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 )

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Lloyde England & His Taxi Cab- The Eye Of The Storm, now released

DoYouEverWonder
post Jun 23 2011, 03:25 PM
Post #61





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



QUOTE
But, one way it could have been employed, is to deploy hypnotists, who over the
years find and collect optimal candidates who can then be used -- How? Imagine
an army of susceptible people, already hypnotized and ready to receive post hynotic
commands. Like perhaps "Harley Guy" or the Naudets etc. Operators inserted into
the story line at various points, to claim they saw planes etc.


I went to college between 72-77. Very often on Weds between 12 - 2 the school would bring in some form of free entertainment. We even had Geraldo & Imus back when they were cool.

One Weds they brought in a hypnotist. The auditorium was packed and most people got a turn to participate in one of his stunts. Toward the end he invited anyone who wanted to quit smoking to come up to the stage. A lot of people went up myself included. First he tried to hypnotize the whole group. Then anyone who couldn't get hypnotized had to leave the stage before he proceeded. The hypnotized people were convinced that cigarettes now tasted like rotten lemons and that they would no longer want to smoke. The effect lasted on my bf, who was hypnotized for about 2 weeks.

Now imagine that this guy/group probably went around to 100's of colleges and were probably looking for the most susceptible. What an easy way to find recruits.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Jun 23 2011, 05:12 PM
Post #62



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (Obwon)
That's what I find so disquieting about taking a view that he's lying. It seems more like
he's as curious in figuring out what happened as the investigators are. If so, that
would suggest that even he doesn't believe his own story, but how can that be?
If he's confused, and doesn't find any answers forthcoming, or even suggestions
to look further into, his best bet, for his own sanity, is to stick to the story he
knows.


Thing is, he has changed his story and continues to change it depending on who is asking the questions.

When interviewed by MSM in 2005/6, he went along with the OCT to the letter, pointing to the lightpoles on the bridge:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1julr_ll...and-on-nbc_news

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/2276/lloydpointing.png
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/5774/lloydpointing1.png

GE reference for perspective:

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/2189/ll...iewpovsmall.jpg

Then the NOC testimony came to light and he was independently interviewed:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5...91830986329305#

He denied being on the bridge. That he was on "solid ground"

Then in "The Eye of the Storm":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC3LRdjocmc

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/1378/lloydheliport.png

Pointing to where he claims he was:

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/7645/lloydpointingpov.jpg

Then he was called by Jeff "Shure" Hill and he stuck to the same story. That he was NOC but started casting aspertions on the intentions of Craig (due to some leading by Hill because he knew this was going to backfire).

QUOTE
England: You know what? I know where the cab was and I know where they wanted it to be, but I can prove where the car was.
There's a permanent picture of the fire and the Pentagon...my cab is the only cab in the world involved in 9/11...and I now where the car was. And they are trying to put the car somewhere else, for what reason, I don't know because they weren't there.

Hill : So they were trying to use some sort of distorted picture..(rolleyes.gif)

England: The pictures were made to be in one place when I was somewhere else....my car is not there at the bridge at Columbia Pike. They got it wrong, and I don't know why they have it wrong.


QUOTE
Hill: when I saw them question you about the picture, that's where I got the impression that they weren't being honest and had an agenda or something


CIT were 100% upfront and actually pressing Lloyd to admit that his cab was on the bridge!
Here are the images he was shown:

http://img827.imageshack.us/i/lloydpictures.png

He wasn't "hypnotized". He has had to adapt at every turn.

IMHO, Lloyd was involved in a situation that snowballed and which the perps took full advantage of. It could have been something as innocent as a "Walter Mitty" scenario in which he gained financially and where the perps blackmailed him or simply let him dig his own grave (as long as it never reached MSM - which they know it never will). Human nature and taking full advantage of a situation (blackmail and coercion) seem more at play here to me. 2 cents.

Either way, the guy is consciously lying. And he's calm and comfortable doing it. That bugs the shit out of me more than anything.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
zoeken
post Jun 24 2011, 01:34 AM
Post #63





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 66
Joined: 9-May 11
From: Hampton Roads
Member No.: 5,884



CIT...

Sorry if I have overlooked it, but, did you get a chance to interview the neighbor that took the pictures from the bridge?

just wondering, and thanks if you can point me in the right direction thumbsup.gif


and thank you for your hard work
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Obwon
post Jun 24 2011, 10:18 AM
Post #64





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 577
Joined: 29-November 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,712



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Jun 23 2011, 04:12 PM) *
Thing is, he has changed his story and continues to change it depending on who is asking the questions.

<snips>

Either way, the guy is consciously lying. And he's calm and comfortable doing it. That bugs the shit out of me more than anything.


No... no... I get that... Obviously he is lying! That much the story amply demonstrates.

What is bugging me is that his lies aren't even fashioned to be sanely credible, and yet
for all we get out of it, it still leads nowhere. So, to me that seems like he's in
some sort of "containment box". He doesn't have a memory of where he got his
orders from, doesn't know who gave them, or even what they were. Thus, he can't
even fashion a passably credible lie, because he lacks so much useful memory.

Okay so that's my posit. Something that would happen if mc had been applied.
Obviously, he would be told to forget what orders he was being given.
Forget who was giving these orders, and even to not remember what the orders
were consciously, and yet he'd still be able to carry them out by what would appear
to him only as a compulsion to act a certain way or do certain things.

Obviously he would not be available if he could, if he wished, point a finger at someone
higher up. He's only "out there" because he cannot! If that's the case, then unless
some way is found to probe for the info, all we have in Lloyd is a vexing circular
conundrum.

His being "comfortable" with giving these blatant lies, even in the face of the evidence,
seems to say that he has no other choice. Or, he could drive himself crazy trying
to account for the missing info he knows he should have, but more likely such
a person will simply go into denial. It's much better to be a baldfaced liar, than
it is to be crazy or admit to oneself that they've been mentally manipulated.
Obviously he has no reason to believe that anyone will consider a story about
mind control, not even conspiracy theorists, so if and when it is used, it becomes
it's own "cover up". That's what makes it the ideal application for an operation
where you need so many people, but need to keep them all in the dark.

I mean, even though we're all familiar in some way, with hypnosis and post hypnotic
suggestion, perhaps have even seen some demonstration of it. Yet, we, and I,
still have a hard time believing that it might have been employed here. They say
L. Ron Hubbard used hypnosis frequently even on mass audiences. We don't know
what the state of the art is, but I just have a sneaking suspicion that it would have
been of the utmost practical use here.

Of course, I'll be the first to admit it will be hard to find. But at least I'm searching.
Perhaps someone who knows more will come to our aid.

Obwon



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Obwon
post Jun 24 2011, 10:37 AM
Post #65





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 577
Joined: 29-November 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,712



QUOTE (DoYouEverWonder @ Jun 23 2011, 02:25 PM) *
I went to college between 72-77. Very often on Weds between 12 - 2 the school would bring in some form of free entertainment. We even had Geraldo & Imus back when they were cool.

One Weds they brought in a hypnotist. The auditorium was packed and most people got a turn to participate in one of his stunts. Toward the end he invited anyone who wanted to quit smoking to come up to the stage. A lot of people went up myself included. First he tried to hypnotize the whole group. Then anyone who couldn't get hypnotized had to leave the stage before he proceeded. The hypnotized people were convinced that cigarettes now tasted like rotten lemons and that they would no longer want to smoke. The effect lasted on my bf, who was hypnotized for about 2 weeks.

Now imagine that this guy/group probably went around to 100's of colleges and were probably looking for the most susceptible. What an easy way to find recruits.


Yes, hypnotists were part of many parties, demonstrations, shows and performances, both
public and private for many a year. So, we know for a fact that it can be done, what
we don't know is what the state of the art is. Obviously a method with so many
useful applications, is sure to have drawn the interest of spy agencies world wide, and
most certainly the CIA, with it's massive budget at it's disposal, has doubtlessly conducted
much research into it.

You say your best friends experience lasted 2 weeks? Obviously that's without his
condition being "refreshed". I've read that such "refreshment" could come in
a form so simple as encountering a phrase or picture in the course of the day.
And yes again, there are plenty of ways that stats on masses of susceptible
people could be added to a database, ready to be used when needed.
9-11 perps, if behind that kind of "firewall" would certainly have a reason
to feel comfortable that they could get away with it.

Try putting your self in their shoes, with this kind of expertise at your disposal and
a plan to effectively deploy it at critical junctures. Knowing that you'll have
people lunging forward as unshakable eye witnesses as needed, would certainly
add to the confusion needed to trip up any investigation, if not scuttle it outright
altogether.

One thing is for sure, we're certainly finding enough places in the official story, to
stumble around in confusion over.

Obwon
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Craig Ranke CIT
post Jun 24 2011, 03:38 PM
Post #66





Group: Contributor
Posts: 1,072
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 75



QUOTE (zoeken @ Jun 24 2011, 06:34 AM) *
CIT...

Sorry if I have overlooked it, but, did you get a chance to interview the neighbor that took the pictures from the bridge?

just wondering, and thanks if you can point me in the right direction thumbsup.gif


and thank you for your hard work


Yes we talked to the neighbor and obtained a couple of images that he says he took corroborating all other images showing the cab and the pole just south of the bridge.

That is covered in the presentation:
http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/vi...ofthestorm.html





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aldo Marquis CIT
post Jun 28 2012, 09:19 PM
Post #67


Citizen Investigator


Group: Contributor
Posts: 1,179
Joined: 16-August 06
Member No.: 10



Bump for Lloyde England. Because guilt is timeless.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Jun 29 2012, 12:11 AM
Post #68


dig deeper
Group Icon

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



ironic that you bring him up, cuz by complete happenstance i ran into him at the local supermarket
yesterday, and he was looking very frail compared to the last time i saw him there (which was a few
months ago). this time he was hunched and using his cart to help him stand, and he walked gingerly,
and was very slow and labored when putting groceries into his cart. seems like he is getting up there
in age, and probably wont be around too much longer. so while guilt maybe timeless,
his life - and his chance to confess the truth before he goes - is running out.





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SeniorTrend
post Sep 16 2012, 05:33 PM
Post #69





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 21
Joined: 15-September 11
Member No.: 6,275



QUOTE (Craig Ranke CIT @ Oct 29 2008, 01:09 PM) *
Get ready for an intense and surreal journey with Lloyde the cab driver while he is confronted by CIT with the north side evidence.

Watch and listen to his reaction with input from his FBI employee wife who he married after 9/11 but was seeing at the time.

See exclusive footage and images of the actual cab as it is today preserved on his 30 acres of property in the woods of Virginia.

Be prepared for an extremely engaging yet disturbing experience.

Home page
high quality megavideo version
lower quality google video version





As much as I try to stay hard boiled on this - to remain data-centric, it still breaks my heart. Watching Lloyd squirm was like getting a root canal without Novocain. To think that people, let alone those that we supposedly elected could be this evil is - I don't know, heart crushing? Soul destroying? And listen to Lloyd's wife.... I think she is terribly conflicted - she admits to a flyover and not a strike. I will continue to do what I can to help try and wake people up, and use my expertise in avionics, post-event telemetry analysis, and RF when such skills can help. My terrible fear is that if the kitchen gets too hot for the perps, they will create yet another false flag op to divert from this. A lie to cover a lie. I salute and congratulate CIT, and Architects and Engineers (who have scored a huge coup with Colorado PBS). When the time is right, the anomalies associated with flight physics and avionics can be used to further the push for the investigation that must come before our country can heal. I believe that one of the purposes (the psyop part) of this false flag was to cause extreme cognitive dissonance in the public - to cause psychic trauma. Those of us who have not succumbed to this psycho-trauma must push on.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SeniorTrend
post Sep 17 2012, 11:35 AM
Post #70





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 21
Joined: 15-September 11
Member No.: 6,275



I'm not a gun person. but in the video, I think that Lloyde had a Kalishnikov casually resting in the corner of his living room. Does anyone else think that is a tad strange? - if it is indeed an AK47? Can someone take a look and see if that is what I think I saw? My living room has flowers, etc, not semi-automatic weapons. Maybe its Shirley's. Like I said, guns are not my thing - thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Oct 29 2013, 08:42 PM
Post #71


dig deeper
Group Icon

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



with Halloween just around the bend i figured i might as well share this - i was watching The Exorcist the other night, and toward the end of the movie, Father Lankester Merrin arrives for the final exorcism, and he is dropped off by a Capitol Cab!


the iconic original poster for the movie (also used for vhs/dvd covers) is of Merrin immediately after getting out of the cab:



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
realitycheck77
post Mar 17 2014, 03:57 PM
Post #72





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 77
Joined: 25-December 08
Member No.: 4,042



QUOTE (paranoia @ Jun 28 2012, 11:11 PM) *
ironic that you bring him up, cuz by complete happenstance i ran into him at the local supermarket
yesterday, and he was looking very frail compared to the last time i saw him there (which was a few
months ago). this time he was hunched and using his cart to help him stand, and he walked gingerly,
and was very slow and labored when putting groceries into his cart. seems like he is getting up there
in age, and probably wont be around too much longer. so while guilt maybe timeless,
his life - and his chance to confess the truth before he goes - is running out.




I think Lloyde England should confess to driving past the Pentagon when a plane flew over hitting a lightpole that crashed into his cab. Is there no justice in the world? What does someone have to do these days to be sent to jail?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 17 2014, 06:01 PM
Post #73



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (realitycheck77 @ Mar 17 2014, 08:57 PM) *
I think Lloyde England should confess to driving past the Pentagon when a plane flew over hitting a lightpole that crashed into his cab. Is there no justice in the world? What does someone have to do these days to be sent to jail?


Not like you to troll Realitycheck77. Run away, yes, but troll?

Why did you decide to make a cheap shot here when there's another thread that's crying out for a response from people like yourself?

Start here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10811356
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Mar 17 2014, 08:16 PM
Post #74





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



QUOTE (SeniorTrend @ Sep 16 2012, 04:33 PM) *
... And listen to Lloyd's wife.... I think she is terribly conflicted - she admits to a flyover and not a strike.


Sorry, it seems I missed that. Where can I find her saying this?

I watched Craig's entire video of his Lloyd interview and must say that he deserves credit for taking the time and effort to put the whole thing together.

However, I believe he blew it with his interview and don't think he or anyone else will have another chance to get it right.

Craig started the interview off well enough, in a calm and probing manner.
But when he started meeting resistance from Lloyd and not getting the answers he expected to get, he became rather aggressive in his questioning and tone.

This was easy to see and hear and Lloyd started becoming extremely defensive from this point on.

Had Craig come to the interview with another member of CIT who was more gentle in their approach and let them ask most/all of the questions I believe the outcome could have been quite different to what we saw.

I also think Craig didn't do his homework well enough to trap Lloyd, in the event of his answers not going the way he thought they would.
He should have thought through every possible answer Lloyd could make and what his response would be.

There was a memorable segment in the video when Lloyd's answers (saying he wasn't on the bridge)
completely exasperated Craig and he just kept asking the same questions over and over again, getting more and more worked up.

It's a shame that such an opportunity (interviewing Lloyd) was not taken full advantage of.









Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 17 2014, 10:10 PM
Post #75



Group Icon

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



@3 mins in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-KCiwwxtnU

Her and Lloyde are slippery customers.

How else would you have gone about it Mike?

Craig showed the multiple images of his cab to Lloyde and he repeatedly denied them. He even went so far as to claim to another "interviewer" (shill) that CIT had faked these same images!

Even when they went for a drive along Route 27 Lloyde placed himself further north beyond the heliport.

Lloyde had no problem placing himself on the bridge in a 2005 NBC interview, even pointing at the lightpoles on it then we've had the years of bullcrap and lies from him ever since the NOC testimony came out. That in itself is evidence enough that Lloyde is unreliable and a liar.

The only way to break this guy is to see his reaction if an MSM (whore) reporter called to his door and asked him to repeat his story.

I'd like to see the detractors' (Realitycheck77) response and treatment of him if he were a witness to the NOC flightpath! (Which has been attempted and rejected)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Mar 19 2014, 04:53 AM
Post #76


dig deeper
Group Icon

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



QUOTE (realitycheck77)
I think Lloyde England should confess to driving past the Pentagon when a plane flew over hitting a lightpole that crashed into his cab. Is there no justice in the world? What does someone have to do these days to be sent to jail?

even within the context of your sarcasm, im not sure what you mean by being "sent to jail". what i was suggesting wasnt punishment, mine is a concern about urgency. because of his age, time is running out. as the elderly lloyde grows closer to his final days, i have this hope that some part of him will be compelled to set the record straight and tell the truth, at least on his literal deathbed. im not holding my breath though...

but as far as the light poles go, they and their bases alone are physical proof enough that they were not broken from contact with a 757 going 500+ mph. how for instance, did pole #2, which was on the same side of the highway as lloyde's cab, fall backwards less than a yard from its base? how did the frangible bases break uniformly at their strongest point (at the connection points underneath) instead of ripping apart asymetrically along their weak points of their designed-to-break walls? how did the long part of the poles end up pinched and folded over - like this below - if a plane really cut through them?


(looks like someone did a sloppy rushed job on this pole = fail)

but physical analysis of the poles isnt even necessary anymore. the fact that the poles did not fall from impact with a plane is solidified by the testimony of over a dozen eyewitnesses who saw the plane fly north of them, AND north of lloyde's cab as pictured in the photos taken on 9/11.




but how about this for a "reality check", isnt it odd that ON 9/11, not one actual live interview of mr.england took place? at least a couple reporters parroted the rumor that "a cab" was hit by a pole supposedly hit by the plane, and multiple reporters were within yards of that pole, that cab and its driver, yet NOT one of them interviewed him live on the air, nor ever shared (with the public) a direct quote from him. surely he was sought out, getting an interview with someone so directly affected by the plane would have been a sensational scoop! yet no interview of lloyde ever aired. so either they did interview him but found him unconvincing or otherwise not worthy for public broadcast, or access to lloyde was restricted. neither possibility bodes well for legitimacy of the fantastic tale that is lloyde's story, and added to the eyewitness testimony that places the plane elsewhere, an intellectually honest person would have cause for outright rejection of lloyde's claims.


feel free to believe what you want, but i know the plane did not hit the pentagon, for a fact. and its not some hard to find secret, the truth is actually there in the witness accounts. no not just the confirmed accounts as obtained by researchers, but the truth is hiding in plane sight even in the many accounts published back in 2001. i urge you rc77 to find as many of them as you can, then make a list of their claims and see what specific assertions end up being corroborated by multiple witnesses. the cit confirmed accounts do hold the key to unlocking the mystery, in that the location of the plane's approach - over the navy annex buildings and north of the citgo gas station - is clarified and established. armed with that, read what the rest of the accounts describe and see if you can figure out what the plane actually did, and where it flew.

hint:

-at least a dozen saw it north of the citgo, in a heavy right bank (too many to name)

-at least a handful then saw it go from that steep right bank, into a left bank - somewhere over the highway, lawn area,
and the construction trailers (at least walter, marra, probst, bell, sepulveda)

-fooled by the right to left bank, at least a handful thought they saw it crash short of the pentagon (timmerman, mcgraw, others - names not handy
at the moment, will dig them up later)

-at least 1 person saw the plane banking over light poles of lane 1 of south parking (r o b e r t s)

-at least 1 person saw an AA jet flying away from the scene, less than a minute after the explosions (p a r s o n s)

but guess what rc77? none of them, not one witness corroborates the 5 frames or the necessary low level flight required for the plane to fit in the official path's flight envelope. i challenge you to find one, just one person who describes a low, level, parallel to the ground (by less than a yard!) flight.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kawika
post Mar 19 2014, 04:02 PM
Post #77





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 477
Joined: 16-August 07
From: Upstate NY/VT border
Member No.: 1,719



https://onedrive.live.com/#cid=E097D925456F...#33;154&v=3



Pentagon police officer William LaGasse said he'd bet his life on the NOC path.

There is no way anyone could make an error this big. He is corroborated by Chadwick Brooks who drew the same thing independently.

This post has been edited by kawika: Mar 19 2014, 04:03 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 19 2014, 05:11 PM
Post #78



Group Icon

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



Witness contradictions to necessary directional damage path:

http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?s...&p=22008856

There's also the issue of an alleged "wobble" (and possible left bank/left wing down) around the Annex area - Carter ("it swerved"), Hemphill ("jink as if to avoid something" and "left wing down"), Ryan ("right wing down, left wing down"), Middleton ("it wobbled"), Elgas ("tilted to the left" and banked "towards the heliport").

There's also the unconfirmed reports by Marra ("rolled left then rolled right"), Deb Anlauf ("swerve[d] around the hotel" - Sheraton).

1. There are no left banks recorded on any version of the alleged FDR data in the final seconds
2. The animation shows no "wobbles" or left bank.
3. The physical damage to the lightpoles demand level flight. Even a 5 bank at the required 20ft agl on Route 27 (and where Stutt's "data" shows 0 bank) would miss at least two of the poles.

Even the alleged 20ft agl on Route 27 is contradicted by Elgas ("50ft" and "height of my house") and Owens ("75ft").

3, 2, 1 - "witness testimony is unreliab....blah"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Mar 22 2014, 09:37 PM
Post #79





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



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Mar 17 2014, 09:10 PM) *
Her and Lloyde are slippery customers.

How else would you have gone about it Mike?

Craig showed the multiple images of his cab to Lloyde and he repeatedly denied them. He even went so far as to claim to another "interviewer" (shill) that CIT had faked these same images!

Even when they went for a drive along Route 27 Lloyde placed himself further north beyond the heliport.


I would have approached the Lloyd meeting in a completely different manner.

I would have prepared for it as if I were preparing for a legal court case.

Under no circumstances, no matter what Lloyd's responses would be to my questions, would I allow myself to get emotional.

We know from NOC witness testimonies and evidence that the plane could not have struck the Pentagon. We also have photo evidence from 9/11 placing Mr. England and his taxi on a SOC bridge with a light pole lying in the middle of the street next to his vehicle.

So we know that the taxi accident had to have been staged.

The first line of questioning would simply be to establish the following: where Lloyd was exactly when his cab was struck by the pole, what he heard/saw before his cab was struck?
What happened at the moment the pole struck his cab? Glass shards or any debris impacting Lloyd?
What he did immediately after his car stopped?

How long it took before the man stopped to help him.
We know the man did not say a word to Lloyd. I would ask Lloyd what he said to the man?
Did Lloyd ask him to do anything?
We know that the man and Lloyd pulled the light pole out from the car.
How did the man know he should help Lloyd with this?
What was Lloyd doing when the man stopped to help him?

Where exactly was Lloyd standing in relation to the car when they removed the pole?
Where exactly was the other man standing in relation to the car when they were removing the pole?

There was damage to the interior of the car and the windshield, but not the vehicle's body.
What precautions, if any, were taken to avoid scratching the car?

Did you own the cab you were driving on 9/11?
Seeing as there was relatively little damage to the car (windshield and seats) why didn't you repair the damage to your cab? What vehicle did you use after the accident for work?
Did you buy that other vehicle?

Where did the two of them place the pole? In front of the car? To the side of the car? Lloyd says he fell over when they were carrying the pole. How heavy did the pole appear to be? Did you put the pole down as soon as it cleared the car, or did both of you walk with the pole some distance before putting it down? If you did, why did you do this, seeing as the pole was so heavy?

What did Lloyd do after the man drove away? Did he try to drive his car away, now that the pole was no longer an obstruction?
If not, what was the reason that he removed the pole from his car?
What was the urgency to remove it?

How long did it take before FBI agents came along after he had removed the pole?

Exactly what did they tell him when they arrived?
What did you say to the agents while they were standing with you?
What were they waiting for?
Did they touch/move any evidence? His car, the pole, glass etc.?
Did they take photos of his vehicle and of the scene?
There are photos of his cab, the pole, the agents etc. Did Lloyd see who took the photos?
How long did they keep Lloyd there?
When they finally allowed him to leave, how did he get home?
When did he get his car back?

Why did the FBI believe he was dead, when federal agents were standing right next to him right after the accident?

Did you suffer any injuries at all?

We know later in the interview, Lloyd changed his story about where he was when the pole hit his car.
I would have prepared for that with the following line of questioning.
You are stating that your car was NOC when the pole hit it. Are there any photos that you are aware of, showing you in that location?

Are you aware that no light poles were downed anywhere near where you claim to have been hit?

The five light poles that were downed by the plane were hundreds of yards away from where you say you were hit. In other words, none of the five downed light poles could have hit your car if you were located where you say you were.

Each of the five downed light poles landed several yards away from where they were standing.

Can you give any explanation at all as to why the pole that you removed from your vehicle broke off from a base that was hundreds of yards away, and was not even travelling in your direction after being hit by the plane?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 23 2014, 10:53 AM
Post #80



Group Icon

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



Honestly Mike, most of those approaches (I appreciate where you're coming from btw) have been tried from 2006 onwards. Here's a list of various threads on the subject at the CIT forum.

http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showforum=15

As for getting "emotional" I was exasperated just watching the interview. I can't even imagine how tense Lloyd's living room was after hours of repeated questioning and the same blatant lies being told.

When Lloyd is under pressure, he claims that he can't remember - example: he was asked for details on the "silent friend" and the details of how the pole was supposedly removed - "I don't remember"

QUOTE
ENGLAND: And uh, a car was comin'-- well I guess [he?] called it more or less a van. And uh, I asked the guy would he help me get the pole out. So, he stopped; he never said a word. I said, "Man it's mighty quiet, it's not makin'-- it's so quiet. And uh, he n-- he never said a word. He helped me get the pole out. The pole happened to be bent when it c-- when- when- w- we pulled the pole out, and the pole was bent. Th-- and- and the bent part took me down the ground. I fell d- down on my back. But I held the pole up. And uh, laid the pole down. And uh he got in his van and- and went on down the road.

[...]

(Later in the interview, while standing in front of Lloyde's cab...)

ENGLAND: ...The dashboard held it up.

PICKERING: It was smashed against the d-- boards. It had to be-- was- was it resting on the hood? Or was it above it?

ENGLAND:I can't say, I don't know. But it-- it was-- it was out here.

PICKERING: Okay. So the base was out here.

ENGLAND :Right.

PICKERING: Okay. So the base is out here.

ENGLAND: Right.

PICKERING: So then the man pulls up in the white van-like vehicle.

ENGLAND: Right.

PICKERING: Okay. So he doesn't speak a word...

ENGLAN: He doesn't say a thing.

PICKERING: But you ask him if he can help you.

ENGLAND: R- Right.

PICKERING: So did-- so did-- which side of the vehicle did he come around

ENGLAND: Well we- we came acround the car. Lookin at the pole.

PICKERING: So I'm gonna move over here. So now I'm the guy helping you. Where did you go? How did you guys pull the pole out?

ENGLAND: (stares at the car for a second or two)

PICKERING: So it's coming out this way. Which side was he on, which side were you on?

ENGLAND: I don't remember.

PICKERING: You don't remember?

ENGLAND: I don't remember. But I know we pul-- we pul-- we took the pole out.

PICKERING: Okay.

ENGLAND :And- and- and the bent part went to the bottom.

PICKERING: Oh so it flipped.

ENGLAND :Yeah.

PICKERING: The bent part, okay.

ENGLAND :Yeah. And it took me down.

PICKERING: So you tumbled backwards this way.

ENGLAND: I f-- yeah I fell-- I fell back-...

SOMEONE OFF CAMERA: (unintelligible)

ENGLAND: Yeah I fell back-- I fell back with the pole in my hand.

PICKERING: Okay. And then once the pole is taken out-- so-- so he must have brought his end out this way? And you were pushed over this way?

ENGLAND: Could have. I d-- I don't quite remember. Because...

PICKERING: Okay. When you fell down, did he come over and help you up? Out from under the pole?

ENGLAND: Not that I can recall.

PICKERING: Okay.
http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?s...t&p=2410566



He claims that the pole fell on him after an explosion (the Daryl Donley fireball image captured @6-7 minutes after the event).

He claims that he was there until the 10:15 evacuation of the area and that a cop pushed him to the ground.

He was asked why the FBI thought he was "dead" and he simply says that his wife heard this.

He was asked how the car ended up on the bridge (which he again denied) and his wife claimed that "they" must have moved it, to which he quickly interjected and said "no, they didn't"

He first claimed that he saw the aircraft, then denied it.

He is on video pointing to the bridge in an on the scene interview in 2005, now he denies it.


The only way, as I said before, to unravel this is to frogmarch an MSM reporter to his door, shove a camera in his face and tell him to repeat his story for the "public". Or for somebody to freak him out with one of these in their hands

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
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: 10th December 2019 - 12:40 PM