911 Pentagon

Ruby Gray

Sure! It seems obvious that the intention was for the public to believe a lightpole was knocked flying by the plane wing, and that it hit the taxi, thus confirming the alleged trajectory of the plane across the bridge.

A segment of a real lightpole, much larger in diameter, thicker walled, deformed, jagged and tapered, would have been very unpredictable as a projectile weapon.
The 12 foot x 4 inch pole was engineered to accurately impact its target.

This pole would have been straight when fired, but bent along its length by the forces encountered inside the cab. Lloyde said that the pole pushed the passenger seat-back into the rear. Photos show that the left hand seat hinge was broken, but the seatback sprang up again. That would have bent this pole, and lifted it up so that it's rebound impact was higher.

Yes, it was a fake lightpole.


Ruby Gray

I posted this video The Eye of the Storm on my thread last night.
Since I added several new lines of evidence there 12 days ago, the views have jumped from 22,000 to 25,000. Quite extraordinary on an almost moribund site where the regulars have nearly all dropped off the perch, and no new members can join, thus there is no debate.

In the 12 hours since posting this video, there have been 400 views. Crazy! Virtually nobody knows about Lloyde England these days. About one third of the global population was born near or since 2001 and 9/11 means nothing to them. Yet this thread seems to be flagged now somehow, even though new readers cannot get notifications since they cannot login. Certain people are interested in the topic. Recent revival of Lloyde's story on various internet sites is having some effect at last.

I also wrote to Craig McKee to tell him about this video being deleted from Ranke's channel and suggesting that he post this valuable historical resource somewhere too. He still refuses to even consider any of my defenses of Lloyde England. Another pro-England friend posted some of my work on his Facebook account, which was quickly blocked.

I believe that this Lloyde England story is the only one from the whole day over all sites, where recognisable perpetrators are seen on video actually participating in the 9/11 crime. Most detractors loudly proclaim that it is neither here nor there whether an old man was confused about his location as the plane flew over him. That is missing the point entirely.

If Lloyde England was correct about his location, and numerous videos plus eyewitness testimony show this to be true, then there was necessarily a premeditated, well-rehearsed tightly-executed script for this scene, requiring bit-part actors (Detective Don Fortunato, PPO bodyguard Aubrey Davis; 5 other Security Detail officers; white van driver; towtruck operators), anti-publicist (Steve Riskus) and an author/stage manager (Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld).

The FBI confiscated every CCTV video from surrounding businesses within hours of the event, and even appeared that evening at Eugenio Hernandez' home to confiscate the amateur video shot from on top of the bridge. Photographers were arrested and handcuffed that morning. Who can tell how many other photos and videos there originally were from the Pentagon?

The miracle is that we have as many videos as we do thanks to FOIA requests.

What disappoints me is how few Truthers even try to see the crucial evidence hidden in plain sight on these videos.

Craig McKee and Adam Ruff loathe me for daring to suggest that Craig Ranke made some errors. Wayne Coste and Chris Sarns have never acknowledged my points, even the parts where I agree with them.

My post to David Chandler (who vociferously demands that we give the utmost respect to Lloyde England and his cab as witnesses to the Pentagon event, while denying every word of Lloyde's testimony), correcting his egregious fake defense of Lloyde England, apparently fell on deaf ears.

Your email to Aldo Marquis on my behalf Jerry, did not provoke a glimmer of interest in revisiting his early work on the subject, and nor has my resurrection of several of his old threads on forums. My many deliberately provocative comments on Craig Ranke's videos never got a nibble, and of course now that the video has been deleted, my detailed comments in defense of Lloyde England have also vanished - although I do have copies of them.

Rob Balsamo's initial interest quickly turned sour and I was accused of crashing his Pilots For 9/11 Truth forum, with the loss of all comments for several years.

My comments to former passionately pro-CIT commentators OneSliceShort etc have not received any response. My email to the erudite blogger Shoestring is unanswered.

The Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, whose YouTube channel hosts the video "FIRST TWO HANDHELD CAMERA VIDEOS of 9/11 AFTER 9.38 a.m." where I first discovered this evidence, stonily ignores my comments about the actual proofs contained within this video, while soliciting help and sending me news of their impending court case with requests for my money.

Posters on other forums are almost universally vicious in their ad hominem attacks, while sidestepping the actual content of my discussion.

For some reason, both Truthers and official fairy tale believers alike, distance themselves from the Lloyde England intrigue. It is as though both sides had been sternly warned off.

Yet that undercurrent of interest on my thread continues to silently increase!
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Staff member
Ruby, your experiences with the 911 "Truth" movement inspire a tremendous sense of "deja vu" within me.

Back in the period from 2001 thru 2005 or so, I was diligently trying to follow everyone's research, participate in online discussions, publish some occasional articles, and generally make sense of the chaos. Rick and I started working together in 2002, when he saw my website and wrote me a long email. (That email from Rick contained more common sense than anything else I'd seen for some time among 911 researchers, or for that matter anywhere or anytime.)

It was amazing to me how everyone seemed attached to their theories, unwilling to really look at evidence, and unable to show clear, coherent and consistent analysis. The entire field degenerated into a cacophony of spook-naming and shaming.

And of course at a political level, there were several theories about who ultimately was to blame for the 911 conspiracy. There was the official theory, that Bin Laden and Al Qaeda and maybe Iraq and/or Afghanistan were to blame. Many within the truth movement advocated for "Let It Happen On Purpose" (LIHOP) theories, meaning that Bin Laden and his twelve intrepid hijackers were primarily to blame, although the entire US government stood down and winked while it happened. Then there were those who blamed it on Bush, or perhaps Cheney & Rumsfeld. Some blamed it on the Israelis and Zionists, while others (not so many) blamed the Catholics. Or maybe the CIA, or capitalists in general. So whose fault was it? There was almost a complete vacuum of reliable evidence, but it didn't stop the arguments from turning acrimonious, and then viciously acrimonious.

And then there was the arrival of a strangely professional contingent of "911 truthers" who mostly hit the scene in 2005 or thereabouts. Folks with expensive business suits and elaborate resumes, leading obviously well funded campaigns to create leadership in the movement. Those people were determined to make sure that some avenues of research were closed off, like the Pentagon overflight theory. Suddenly it became vital for the health of the "truth movement" to achieve consensus around the idea that the Pentagon was struck by a large plane following the flight path defined by the light poles.

Faced with all this nonsense, Rick and I eventually decided to abandon 911 truth research, and look into the bigger picture. Sadly, we haven't yet experienced any steadily increasing undercurrent of interest... still a sleepy backwater here. So, congrats on your success in attracting a following.
Last edited:

Ruby Gray

Thanks for your enlightening back story! Divide and conquer seems to be their effective technique for crushing all those many avenues of opposition of every flavour. But I found a loophole. Those released videos were not as innocuous as the FBI supposed. So I with my nitpicking diagnostic radiographer's skills and general contrariness, plus my conviction that Lloyde England was telling the truth, went to work.

I was reading somewhere today, where somebody claimed to have analysed the Gatecam footage and found that the resolution had been reduced and that purplish stripe inserted on the plane. Well I never believed that was a genuine image of a 757, and not a single testimony places it in that location, so a purple stripe here or there is of no consequence. But I have long had my suspicions that the other video footage was tampered with to reduce resolution.

Jerry Russell

Staff member
Divide and conquer seems to be their effective technique for crushing all those many avenues of opposition of every flavour.
I could get myself in trouble by dissing each and every 911 truther that ever lived. In my better moments, I realize that along with many troublesome aspects of the movement, there was also a lot of passion, hard work and integrity. And if I worked hard at it, I could come up with the names of some totally awesome and impeccable researchers and activists who deserve nothing but admiration.

But rather than taking the risk of drawing up any lists of good guys and bad guys, I'm going to stick with broad generalizations. Any individuals out there reading this, you know who you are.

Jerry Russell

Staff member
Did you save Richard's introductory email for posterity?
Yep, I still have it, as well as almost all my emails dating back to 1994. It was actually a cc; of an email to researcher Carol Valentine. It's pretty long, and I'm not sure if it's relevant to anything current.

Ruby Gray

Good to know you maintain such a database. I would expect nothing less from you!

4,400 views on my thread "LLOYDE ENGLAND VINDICATED" now in just 2 1/2 weeks.
I wonder why!

There are maybe 3 posters who debate with me sporadically, and a couple more who deliver short encouragement from time to time on AboveTopSecret forum in Aldo Marquis's old Mystery of the Moved Taxi thread, and about 30 bloodthirsty snarling cannibalistic predators on International Skeptics forum, but nobody really discusses the evidence as they at least used to do 10+ years ago.

The current tactic is belligerent derision, bombardment with barrages of off-topic questions, personal slights, misogynistic misrepresentation etc.
All the trademarks of ignorant bigoted bullies.

Not a single soul seems fazed by the revelation that PPO Aubrey Davis, bodyguard of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, left his boss to caper vulnerable about the lawn, and skived off to locate, retrieve and guard an obscure unknown cab driver during a photo session, instead.

Actual facts seem to fall on stony ground these days.

But there still remains that figure of 4,400 recent views on a nearly moribund forum where no new members' commenting is now possible.

Who can they be?