911 Pentagon
- Thread starter Jerry Russell
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 9/11 pentagon flight 77
Blue_Windows
Active Member
I wonder – is the cab at 0:19 seconds the decoy? Or was the decoy cab undamaged?
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
No, that's Lloyde's cab. It was taken after Lloyde had left. Note the sheet if yellow paper inside the windshield, apparently authorisation for the towing company.
But the undamaged decoy and its two occupants took off to the south under I-395 at 9:44 a.m., on video for several seconds.
Only one person mentions the decoy cab, Yvette Buzard, in her written account in Then Came The Fire. She said a long lightpole was laying across the top of it.
Nobody else took any notice.
There is also a 3rd hand account about some construction worker who allegedly saw a pole fall on it. Nobody ever followed up on that for a verbatim quote.
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
In this clip, which according to the timestamped FOX5NEWS footage of the tow truck & trailer departing the cemetery site at 9:43:12 a.m., must have started at about 9:43:20 a.m., you can see the decoy cab in 2 frames if you look at it frame by frame, around where he has his hand across the lens and there is a red car.
Then you can see the black towtruck approaching from the cemetery retaining wall, with the black covered trailer behind it, loading ramps vertical behind the cab. As it gets closer, the towtruck starts turning right across the southbound lanes.
Meanwhile, Lloyde is walking north in the HOV lanes.
At the left side of the picture. Brown pants, pale blue shirt, left hand in his pocket, cellphone to his right ear.
Then Camera Guy says, "Doris get this thing working," and he swings around about 250° to his right, to capture the decoy cab racing away. You can follow it right under the 395.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxwL7r7q856D1jD-heE69NevmSy7w1nhQI?si=FSWFnp08OIsgsVWc
Then you can see the black towtruck approaching from the cemetery retaining wall, with the black covered trailer behind it, loading ramps vertical behind the cab. As it gets closer, the towtruck starts turning right across the southbound lanes.
Meanwhile, Lloyde is walking north in the HOV lanes.
At the left side of the picture. Brown pants, pale blue shirt, left hand in his pocket, cellphone to his right ear.
Then Camera Guy says, "Doris get this thing working," and he swings around about 250° to his right, to capture the decoy cab racing away. You can follow it right under the 395.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxwL7r7q856D1jD-heE69NevmSy7w1nhQI?si=FSWFnp08OIsgsVWc
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
The First 2 Handheld Videos shows the tow truck and empty trailer departing the bridge to the north after 9:45 a.m.
This Ingersoll photo timestamped 9:48 appears to show Lloyde talking to a man, presumably when they both signed the dollar bill and swapped halves as a keepsake.
Aldo Marquis and others tried to find that guy, but had no luck, so again accused Lloyde of inventing this story.
But it makes perfect sense if this guy was an accomplice tasked with keeping Lloyde occupied and looking the other way, while they staged the cab scene.
I tried locating the man by the name on the dollar bill, and found a famous footballer. But it seems to be a fake name in this case.
This Ingersoll photo timestamped 9:48 appears to show Lloyde talking to a man, presumably when they both signed the dollar bill and swapped halves as a keepsake.
Aldo Marquis and others tried to find that guy, but had no luck, so again accused Lloyde of inventing this story.
But it makes perfect sense if this guy was an accomplice tasked with keeping Lloyde occupied and looking the other way, while they staged the cab scene.
I tried locating the man by the name on the dollar bill, and found a famous footballer. But it seems to be a fake name in this case.
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
Craig McKee and Sheila Casey are playing tag team against me on FB. They have both been posting voluminously over this 22nd anniversary.
Of course, attacking the Chandler-Coste Cabal is foremost for McKee, who has been running a campaign against them for years, because they dare to pick on his beloved CIT. And Lloyde England is dragged into it, and roasted all over again, despite all the work I have done trying to educate him and straighten out the damage CIT did to the cause of 9/11 truth.
Sheila has had another dig at Lloyde, by reposting her original article praising CIT and defaming Lloyde, after her **FIVE WHOLE DAYS OF RESEARCH!!** Which of course means, she spent 5 days watching all CIT's videos.
So I wrote this in response to their bone-headed refusal to address the evidence that proves CIT wrong.
Craig, especially, has years invested into supporting CIT and stands to totally lose face if he concedes a single point.
But he is accusing the C-CC of exactly what he is doing himself.
I've tried to give him the benefit of the doubt for years, but now I have to commit him to the same Team Treason that he pretends to despise.
They've both been giving me a hard time on Sheila's post.
So I responded :
Of course, attacking the Chandler-Coste Cabal is foremost for McKee, who has been running a campaign against them for years, because they dare to pick on his beloved CIT. And Lloyde England is dragged into it, and roasted all over again, despite all the work I have done trying to educate him and straighten out the damage CIT did to the cause of 9/11 truth.
Sheila has had another dig at Lloyde, by reposting her original article praising CIT and defaming Lloyde, after her **FIVE WHOLE DAYS OF RESEARCH!!** Which of course means, she spent 5 days watching all CIT's videos.
So I wrote this in response to their bone-headed refusal to address the evidence that proves CIT wrong.
Craig, especially, has years invested into supporting CIT and stands to totally lose face if he concedes a single point.
But he is accusing the C-CC of exactly what he is doing himself.
I've tried to give him the benefit of the doubt for years, but now I have to commit him to the same Team Treason that he pretends to despise.
They've both been giving me a hard time on Sheila's post.
So I responded :
Last edited:
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
Craig's knowledge of this event is crap Sheila, totally superficial, same as yours.
Your interview on that recent video was so shallow when you started mocking and slandering Lloyde. Appalling.
Craig is constantly misquoting Lloyde. His transcription of Lloyde's words sucks.
I have painstakingly transcribed the entire 2 CIT videos, and I KNOW that Craig has misrepresented him.
You told me that you had a big disagreement with CIT. Adam Syed told me the same thing.
But here you are, defending and promoting their worst work as though they were covered in fairy dust.
You all act like lovesick CIT groupies. You cannot assess them rationally. You are unable to discuss anything they did critically.
They were inexperienced interviewers with an agenda to disregard everything Lloyde actually said, and make him out to be a liar responsible for the crime of 9/11.
Their minds were made up before they met him.
They made mistakes.
Especially with Lloyde England, Father McGraw, Joel Sucherman, Vin Narayanan and Mary Ann Owens, who have all been proven to be North of Citgo witnesses, in different locations than CIT placed them.
You refuse to discuss any of these 5 valuable NOC eyewitnesses.
Lloyde did not draw that car. Russell Pickering drew it. Lloyde only added the pole. To scale.
Lloyde showed the length of the pole on video, multiple times. It came to the front of the hood. Just as he showed on that sketch. About 12 feet long.
Which is "LONG" when it is inside your car, by anyone's standards.
But when Craig Ranke asked Lloyde, about the length of the pole in his car, Lloyde was about to answer him.
Then Craig interrupted (he interrupted Lloyde's answers DOZENS of times),
"No, I mean the pole, the WHOLE POLE,"
to which Lloyde truthfully replied that a WHOLE lightpole would be 30 or 40 feet long, which could he proven by measuring one.
So Ranke changed his question before Lloyde could answer it.
Lloyde answered the second question, because Ranke gave him no chance to answer the first one.
You totally ignore the actual evidence, with your constant bleating about "blurry images".
If those images were crystal clear, do you imagine they would ever have been released?
It took someone like me to put in the time to study all the images from dozens of sources, and piece Lloyde's true story together.
Why are you blind to the fact that Lloyde being proven to have been beside the cemetery wall, AS HE ALWAYS SAID, actually CONFIRMS and STRENGTHENS the NOC flightpath and the flyover?
WHY do you keep repeating CIT's lie that "Lloyde changed his story" when I have shown you that Lloyde ALWAYS denied being on the bridge when the pole hit, from the first day they spoke to him?
Aldo and Craig were blindsided by the circumstantial evidence on the Ingersoll photos.
But those photos, as they should have known full well, actually PROVE that Lloyde was NOT on the bridge until 18 minutes AFTER the explosion.
Explain where he was until then!!
Show proof of where he was during those 18 minutes!!
What is wrong with you people?
WHY are you blaming a humble cab driver for this crime, when I have shown you that Donald Rumsfeld's own bodyguard was sent down to the bridge, to supervise Lloyde during the photo shoot?
How do you not comprehend the magnitude of the significance of this?
You're supposed to be a couple of hard-hitting reporters, and you just don't get it!!
This fact alone, proves Rumsfeld's involvement in the farcical tableau of the taxi and light pole on the bridge, the victimisation of Lloyde, and the entire contrived process required to stage the scene, just to support the government's fraudulent flightpath.
That bodyguard was promoted to head of the Pentagon anti-terrorism force.
He lied blatantly about their activities on 9/11, in his statements in the book written on Rumsfeld by someone whose name escapes me just now. That is apparent from the numerous videos and photos showing that what he actually did was quite different from what he claimed to have done.
Why are you not investigating HIM???
You could both win fame and adulation for exposing a major player in the crime of 9/11!
WHY did CIT delete his photos from their website when I told them who he was?
Why did CIT suddenly quit, after being so passionate?
They were got at.
Yet they were permitted to leave all their websites intact for years, because the gross errors in them discredited their other excellent work.
You lot are no better than Chandler and Coste.
You are no more interested in the truth of the Pentagon event than they are.
Your interview on that recent video was so shallow when you started mocking and slandering Lloyde. Appalling.
Craig is constantly misquoting Lloyde. His transcription of Lloyde's words sucks.
I have painstakingly transcribed the entire 2 CIT videos, and I KNOW that Craig has misrepresented him.
You told me that you had a big disagreement with CIT. Adam Syed told me the same thing.
But here you are, defending and promoting their worst work as though they were covered in fairy dust.
You all act like lovesick CIT groupies. You cannot assess them rationally. You are unable to discuss anything they did critically.
They were inexperienced interviewers with an agenda to disregard everything Lloyde actually said, and make him out to be a liar responsible for the crime of 9/11.
Their minds were made up before they met him.
They made mistakes.
Especially with Lloyde England, Father McGraw, Joel Sucherman, Vin Narayanan and Mary Ann Owens, who have all been proven to be North of Citgo witnesses, in different locations than CIT placed them.
You refuse to discuss any of these 5 valuable NOC eyewitnesses.
Lloyde did not draw that car. Russell Pickering drew it. Lloyde only added the pole. To scale.
Lloyde showed the length of the pole on video, multiple times. It came to the front of the hood. Just as he showed on that sketch. About 12 feet long.
Which is "LONG" when it is inside your car, by anyone's standards.
But when Craig Ranke asked Lloyde, about the length of the pole in his car, Lloyde was about to answer him.
Then Craig interrupted (he interrupted Lloyde's answers DOZENS of times),
"No, I mean the pole, the WHOLE POLE,"
to which Lloyde truthfully replied that a WHOLE lightpole would be 30 or 40 feet long, which could he proven by measuring one.
So Ranke changed his question before Lloyde could answer it.
Lloyde answered the second question, because Ranke gave him no chance to answer the first one.
You totally ignore the actual evidence, with your constant bleating about "blurry images".
If those images were crystal clear, do you imagine they would ever have been released?
It took someone like me to put in the time to study all the images from dozens of sources, and piece Lloyde's true story together.
Why are you blind to the fact that Lloyde being proven to have been beside the cemetery wall, AS HE ALWAYS SAID, actually CONFIRMS and STRENGTHENS the NOC flightpath and the flyover?
WHY do you keep repeating CIT's lie that "Lloyde changed his story" when I have shown you that Lloyde ALWAYS denied being on the bridge when the pole hit, from the first day they spoke to him?
Aldo and Craig were blindsided by the circumstantial evidence on the Ingersoll photos.
But those photos, as they should have known full well, actually PROVE that Lloyde was NOT on the bridge until 18 minutes AFTER the explosion.
Explain where he was until then!!
Show proof of where he was during those 18 minutes!!
What is wrong with you people?
WHY are you blaming a humble cab driver for this crime, when I have shown you that Donald Rumsfeld's own bodyguard was sent down to the bridge, to supervise Lloyde during the photo shoot?
How do you not comprehend the magnitude of the significance of this?
You're supposed to be a couple of hard-hitting reporters, and you just don't get it!!
This fact alone, proves Rumsfeld's involvement in the farcical tableau of the taxi and light pole on the bridge, the victimisation of Lloyde, and the entire contrived process required to stage the scene, just to support the government's fraudulent flightpath.
That bodyguard was promoted to head of the Pentagon anti-terrorism force.
He lied blatantly about their activities on 9/11, in his statements in the book written on Rumsfeld by someone whose name escapes me just now. That is apparent from the numerous videos and photos showing that what he actually did was quite different from what he claimed to have done.
Why are you not investigating HIM???
You could both win fame and adulation for exposing a major player in the crime of 9/11!
WHY did CIT delete his photos from their website when I told them who he was?
Why did CIT suddenly quit, after being so passionate?
They were got at.
Yet they were permitted to leave all their websites intact for years, because the gross errors in them discredited their other excellent work.
You lot are no better than Chandler and Coste.
You are no more interested in the truth of the Pentagon event than they are.
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
DougGlaass
Member
DougGlaass
Member
I'm not friends with her but just sent a request so if she accepts I will come to your rescue lol obviously not your rescue but McKee saying that your goal is to discredit CIT is fucking bonkers.
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
STEVE RISKUS was email interviewed by an Italian research site, who sent him some photos so he could mark his location on them.
Aldo Marquis reproduced the resulting post, but the translation is terrible, and alas, the photo links have since disappeared.
However I saved them years ago.
Aldo Marquis reproduced the resulting post, but the translation is terrible, and alas, the photo links have since disappeared.
However I saved them years ago.
I followed the link and found that Ruby's post came at the end of a rather long conversation involving Craig McKee as well as Sheila and 'Lorraine'. And there's been no further reply from McKee, regarding Ruby's accusation that McKee consistently misquotes Lloyde and garbles his "transcriptions". For the moment, our 'Lorraine' has the last word.
In his argument, McKee relies heavily on Jeff Hill's interview with Lloyde. I think we've discussed that interview before somewhere, but it's been a long time. Ruby, is this interview at your fingertips? What did Lloyde really say? Surely not that the pole in his taxi was 40 feet long.
Blue_Windows
Active Member
I believe Ruby is the same person as Lorraine here 
Ruby/Lorraine explained it to me some pages back in this thread, but Craig and Lloyde are talking past each other. When Lloyde says "the long piece", he's referring to the two poles behind his car, which do not have a tapered end. But Craig thinks he's talking about the pole (light pole) in front of the car. Importantly, Lloyde's "pole" had a vertical fin attached on one end, likely for aerodynamics, because it was fired from aerial vehicle like a helicopter (likely the Marine CH-53E Superstallion).
Ruby/Lorraine explained it to me some pages back in this thread, but Craig and Lloyde are talking past each other. When Lloyde says "the long piece", he's referring to the two poles behind his car, which do not have a tapered end. But Craig thinks he's talking about the pole (light pole) in front of the car. Importantly, Lloyde's "pole" had a vertical fin attached on one end, likely for aerodynamics, because it was fired from aerial vehicle like a helicopter (likely the Marine CH-53E Superstallion).
I didn't want to blow anyone's cover
Ruby Gray
Well-Known Member
Thanks Jerry!
I've been doing battle the past few weeks with all these people who are ostensibly on the same side, as you know from when you first rescued me with your incisive comprehension and keen observations from their slavering jaws on Truth and Shadows some years ago.
It has always flummoxed me, how they, especially McKee, perpetually condemn Chandler, Coste etc for their disingenuous wresting of the evidence and refusal to back down in the face of better information, while indulging in precisely the same tactics themselves.
I am accused of "trying to discredit CIT" for my strong stand on the few cases which CIT unfortunately got terribly wrong. Notably Lloyde England, but also Father Stephen McGraw, Joel Sucherman, Vin Narayanan and Mary Ann Owens. I provide a wealth of video and photographic evidence to support everything I write, yet I am accused of unsupported conjecture!!
When McKee tires of defending his devious accusations, Adam Ruff steps in. He has been vociferous in his attacks on me and my work for years. His aggressiveness was somewhat intimidating.
But this time, I held my ground and pressed him to answer a few simple questions. Such as identifying characters in the narrative, depicted on time stamped photos.
His absolute failure to answer anything revealed his dearth of knowledge about the Pentagon event. I've always referred to him as McKee's Rottweiler, but he's more of a toothless terrier. I am quite frankly stunned that anyone with such a miserable grasp of the Pentagon evidence, promotes himself, and is generally accepted as, an authority on it.
This morning I got a notification that he had replied to a comment of mine, but by the time I looked for it, he had blocked me, and all his comments had vanished.
Perhaps someone here can check out this thread, which is one of the pages where Ruff was floundering in his attempt to silence me.
These cowards can not debate any subject on its own merits. They cannot think logically. I have called them lovesick CIT groupies, because all they have is an uncritical devotion to every CIT dogma, right or wrong. None of them has ever done any independent research of all available evidence, nor analysis of previous assumptions in light of more recently released material.
Mysteriously, they all choose to blame a dead taxi driver for the crime of 9/11 Pentagon, and insist that no further investigation is required.
This to me exposes their twisted agenda of infiltration and disinformation. They are just as guilty of this as the Chandler-Coste Cabal.
But at least the CCC has made the attempt at doing research and analysis, although I strongly disagree with most of their conclusions. And I have put in the effort to systematically disprove them.
McKee - Ruff - Casey - Syed etc have never done anything except watch CIT videos and attack everybody else with different views.
As Chandler so astutely noted.
I've been doing battle the past few weeks with all these people who are ostensibly on the same side, as you know from when you first rescued me with your incisive comprehension and keen observations from their slavering jaws on Truth and Shadows some years ago.
It has always flummoxed me, how they, especially McKee, perpetually condemn Chandler, Coste etc for their disingenuous wresting of the evidence and refusal to back down in the face of better information, while indulging in precisely the same tactics themselves.
I am accused of "trying to discredit CIT" for my strong stand on the few cases which CIT unfortunately got terribly wrong. Notably Lloyde England, but also Father Stephen McGraw, Joel Sucherman, Vin Narayanan and Mary Ann Owens. I provide a wealth of video and photographic evidence to support everything I write, yet I am accused of unsupported conjecture!!
When McKee tires of defending his devious accusations, Adam Ruff steps in. He has been vociferous in his attacks on me and my work for years. His aggressiveness was somewhat intimidating.
But this time, I held my ground and pressed him to answer a few simple questions. Such as identifying characters in the narrative, depicted on time stamped photos.
His absolute failure to answer anything revealed his dearth of knowledge about the Pentagon event. I've always referred to him as McKee's Rottweiler, but he's more of a toothless terrier. I am quite frankly stunned that anyone with such a miserable grasp of the Pentagon evidence, promotes himself, and is generally accepted as, an authority on it.
This morning I got a notification that he had replied to a comment of mine, but by the time I looked for it, he had blocked me, and all his comments had vanished.
Perhaps someone here can check out this thread, which is one of the pages where Ruff was floundering in his attempt to silence me.
These cowards can not debate any subject on its own merits. They cannot think logically. I have called them lovesick CIT groupies, because all they have is an uncritical devotion to every CIT dogma, right or wrong. None of them has ever done any independent research of all available evidence, nor analysis of previous assumptions in light of more recently released material.
Mysteriously, they all choose to blame a dead taxi driver for the crime of 9/11 Pentagon, and insist that no further investigation is required.
This to me exposes their twisted agenda of infiltration and disinformation. They are just as guilty of this as the Chandler-Coste Cabal.
But at least the CCC has made the attempt at doing research and analysis, although I strongly disagree with most of their conclusions. And I have put in the effort to systematically disprove them.
McKee - Ruff - Casey - Syed etc have never done anything except watch CIT videos and attack everybody else with different views.
As Chandler so astutely noted.