The Physical Damage To The Cab, let's look at it in context Options

[Craig Ranke CIT]

People who try to make excuses and suggest that the physical damage to Lloyde England's cab could have been accomplished in real time with a light pole or piece of a light pole are not looking at the information in context.

Examining images of the cab either immediately after the event or preserved under a tarp on Lloyde's 30 acres of woods for almost 7 years changes the frame of reference so this article will bring it back into context.

Before I elaborate I feel it's important to always remember of course that it has been independently proven many times over that the plane was nowhere near the poles to begin with.
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/citgogif.gif)
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/ancgif.gif)
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/witness%20flight%20paths/allpaths.jpg)


But for those who for whatever illogical reasons are unable to accept the scientifically validated north side evidence, let's hypothetically place the plane on the south side and examine the physical evidence of the light pole and cab.

But I have to issue one more disclaimer. I need to stress how the following scenario is extremely hypothetical since we also now have mathematical proof that the final descent required due to the topography and obstacles physically proves the plane could not have hit the light poles as reported. This is due to the fact that the required G forces at the reported speed of 535mph have been proven impossible. The plane would have broken up over the highway.

(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/cgi%20povs/VDOT_Pent_Alt_a.jpg)
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/cgi%20povs/VDOT_Pent_Alt_ab.jpg)
All relevant calculations available in this 13 minute presentation from Pilots for 9/11 Truth.

Moving along....

If it was hypothetically possible for the plane to hit light pole 1 as reported we must consider the incredible amount of kinetic energy the light pole would absorb from the approach of this 90 ton Boeing:
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/approachgif.gif)

But let's not forget the dynamics involved with the cab coming to an immediate skidded sideways stop traveling around 40 mph:
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/sliding.gif)
(imagine the pole is in the windshield as Lloyde clearly claims and the interior damage to his cab requires)


But wait!

I'll admit I don't have the exact formulas to calculate this but here is what I would suggest from a layman's perspective: the fact that the 40 mph car and the 535 mph passenger jet would be coming TOWARDS each other would multiply the kinetic force of the pole on the car significantly.
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/driving.gif)

Correct?

Anyone disagree with this?

Now let's take a closer look at the physical damage to the cab.

It's been completely established how there is no damage to the hood and how it in fact looks freshly waxed!

(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Lloyd/DSC_0421.jpg)
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Lloyd/lloydshood.jpg)

[paranoia]

You’re welcome madtruth, but I hope that you saw some of the rebuttals to 22205’s speculations as well, in particular aldo’s point about the timing of the event: lloyde would have been aware that the WTC’s had been hit for real (and not simulated as a drill), so he had the choice of backing out or not showing up to the pentagon if he was innocent or unwitting, cuz at that point he could no longer be under the (false) impression that “drills” were taking place. So the fact that he was aware of the events in NYC, yet still showed up at the pentagon, is a good indicator that he may have been more involved than duped. Imo, aldo’s point has some major merit and should be given serious consideration in any assessment of lloyde’s complicity.

So feel free to make your own judgements about lloyde’s level of complicity. Frankly that’s secondary to the real deal: that the plane never flew near those poles, never hit them, and thus no pole ever flew into and/or smashed that cab’s windshield. So regardless of level, lloyde is definitely complicit one way or the other in lying about the pole. So he is guilty of deception and of aiding and abetting the perpetrators, as an accessory (possibly before as well, but definitely) after the fact.

[madtruth]

Those are great points. And also, the perps would not recruit him as an unwitting duped drill actor knowing that the WTC's would be hit prior and that the chances of Lloyd catching on so easily. So,yeah, it does point to him being knowingly involved rather than duped. And as you said, it's all academic anyway as we know. Lloyd is guilty,and the evidence is so overwhelming. So overwhelming that I think this has a better chance than anything we've seen before, to make it to a mainstream media source.
Let's hope so!

Marc

You’re welcome madtruth, but I hope that you saw some of the rebuttals to 22205’s speculations as well, in particular aldo’s point about the timing of the event: lloyde would have been aware that the WTC’s had been hit for real (and not simulated as a drill), so he had the choice of backing out or not showing up to the pentagon if he was innocent or unwitting, cuz at that point he could no longer be under the (false) impression that “drills” were taking place. So the fact that he was aware of the events in NYC, yet still showed up at the pentagon, is a good indicator that he may have been more involved than duped. Imo, aldo’s point has some major merit and should be given serious consideration in any assessment of lloyde’s complicity.

So feel free to make your own judgements about lloyde’s level of complicity. Frankly that’s secondary to the real deal: that the plane never flew near those poles, never hit them, and thus no pole ever flew into and/or smashed that cab’s windshield. So regardless of level, lloyde is definitely complicit one way or the other in lying about the pole. So he is guilty of deception and of aiding and abetting the perpetrators, as an accessory (possibly before as well, but definitely) after the fact.