• 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

Nobody is taking a stab at hole the pole ended up in Lloyd's car?

Does Lloyd have super duper UFO brakes able to stop on a dime when
the "plane" knock the pole over?

Does the pole float in mid air, and wait for the car to skid into place, then
get horizontal and slide into the back seat leaving the heavy end suspended
over the hood without scratching the roof, or hood?

Magic Pole...or maybe that's actually column 79 from WTC 7? :confused:
 
Turbofan said:
(imagine the 30 foot long pole still inside the cab as described by Lloyde and required by the interior damage)
Click to expand...
So now the cab's damage match the pole?

Turbofan said:
For all we know it could be a missile, or smaller aircraft, or maybe drawn in.
Click to expand...
No, from all we know it was AA77. AA77 was tracked by radar until it reached the vicinity of the pentagon, tens of people saw it crash into the pentagon, debris that match a 757 and the remains of the crew and passengers were recovered from the pentagon.
Nobody saw a missile and no missile parts were found at the pentagon.
Few people described a smaller plane however the vast majority of witnesses described a commercial airliner. And again, debris that match a 757 and the remains of the crew and passengers were recovered from the pentagon.
Calling something a fake is the easiest way to ignore evidence you don't like.
 
Turbofan said:
Don't hate me because the DoD (DUD) video doesn't proove AA77 was there...
Click to expand...


Silly you, nobody puts the burden of proof all on that one video. The physical evidence taken together is sufficient to prove this. The video, meanwhile, is consistent with AA77 being there over the lawn; it is not inconsistent with it. What it is inconsistent with is the proposition that AA77 flew over the Pentagon. I seriously doubt you would dismiss the video so cavalierly if it had in fact shown a flyover. No, it would have been promoted as Exhibit A for the flyover hypothesis.
 
beachnut said:

CITLies1.jpg
Click to expand...
Glad Turbofan posted the 50 mph skid by Lloyd, it explains all the damage to windshield.

Best part about 9/11 truth; they debunk, refute, and generally destroy their own ideas as they spew lies and fantasy.
 
beachnut said:
Glad Turbofan posted the 50 mph skid by Lloyd, it explains all the damage to windshield.

Best part about 9/11 truth; they debunk, refute, and generally destroy their own ideas as they spew lies and fantasy.
Click to expand...

Very well put!
Thumbs up!
I know that Rod Serling has passed but that would be superduper cool if he narrated all the CIT junior high like movies.
 
Last edited:
Turbofan said:
Time to buy a lotto ticket!

Don't hate me because the DoD (DUD) video doesn't proove AA77 was there...
Click to expand...

No-one can say for definite from the video that 77 was there, but we can prove a flyover plane was not there.

If there had been a flyover plane it would have been captured in both vids and many thousands of witness would have seen it.

If the vids are fake or tampered with then why not put a clearer view of 77?

Epic fail from CIT monkeys. You should back away from those morons they will drag you and PFT further down the insanity slope.
 
Last edited:
Turbofan said:
Nobody is taking a stab at hole the pole ended up in Lloyd's car?

Does Lloyd have super duper UFO brakes able to stop on a dime when
the "plane" knock the pole over?

Does the pole float in mid air, and wait for the car to skid into place, then
get horizontal and slide into the back seat leaving the heavy end suspended
over the hood without scratching the roof, or hood?

Magic Pole...or maybe that's actually column 79 from WTC 7? :confused:
Click to expand...

Beavis and Butthead and their mouthpieces at this forum have never really explained the the light poles...

How exactly were light poles planted on a busy highway in broad day light without anybody noticing?

Perhaps the NWO is capable of performing unthinkably great magic tricks. After all, they were able to fool people that were there into believing the plane really hit the Pentagon when it really pulled up and over at the last second.
 
Last edited:
dtugg said:
After all, they were able to fool people that were there into believing the plane really hit the Pentagon when it really pulled up and over at the last second.
Click to expand...

Curse those NWO fiends and their black mind control magic! CURSE THEM!!
 
dtugg said:
How exactly were light poles planted on a busy highway in broad day light without anybody noticing?
Click to expand...

Well, since their conspiracy theory includes everybody except CIT huggers, this doesn't faze them at all.
 
How exactly were light poles planted on a busy highway in broad day light without anybody noticing?
Click to expand...

Yer not going to get all wacked out about the minor details are ya?
Yer not going to question a couple of intellectuals are ya?
Frick and Frack are in the land of death ray beams, min nukes, 402,789 demo charges, thermite tectonics, mind control, and anti gravity. What makes you think you can keep up with them? Yer in the little leagues buster, while Beavis and Butthead have paid their dues, with scientific reasoning well beyond your feeble mind. These guys are cutting edge, and don't you forget it! You can only watch in amazement, as they scour the world (universe), for that ticking time bomb.

Where do you get off questioning the flawless, meticulous, CIT team? Their accoutrement of brain power is
IRRECONCILABLE
with yours, so stand back, or take a back seat, and watch with amazement.
 
Caustic Logic,

In your blog you addressed this topic with the title "See-Saw Analogy Moot" and came to the conclusion that no calculations were necessary to determine that the light pole could have easily remained suspended over the hood of the car after spearing the windshield as Lloyde reported.

You suggested that the back seat and dash would have been sufficient to suspend the rest of the pole over the hood even though there is only a minor surface tear shown as damage to the back seat.

Although you stated that you believe this to be the case and that no calculations were necessary to figure it out, you proceed to list what you called the "known variables" for anyone who wanted figure what you deemed unnecessary calculations anyway.

You said:
If anyone wanted to do some calculations on how impossible Lloyd's story is, here are the variables:
- Pole length overall – my take - app. 23 ft including 18” base
- expected weight, and distribution of that along the narrowing length - erg, math...
- degree of bend, and its length and location along the pole - see my graphic above for one estimate.
- Line from bash dent to seat gouge – lateral difference is negligible – it seems to have come in almost straight back
– Vertical line - Exact dimensions of Lincoln Town car interior would need to be known for either of these. I'd guess 5-8 feet of pole was on the inside side of the dashboard fulcrum.
- depth of penetration into the back seat - I'd wager at least several inches.
- lateral rotation of the bend on entry - vertical, sideways? I'd wager sharp end down, as it seems most others have.
- effective strength of the seat frame and/or any chassis elements holding the light end down against the heavier end's pull.
Click to expand...

I find it interesting how you would leave out the most pertinent known values such as weight and speed of the jet, speed of the car traveling the opposite direction, and the ensuing variables introduced as the car came to a sideways stop on the road after the pole entered it.

Did all of these pertinent variables happen to slip your mind?

If so, when considering these rather pertinent variables that are unavoidable when analyzing Lloyde's account, do you still feel that calculations are unnecessary or does the damage still seem to add up perfectly to you?

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/approachgif.gif
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/driving.gif
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/gifs/sliding.gif

If not, why would you bother to consider this scenario out of context of all the necessary physics involved?

Do you understand how this does not accurately represent the problem and see how this is in fact a deceptive way to address it?
 
Hey, TLB, since you are here can you answer me a question:

How many people saw a plane fly towards the Pentagon and pull up and over at the last moment?

Thank you.
 
They must have had a bigwheel tailgate party at the CIT Treefort and ordered TLB to top this thread.
The CIT kids havent gotten much attention since releasing this video on Lloyde.
 
TheLoneBedouin said:
You suggested that the back seat and dash would have been sufficient to suspend the rest of the pole over the hood even though there is only a minor surface tear shown as damage to the back seat.
Click to expand...


If you had any modicum of reading comprehension, you would know that Caustic Logic points to more than the "minor surface tear" but the wide separation of the seatback from the seat bottom, suggesting that it was through this gap into the metal frame of the seat that the pole was wedged. He even marked this out with a red highlighter:

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/Taxi_Interior_diagramatic.jpg

As he put it: "It seems unlikely the surface leather had in any part in anchoring the see-saw, but rather metal that was designed for, at the least, supporting the weight of American passengers (light pole segment app. weight - 200-220 lbs)."

I find it funny that this part of his argument escaped your attention.

But what is even more funny is CIT pits evidence of physical damage against imperfect witness recollections, and concludes that the physical scene must be staged. This would be equivalent to supposing that JFK really died from a bomb implanted in his head, and that the witnesses were mislead by the sound of fake "gunshots" ringing throughout the Plaza (with the GK witnesses recognizing the real place where the fake gunshots were coming from, whereas the "south of GK", aka "TSBD" witnesses used to establish the "official story" being government plants), and then the physical damage to the presidential limo was fabricated in order to support the "gunshot" theory -- with fake gunshot holes being placed into the interior and windshield. That is essentially the same as CIT's lunacy.
 
Mangoose,

Do you feel that when assessing the plausibility of the damage to the cab in relation to Lloyde's story that it is fair or intellectually honest to simply ignore pertinent values such as weight and speed of the jet, speed of the car traveling the opposite direction, and the dynamic between the pole and the car as the car comes to a sliding sideways stop on the road with the pole still in the cab suspended over the hood?

If so why?

If not, do you agree with Caustic Logic that no calculations are necessary to determine that it is entirely possible for the pole to remain suspended over the hood during this entire ordeal as described by Lloyde?

P.S. Hearing something that sounds "like a bomb" is not comparable to seeing something as simple as where a plane flew in relation to ground objects.
And for the last time, CIT doesn't ignore the physical evidence. The anomolous damage is what lead them to investigate in the first place! We are discussing the physical plausibility of Lloyd's story right now. OCTers ignore inconvenient facts like the radar data showing a plane coming over the Potomac- in agreement with witnesses! The hypocricy is staggering...
 
Last edited:
Beavis and Butthead don't ignore the physical evidence per say. They just claim with zero proof that it was all faked. And everybody that handled this supposed evidence is actually in on it. Or something like that.
 
If by 'not ignoring' the evidence he means 'hand waving it away' then yea, I guess they don't ignore it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom