Ruby Gray Writer

Join Date: 6 Dec 2016 Posts: 367 Threads: 3 Blog Entries: 4 Thanked 257 Times in 167 Posts

Re: LLOYDE ENGLAND VINDICATED with NEW EVIDENCE on PHOTOS & VIDEO I've studied Lloyde England's version of events, and it seems to me that this man is totally 100% honest and believable.



Much as I esteem Craig Ranke and Aldo Marquis' work in revealing many details about the Pentacon, I have reached the considered conclusion that they blundered big time where Lloyde England is concerned.



They owe him the most humble and abject apology for having maligned his good name, for having attributed false statements to him, for misrepresenting him to the world, for calling him a senile old man not fit to drive a cab, for accusing him of being an accomplice to mass murder.



Lloyde England is guilty of nothing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

He told CIT,





"IT WAS PLANNED ... I'M IN IT ... They DIDN'T MEAN for ME to be in it."



But CIT uncharacteristically refused to accept a single statement made by Lloyde, although in fact, he was their first and crucial NORTH SIDE WITNESS!



In his Survivor Fund interview (2002?), he stated that he saw the plane go overhead as he APPROACHED THE NAVY ANNEX, travelling south from Rosslyn. This means he must have been North of the turn-off to the Navy Annex when the plane flew overhead. However, the bridge is SOUTH of the Navy Annex turnoff (H Road).





This makes Lloyde England a NORTH SIDE FLIGHT PATH WITNESS.



In his NBC TV interview, England was interviewed pointing to the location where "IT HAPPENED," which was not on the bridge. He stated that the Pentagon deal was "a FAKE THING", which is why he believed Moussaoui should not get the death penalty.



In CIT's 2006 interview, Lloyde was adamant that he WAS NOT ON THE BRIDGE; HE WAS ON FLAT GROUND, when "IT" happened. Aldo asked him point-blank about being hit by a light pole on the bridge, and Lloyde adamantly denied it. He appeared shocked that anyone should have had the idea it "HAPPENED" there.



In CIT's next interview (2008?), he was confused by the photographs he was being shown, of his cab next to the 30-foot pole on the bridge. You can see him trying to make sense of it. He KNEW that his cab had been speared by a LONG piece of a pole; CIT pressed him to identify the very long piece lying there in front of his cab beside the lamp and the pole arm, and questioned him about it having been the long piece WITH THE BOLTED BASE, which went through the windshield. Lloyde then stated very definitely,





"See this the long piece. See the END on it? IT DIDN'T HAVE A END ON IT NO, the base was IN THE GROUND."





Conclusion : It was a long piece of pole that ended up inside the cab, but definitely not THIS piece of pole still attached to the base. Lloyde's drawing of the pole in the cab shows a "long piece" which did not extend further than the front bumper. The piece that CIT (and the world) assumed Lloyde was referencing, would have extended another 20+ feet beyond the bumper, which everyone knows is absurd. So this marginalises Lloyde's testimony in the eyes of the world.



What CIT has failed to notice is that, BEHIND the cab in Ingersoll's images, there is ANOTHER bent piece, a long piece, of a hollow metal tube smaller than the one in front of the cab, which appears to be of a perfect diameter to have fitted inside that hole in the windshield. Nobody seems to comment on this other piece of pole, but it is the obvious suspect for the offending projectile.



Although CIT has frequently accused England of having done a 180 degree about-face in his position on the bridge on 9-11, which they attribute to their own work in proving the North Side approach which they assume he had heard about from others who saw their videos, this is totally untrue.



In every instance that I have been able to find from Lloyde England, he has unequivocally stated that he was NOT at the bridge (Columbia Pike overpass) WHEN THIS HAPPENED.



He states in every interview, that he was driving South on Route 27, and APPROACHING the NAVY ANNEX. Craig even asks him in exasperation in "The Eye of the Storm,"





"What, are you telling us that they MOVED YOU from somewhere else to the bridge???"





Yes guys, that is exactly what the man was telling you! He may not have understood HOW this happened, he may not even have been conscious; after all, he did have to get himself up off the ground twice; and he stated,





"There are some things I don't have a answer for."





When, much belated, Craig and Aldo did allow England to show them the exact location he was at WHEN IT HAPPENED, as they routinely did with many other witnesses whose testimonies they filmed on site, CIT flatly refused to believe Lloyde, because they had themselves been so hornswoggled by the Official Story with its photographs of the CAB ON THE BRIDGE, which as CIT knew perfectly well, were STAGED.



Other witnesses were allowed to tell their stories in their own way, and were not subjected to incredulity as England was. These witnesses are the very ones used to promote the NORTH SIDE FLIGHT PATH, which CIT then used to discredit Lloyde, simply because ... LLOYDE was PHOTOGRAPHED on the BRIDGE, which they imagined, proved that he was lying, since the incident could not possibly have occurred there.



Inexplicably, CIT remained inured to its own gross misrepresentation of Lloyde's testimony.





They went to some trouble to obtain images from "Mike", a friend of Lloyde's who had taken some photos (he said "a half dozen or so") of the cab on the bridge. However, only 2 images were forthcoming, taken a second or two apart. Craig dismissed these 2 images as worthless because they were of low resolution; they showed virtually the same view as one of Jason Ingersoll's photos; and they were almost identical with each other.





However, these 2 images provide many clues to the way in which the event was staged.





Why did Mike only give CIT 2 hard copies of photos, and 2 photos on a disc, when he said that he had "6 or so"? Were there actually more photos taken? I suggest that indeed there were more. That other photos may have been taken at another location prior to these 2 on the bridge. Although Lloyde admitted candidly that his friend Mike was "up on the bridge", he also stated that photos were taken at the site that he identified, NORTH of the bridge, approaching the Navy Annex. Were those photos ever copied onto that disc as well? Were they then deleted as being too dangerous to share with others? If so, and if the disc still exists, there is image recovery software that can retrieve "deleted" pictures. It would be a worthwhile thing to check this disc for any other information.





Meanwhile, what do the 2 photos show us? In fact, they contain clues that identify the TIME they were taken, which happens to be the very same time that JASON INGERSOLL took his first 2 photos, outside the Navy Annex, as he began his trip down to Route 27.





So what can we tell from this? We now know that, several minutes before Ingersoll began to take shots that identified the cab and the long pole posed there on the bridge, the cab and the pole pieces were posed already for the photo ops that would sell the AA77 Official Flight Path story to the world.





We can also see an emergency vehicle on the bridge. It is facing the wrong way on the road. It has a wide emergency lights bar on its roof. It has two stripes along its sides, possibly red and blue or orange and blue. The double back doors of this white, van-like vehicle are open. There seems to be a platform extending out the back beyond those doors. The driver's door is open, and a man is standing on the platform at the back. This man is wearing a grey hoodie, that garment of disguise favoured by perpetrators of nefarious deeds.





There is another man standing on top of the median divider. He wears a light shirt and grey pants. He is carrying something in his left hand. By the way he is hoisting up his left arm and shoulder, that thing is heavy. It appears to be a large khaki-coloured tarp or bag. It is so long that he has to hold it up to clear the guard fence. Apparently he has just come from the traffic lanes next to the South lanes, which are blocked off by a red and white diagonal striped barrier.





In the second photo, the man has jumped down onto the road, and is moving towards the man standing on the platform at the back of the van. He is still holding the bag or whatever, and as he moves, he drops something behind him. This item is black, and it lands on the road against the barrier. It is visible in the other photos taken later that morning, but it was not there in the first of Mike's photos.





The other piece of "bent pole" is lying on the road behind the white striped van, over a white road marking. It is visible in the other photos taken of Lloyde's cab by Ingersoll and others.





What is missing from these photos? LLOYDE is missing. Perhaps he was standing behind the camera with Mike, or maybe not. Who knows? This may be one of the things he has no answer for.





There are so many clues in Lloyde England's story, which Craig & Aldo so cursorily glossed over, because of those official photos taken on the bridge.





There is the testimony of TONY TERRONEZ, a North Side Flight Path witness, who states that he heard the crash of shattering glass, and saw a car next to him with a shattered REAR windshield. This description fits Lloyde's taxi perfectly, if you realise that Terronez was travelling north, while Lloyde was travelling south. Their cars were stationary next to each other. That Lincoln is a somewhat boxy car that looks pretty much the same back and front. If the headlights were below the road divider, and in the shock Terronez only saw a windshield facing south with a 4'' hole in it that looked as though it had been hit by a baseball bat, then he may easily have assumed that the cab was travelling in the same direction as he was, North. But there is no evidence of any other vehicle having had this identical damage. Ergo ... this is independent proof that Lloyde was exactly where he claimed to be from the beginning  way up there opposite the Heliport.





More independent proof of this abounds. Penny Elgas, Robert Turcios, Sean Boger, Joel Sucherman, Vin Narayanan and many others, all claimed to be under the flight path or to have a view of it, and all claimed that a light pole or exit sign had been clipped, opposite the helipad. CIT only placed most of these witnesses South of the bridge, because of the faked staged photos of the cab, which was moved there after the damage was done.









Had CIT just listened to Lloyde England with the respect and genuine belief afforded other witnesses, and followed through on the many clues they missed, they would have seen how his testimony could have advanced their case much further.





Instead, because of photographs of a scene they KNEW to be staged, they worked back to front, and placed most witnesses in the DUBIOUS category, locating them far south of the bridge, which makes them all appear to be lying. Some were, surely.





But when you ignore the official flight path, and locate those witnesses relative to the NORTH flight path, many of them fall into place with much valid evidence that corroborates the North Side Witnesses they already have. For example, Joel Sucherman states that the plane flew West to East, straight across his field of view, and that he was only 100 yards west of the impact hole. Yet CIT places him just below the I-395 overpass, hundreds of yards from the Pentagon.





CIT places FATHER STEPHEN MCGRAW way to the South. However, he was filmed and photographed working on the lawn, many yards NORTH of the Helipad. He had left his car on the highway, and crossed the guardrail onto the Pentagon lawn. CIT has him necessarily walking about 350 yards to get to that position. But McGraw stated that he was NEXT TO Lloyde's cab, and he was clearly a NORTH Side Witness himself. Several times, McGraw stresses that he saw 2 fires flaming out of the TOP floor windows of the Pentagon. More likely he saw 2 AFTERBURNERS from the military jet as it accelerated and flew over the building???





And another thing. CIT asked for the I.D. of the 3 guys guarding the staged bridge scene. Surely the guy in dark glasses and blue shirt is Detective Don Fortunato? The officer who ended up by the taxi cab on the highway?





LLOYDE ENGLAND WAS ALWAYS A NORTH SIDE WITNESS.





It is not CIT who have been demonised for condemning Lloyde England; it is CIT who have demonised this honest witness to the truth of the Pentacon. __________________

Isaiah 30:25

~ the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall.