of gravity if we consider this situation out of context....but let's put it IN context to REALLY demonstrate the ridiculousness of this story.

The official story requires a 90 ton boeing traveling at 460 knots or 530 mph to have hit this pole:


But don't forget to factor in all the kinetic energy of the cab traveling about 40 mph in the opposite direction:


Assuming the pole could possibly have speared the windshield under these conditions without damaging the hood, what do you think would happen as the car came to a sliding sideways stop on the road?

(imagine 30 feet of pole still sticking out of the hood)




It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the pole would have gone flying out of the car or in the very least severely shifted destroying the windshield frame.

But the hood AND the windshield frame remained completely unscathed.


And Lloyde has an elaborate story about a silent stranger helping him remove the pole immediately after he came to a stop on the road complete with him falling down on the ground with the pole on top of him as he removed it and the top bent part supposedly flipped over.

What's clear is that the internal damage to the cab is too extensive to be from a small piece of the pole, indicating it was likely staged in advance to deliberately look like it was caused by the large pole. But since the cab and pole had to be staged immediately after the attack (probably after they blocked traffic) they must have decided to leave the exterior undamaged to stay as inconspicuous as possible.

Bottom line NONE of it make sense with physical reality and NONE of it is supported by independent evidence while ALL of it has been proven to be a complete fabrication by the witnesses who unanimously place the plane on the north side far from the light poles.








I hope the Mods don't mind if I post a comment to this thread, that was started a while back. I know that there are a lot of new members that most likely have never seen this. I have been a member since 2007, but I took a break from all the "Conspiracies" because my mind just couldn't take it anymore. May need another break after trying to digest all the info that is on this web site.

I can understand how people have questions about the Official Version of events. There are a lot of coincedences, and things that happen that defy logic.

Both sides of this argument have valid points. I can see how one would have a hard time believing that Lloyed Englands cab was penetrated by the light pole without even scratching the windshield.....It's possible......but if it happened the way it is officially described.......it is one hell of a lucky event for the Cab Driver.

I looked at the picture of the cab many times to try and fiqure out how it could have happened.....and it's like there was some Magical presense.....or protector....or Angel...was looking out for the Cab Driver.

For his cab to become sideways in the road.....Lloyed must have seen the plane out of his right side vision.....panicked...hit his brakes.....slid sideways with the front of his car facing the direction of the plane......the plane clipped the light pole....bent it.....knocked it off it's base.....and propelled it through through the winshield of his car....barely missing him.....knocking the front seat over....and coming to rest in the back seat where there is a small cut in the seat.

All of the above is possible.......but like many other's........I just find it almost too hard too believe it happened that way.

Either Mr. England was the luckiest man alive on the Planet that day.........or something just doesn't add up.

I will also say....It's also hard to believe that poles were planted......just after the crash.......his cab was positioned the way it was .

I saw the pictures of the Large Generator angled towards the hole in the Pentagon.....and the nick in the concrete curbing....most likely from the left engine. I don't think it is possible for that to be staged.

I just don't know what to think anymore. There is much evidence to support the Official Version ....and there is a lot of....I won't say evidence.....but amazing coincedences to dispute the Official Version...to keep one's head spinning for years to come.

In my opinion.....This will be like the JFK assasination.........Books will be written....pro and con......movies will be made.....and years from now.......People will still have questions....and many doubts about what "Really " happened that terrible, terrible day.

Thanks to Weed Whacker for directing me to this thread.

I pray for this country.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


I'm sorry. In my above post I should have said.....didn't scratch the hood of the car.

I said windshield. Now, it's posssible to have happened this way....but it seems like a lot of care was taken to get the pole out of the car....through the windshield....without scratching the hood. Just very odd.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join