• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Lloyd England: Eye of the Storm

TheLoneBedouin said:
You will be happy to note, that a Virginia resident over at the Loose Change forums just discovered a new NOC witness at a Halloween party. I'd like to see you tell this witness about your BS math (email 22205 at the LC forums- we can arrange a recorded call).
Click to expand...

Really?

At a Halloween party.

He just happened to come across a complete stranger, who just happened to be a NOC witness.

They just happened to get into a conversation about 9/11.

They just happened to discuss specifically the NOC theory.

The witness just happened to be able to recall the exact location of the Citgo, the exact position of the plane, and all of the directions relative to "north", after 7 years.

All of this just happened.

At a Halloween party.

...

Truthers are funny people.
 
1337m4n said:
Really?

At a Halloween party.

He just happened to come across a complete stranger, who just happened to be a NOC witness.

They just happened to get into a conversation about 9/11.

They just happened to discuss specifically the NOC theory.

The witness just happened to be able to recall the exact location of the Citgo, the exact position of the plane, and all of the directions relative to "north", after 7 years.

All of this just happened.

At a Halloween party.

...

Truthers are funny people.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Eventually everyone is a NOC witness. I probably am and not aware of it.

Can't wait till I get interviewed on CIT!
 
There was a cool movie playing at the Loose Change Halloween Party:

rankeeeeeee.jpg

 
1337m4n said:
Everybody, stop debating all these weird tangents and just answer me this:

What are the implications of Lloyd incorrectly stating his location?
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you don't know. Lloyd was trying to help CIT substantiate their NOC case, but Ranke wouldn't let him. You see, Ranke and crew have already committed to the fact that Lloyd is an OCT accomplice, so his support couldn't be allowed as that would spoil the plot in an otherwise nonsensical theory.

It simply proves that CIT is an inside job!
 
TheLoneBedouin said:
No, we're not. Nothing flew your ridiculous fabricated flightpath. However even your path is flyable, so it doesn't "debunk" CIT anyway.

If you take Terry Morin's flightpath literally and ignore the inconvenient "FOB flyover" part, the plane will impact on the wrong side of the building.

What the witnesses do imply, is that the plane came over the Navy Annex to the North of the Citgo, and flew over the Pentagon without descending (or atleast, descending very little and pulling up). Needless to say, this a very simple maneuvore that practically any plane can fly.

You will be happy to note, that a Virginia resident over at the Loose Change forums just discovered a new NOC witness at a Halloween party. I'd like to see you tell this witness about your BS math (email 22205 at the LC forums- we can arrange a recorded call).
Click to expand...

And we see the CIT sheep stack lies on top of lies.

Hey TLB, lets see the calculations that shows the CIT path. Hell you show the halloween partier the calculations you fraud.
 
1337m4n said:
Really?

At a Halloween party.

He just happened to come across a complete stranger, who just happened to be a NOC witness.

They just happened to get into a conversation about 9/11.

They just happened to discuss specifically the NOC theory.

The witness just happened to be able to recall the exact location of the Citgo, the exact position of the plane, and all of the directions relative to "north", after 7 years.

All of this just happened.

At a Halloween party.

...

Truthers are funny people.
Click to expand...

Ok...so I'm not the only one who thought that was a little bit weird.
 
No wonder A.W. is so stupid, he's got himself on his side!

He even measured the distance between some white paint to prove a light
pole is a certain length. :rolleyes:

Maybe with this year's christmas money, he can buy some glasses:

topofpole1.jpg


244g.jpg


cabandlongpole.jpg


how about that custom mandrel bend courtesy of American Airlines! LMAO

Have you guys ever though about that? I know A W hasn't. You can't
get an airplane to achieve such a smooth bend at 530+ MPH :big:

Now I know I'm talking to a bunch of 5 year olds (for the most part).
 
Hey Turbofan, have you and your masters at CIT and PffffT shown your incontrovertible evidence to the proper authorities and the media yet? I mean, apparently, it is so rock solid that it is impossible to ignore unless you are a 5 year old. I guess that leaves two possible options. Either your masters have shown it to the proper people but they have ignored it because they are stupid or in on it and you guys are the only smart, honest people in the world. Or your masters are cowards and refuse to release evidence of mass murder to people that can do something about it.

Third, super secret option:
Or your masters at CIT and PffffT are rule8 moronic frauds and their "evidence" proves nothing at all.

Which is it?
 
again, argument from incredulity

Turbofan said:
No wonder A.W. is so stupid, he's got himself on his side!

He even measured the distance between some white paint to prove a light
pole is a certain length. :rolleyes:

Maybe with this year's christmas money, he can buy some glasses:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/light poles/topofpole1.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/eye of the storm/244g.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/pentagon trip/cabandlongpole.jpg

how about that custom mandrel bend courtesy of American Airlines! LMAO

Have you guys ever though about that? I know A W hasn't. You can't
get an airplane to achieve such a smooth bend at 530+ MPH :big:

Now I know I'm talking to a bunch of 5 year olds (for the most part).
Click to expand...

Its all about inertia Turdballfan, The light pole was motionless the plane was not. Theres your bend. the tube with 3/16 wall thickness is extremely ductile. I noticed you added a "piece" to your pole length. thats the lamp arm. Heres your original image with the car front ends added to it in a weak attempt to prove your point. Not that the car front ends don't extend past the white lines, I saved this to my photobucket before you could delete it. Because it was so humorous





PFT_pole_length2.jpg



Heres my images again for comparison.



27footpole.jpg


loydepole.jpg
 
From the other thread:
Turbofan said:
Can anyone here tell me how a wing hitting a light pole at 530+ MPH can produce a smooth curve like the picture shown?
Click to expand...

A few months ago there was a similar pole lying on the ground near my office, I guess it must have been knocked over by a car. What made me take note was that it was curved just like the one in the photo with Lloyd, although the poles that were just like it but still standing are perfectly straight.

So either one of these two explanations must be true:

1. The poles are made to be lightweight and will bend when they fall over and hit the ground, or

2. The NWO was trying to trick me, being a JREFer, by planting another light pole for me to see and report on here.
 
CurtC said:
From the other thread:


A few months ago there was a similar pole lying on the ground near my office, I guess it must have been knocked over by a car. What made me take note was that it was curved just like the one in the photo with Lloyd, although the poles that were just like it but still standing are perfectly straight.

So either one of these two explanations must be true:

1. The poles are made to be lightweight and will bend when they fall over and hit the ground, or

2. The NWO was trying to trick me, being a JREFer, by planting another light pole for me to see and report on here.
Click to expand...

or 3, the poles were staged

Anyone here who believes a wing can cause the smooth bend in that light pole
is an idiot.

For those who have worked with tube benders and metal tubing know the
impossibility of what CurtC and others are claiming.

I will offer the Randi million challenge to anyone that can:

Bend a metal cylinder/tube as shown in the light pole photo by striking it with an aluminum wing facsimile at any speed.

I wont hold my breath...

Non believers will run out and grab a metal tube of some sort and try this.
They may even jog down to their local exhaust shop and watch them bend
tubes for a while. Ask some questions too. Watch the radius of the bend,
and the diameter of the tube throughout the bend with and without the
mandrel technique.
 
Last edited:
Turbofan said:
or 3, the poles were staged

Anyone here who believes a wing can cause the smooth bend in that light pole
is an idiot.

For those who have worked with tube benders and metal tubing know the
impossibility of what CurtC and others are claiming.
Click to expand...

I think your "light poles were staged" was part of my number two explanation. Your #3 seems to be that I'm lying.

I intended to bring my camera and take a picture, but the next day the pole was gone. It was uncanny how, when viewed looking down its length, it looked exactly like the photo of the one by Lloyd's car. The smooth curve was about the same amount, mostly curved in the narrower end, everything.
 
Turbofan said:
Anyone here who believes a wing can cause the smooth bend in that light pole
is an idiot.
Click to expand...

Says somebody that believes the plane pulled up and over the Pentagon. How many witnesses do you have for that again?

I assume that you have calculations showing the bend in the light pole couldn't have been made by the wing of the plane. Care to share them with us?

You simply saying it is impossible means nothing at all. You are just some random fanboy that believes whatever the worst investigators in the history of the world tell him to think. How many investigators have their own witnesses debunk their claims?

Nobody here really has to go out of our way to show you that the pole could have been bent that way by the plane. The status quo is with us. If your stupid little club wants to change that, you have to offer proof. Thus far, you and your idiot friends have offered zero.
 
Turbofan said:
What does the weight of the car have to do with the back seat and pole? :confused:
Click to expand...
Well your the one who seems to think that the car cannot support the wieght of the pole.

Am I talking to a bunch of first graders here?

How long was the section of pole that 'landed' in Lloyd's car? 35 feet?
What is the approximate weight of the pole, 200 lbs.?

Six feet inside the car, and the fulcrum occurs at the windshield six feet
from the thinnest part of the pole.

That means about 171 pounds was supported by the seat leather :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
If your math comes to anywhere near correct, that is a small amount of wieght for the back of the seat to support.

Take into account that the pole is bigger near the base and tapers toward
the top, but I'll give you equal weight distribution.

I'll also forget the fact that the car skidded and the pole would have shifted.

I need some of that super strength taxi leather! LMAO
Click to expand...
Get some leather upoulstery and try to rip it. Leather is pretty strong material. Lots of tensile strength. Thats why it is used so often.

maybe one you concede, you can begin to explain how the pole could have
physically guided itself into the car. This should be good.
Click to expand...
Why would the pole need to guid itself into the car. That is a rediculous statment.
All you would need is simple chance. The pole just got hit by the wing of the plane. It would no doubt be rotating or flipping about in a chaotic manner. If the pole was in the right orientation when the car hit, the pole could easily impale the car.
 
dtugg said:
Says somebody that believes the plane pulled up and over the Pentagon. How many witnesses do you have for that again?

I assume that you have calculations showing the bend in the light pole couldn't have been made by the wing of the plane. Care to share them with us?

You simply saying it is impossible means nothing at all. You are just some random fanboy that believes whatever the worst investigators in the history of the world tell him to think. How many investigators have their own witnesses debunk their claims?

Nobody here really has to go out of our way to show you that the pole could have been bent that way by the plane. The status quo is with us. If your stupid little club wants to change that, you have to offer proof. Thus far, you and your idiot friends have offered zero.
Click to expand...

There are a quite a few ignorant people on this forum. Pages of BS spent
teaching the basics to a bunch of kids.

http://www.thefabricator.com/TubePipeFabrication/TubePipeFabrication_Article.cfm?ID=1875

Study up on what it takes to maintain a consistent diameter throughout a
bend of a tube.

Anyone here with half a brain could think it through and realize the inner
radius of the bend will compress while the O.D. will expand. Without a
mandrel inside of the tube, the metal will collapse on itself and kink.
The faster you bend the tube, the greater the kink. if you do it fast
enough, it will break.

You can even see the effects with a paper towel roll core if you don't have
any metal tubing handy.

Kids.
 
"There are a quite a few ignorant people on this forum. "

This poster being the biggest one. If he doesn't even understand how a lever works, then he has no real business thinking he is more intelligent than anyone else.
 
Turbofan said:
Cripes! you better get some debate skills and logic...or at least hang yourself
from a 30 foot pole extending through your windshield supported by a tiny hole the
size of a belt buckle.

Please tell me you guys are getting paid for these insane answers?
Click to expand...

The rip in the upoulstery is incidental. In the pictures you can clearly see that the tip of the pole got wedged under the seat back. You can see the gap between the seat back and the seat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom