IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Lloyd England's Impossible Story

NP1Mike
post Apr 13 2014, 08:59 PM
Post #1





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



It's hard to believe that as of today, not a single person has bothered to put together a piece about Lloyd England on Wikipedia.

I will be discussing an angle of his story (quite literally) that I believe has not been covered up until this point; an angle that shows his story to be a complete fabrication.

As Citizen Investigation Team (CIT) has mentioned, Mr. England's involvement in 9/11 may have been deliberate or he may simply have been at the wrong place at the wrong time and used as a patsy. We just don't have enough information to figure it out yet. But we do have enough information to prove his version of events is impossible.

Up until now, Mr. England's story has been discredited on several levels.

The location of his taxi and the downed light poles south of the Citgo gas station conflicts completely with the testimony of more than a dozen eye witnesses who saw Flt. 77 fly north of the Citgo gas station towards the Pentagon. A flight path north of the Citgo gas station (NOC) would have made collision with the 'downed' light poles impossible.

Driving 40 m.p.h. with a 30+ foot light pole impaled through his dashboard, the heavy side outside his car, swerving for 40 feet before coming to a halt and not having as much as a scratch on the hood of his car is difficult to imagine.

Most people, after having survived such a traumatic accident would be shell-shocked and not have the presence of mind to do anything for quite some time before calming down and realizing the gravity of the situation. Not Mr. England. Just minutes after the accident he was busy flagging down a van to get assistance in removing the light pole from his car! What was his reasoning? What was the urgency?

"Because I wanted to drive the car home. The car is my only transportation." Right, better to tamper with the evidence and flee the scene of an accident than wait for the police? Like the police wouldn't have been able to help you remove the pole when they arrived?

And the man who was gracious enough to stop and help out Lloyd just happened to be completely silent the entire time he was helping him.
He didn't ask Lloyd if he was injured, something that 99.99% of the public would do at the scene of an accident, and to boot, according to Lloyd he left as Lloyd was still lying on the ground struggling with the bent end of the pole lying on top of him!


I will be focusing on three key areas of Lloyd's story: the timing of the 'accident', the location of Lloyd at the moment of impact and the direction of impact.

Timing/location:
Flt. 77 was supposedly flying at around 530 mph when it supposedly struck the Pentagon. This translates into ~ 780 ft./sec.

Pole 1 was approximately 990 ft. away from the Pentagon crash point.
This means that from the time Flt. 77 would have struck Pole 1 (the pole that supposedly hit Mr. England's taxi) until the time it would have struck the Pentagon, a little more than one second would have transpired.

This simple timing fact is very important when considering the location of Mr. England's taxi when it was supposedly struck.

The window of time from when Pole 1 was supposedly struck until the time when the pole would have had to have hit the taxi was incredibly short.
Less than 1/20 th of a second, or a blink of an eye.

Anything longer than this time and the pole would have passed beyond harm's way of Mr. England's taxi.

So Mr. England had to have been almost literally underneath the jet just as it supposedly struck Pole 1. That would have been quite a fateful coincidence.


Direction:

The lines in the attached photo look complicated but they aren't really.

Pole1

All the blue lines are parallel to the jet's fuselage.
All of the yellow lines are perpendicular to the jet's fuselage.
All of the orange lines are parallel to the leading edge of the jet's wings.
The two most important lines are the pink and blue lines that intersect each other and have arrow on one end.
The red dots are where Poles 1 and 2 were located before being supposedly struck by Flt. 77.

Let's examine the yellow lines first.
The reason I included them was to imagine what would have happened to the
poles had the jet been equipped with a special wing structure;
a wing structure with leading edges perpendicular to the jet's fuselage.

As you look at the photo, imagine the jet approaching Pole 1 with these 'perpendicular wings'. I have inserted a yellow line just before Pole 1, to show the angle that the wings would then be striking the pole at.

Because the wings would be perpendicular to the jet's fuselage, the pole would travel in roughly the same direction as the fuselage.

Or in other words, the pole would travel at the same angle the jet was heading for, towards the Pentagon.

But, as we know, the leading edge of the wings were not perpendicular to the jet's fuselage; rather, they were angled, as are most wings on most jets.

Let's focus our attention briefly at Pole 2 now.

The orange angled line just before Pole 2 is depicting the leading edge of the jet's left wing as it would be situated just before striking Pole 2.

The angle of the wing as it strikes Pole 2 is almost perpendicular to the road.
Somehow however, the pole managed to be propelled to the left, onto the grass.
Keep the angle and where the pole fell in mind as we now shift our focus back to Pole 1.

The orange line just before Pole 1 is depicting the leading edge of the jet's right wing as it would be situated just before striking Pole 1.


If a hypothetical wing that was perpendicular to the jet's fuselage (the yellow line just before the red dot) struck the pole, we would expect the pole to travel in the direction of the blue-arrowed line.

But the plane's wing is angled (the orange line just before the red dot) and so we would expect the pole to travel in the direction somewhere between the blue and the pink- arrowed lines.

Recall that Pole 2 was propelled to the left and so it follows that Pole 1, with an even greater angle of contact (with respect to the road) would be propelled further to the right.

Now here comes Mr. England's (and the perps') dilemma.

If we study the angle that Pole 1 supposedly impaled Mr. England's taxi, we notice a basically straight line parallel to the length of the vehicle.

Not only does the physical evidence of damage to Mr. England's vehicle bear this out, but if Pole 1 had struck his taxi at a 60 degree angle or thereabouts, it would have impaled Lloyd's chest and killed him instantly.

And so we finally come to this impossible situation.

We have a light pole that is supposedly struck by Flt. 77 which is supposedly heading straight for the Pentagon.

The angle that the pole would be traveling at after being struck would be approximately 60 degrees away from parallel to Route 27. (somewhere between the blue and pink-arrowed lines).

But Mr. England's taxi which is traveling at approximately 40 m.p.h. is supposedly struck virtually head on, with the pole penetrating at an angle almost parallel to his vehicle.

If Newton's Laws of Physics weren't violated then it would have been physically impossible to have occurred.

Either the pole strikes the cab at about a 60 degree angle and instantly kills Lloyd or the pole never strikes the taxi.

I'll let you the jury decide.

This post has been edited by NP1Mike: Apr 13 2014, 09:02 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Apr 14 2014, 10:41 PM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Nice break down Mike. Great points.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwpmniLh98o...E/preview?pli=1

Two other points.

After the right wing allegedly strikes pole 1 there then follows nearly 100ft of fuselage to prevent the pole travelling in the necessary direction (even if it did somehow swing in Lloyd's direction). Also, with the wings sweeping upwards (by about 8ft from fuselage to wingtip), the aircraft had to be about 22ft AGL as it passed that pole to cut the pole at that height (pole on ground is about 30ft long).

thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Apr 14 2014, 11:10 PM
Post #3





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Apr 14 2014, 09:41 PM) *


Thanks OSS.

I also had thought about your first point. The fuselage would certainly be a big obstruction to the pole had it tried to defy the laws of physics. smile.gif

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Apr 15 2014, 05:18 AM
Post #4


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,033
Joined: 16-October 06
From: dc
Member No.: 96



i just wanted to add that there is an "E" at the end of lloyde's name... and while on the topic of his name, see this thread for details about he and his wife legally changing their names days prior to 9/11 and what that name change reflects: http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=1293

thumbsup.gif

see also: http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums...7&t=1579546

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Apr 15 2014, 05:16 PM
Post #5





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (paranoia @ Apr 15 2014, 04:18 AM) *
i just wanted to add that there is an "E" at the end of lloyde's name... and while on the topic of his name, see this thread for details about he and his wife legally changing their names days prior to 9/11 and what that name change reflects: http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=1293

thumbsup.gif

see also: http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums...7&t=1579546



Thanks for that paranoia!

I did see both spellings of his name prior to my post and I was interested in getting it right, thus my attempt at finding a Wiki article.

Since the majority of spellings on the net did not have an 'e' on the end (including MSM news articles), I went with that.

Yes, it is quite the coincidence that he and his wife-to-be would change their names less than a month prior to 9/11.

*I was going to edit my OP to correct the spelling of Lloyde's name,
but I just discovered that I am not permitted to do so.
That is unfortunate.

(This post was edited to add the above note*)



This post has been edited by NP1Mike: Apr 15 2014, 05:22 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FirstUsedBooks
post Apr 15 2014, 05:36 PM
Post #6





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 31
Joined: 30-July 11
Member No.: 6,103



What, if anything, to make about the fact that he got to keep his car, apparently after the FBI had had it in for examination? Given the m/o of the rest of the 9/11 operation, I'd have expected it to be crushed, but he got to keep it and park it at his cottage and show it to Craig. Presumably he received an insurance settlement for it and bought another vehicle for his business. But why would an insurance company write it off, if only damage was a windshield and two seat backs? I wonder whether he still has the car, it should be worth a bit now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Apr 15 2014, 06:22 PM
Post #7





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (FirstUsedBooks @ Apr 15 2014, 04:36 PM) *
What, if anything, to make about the fact that he got to keep his car, apparently after the FBI had had it in for examination? Given the m/o of the rest of the 9/11 operation, I'd have expected it to be crushed, but he got to keep it and park it at his cottage and show it to Craig. Presumably he received an insurance settlement for it and bought another vehicle for his business. But why would an insurance company write it off, if only damage was a windshield and two seat backs? I wonder whether he still has the car, it should be worth a bit now.



Yes, I too thought about that. It is very curious indeed.

I also would like to know what excuse would be given as to why the car wasn't repaired.
As you say, the damage was quite negligible overall.

If Lloyde owned the car, as it would seem that way, why would he go out and buy another one at great cost, when he had a perfectly good one to use (albeit with some minor repairs)?

It is strange indeed, that such a piece of inculpatory evidence would be preserved by Lloyde.

It is a pity that the MSM (and no wonder why) hasn't jumped all over Lloyde about his 180 degree turn in his position about where he was when the light pole supposedly struck his cab (NOC vs. SOC).
They probably would attribute it to a senile old man losing it and simply forgetting things.





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Apr 15 2014, 06:34 PM
Post #8


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,033
Joined: 16-October 06
From: dc
Member No.: 96



i agree that the cab was certainly salvageable, and with minimal repairs could have gotten back on the road - once the fbi returned it to lloyde. but if i remember correctly, his auto insurance did not pay for a new cab. there may be further details out there, but this link is what i have handy:

http://www.cfncr.org/atf/cf/%7B8C61F1DB-3F...mber%202003.pdf

QUOTE
Lloyde A. England

He had driven his taxicab past the Pentagon a million times before, but September 11 was different from any other day. On that day, Lloyde A. England had just dropped off a passenger and was driving home as American Airlines Flight # 77 flew directly overhead, sending a light pole crashing through his windshield. In that brief moment his car was totaled and his livelihood threatened.

When other agencies did not help, the Survivors’ Fund and NVFS case manager Sarah Carter stepped in and arranged for funds for his mortgage and groceries until he could buy another cab. Perhaps as valuable as those financial contributions were the talks he had with his case manager, who validated the trauma he had experienced that day.

“It’s good to know there are people out there who are willing to help working people,” says England.“It’s not that I couldn’t work. I was just set back"


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 14th November 2019 - 12:07 AM