Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I don't know what i was thinking returning to this thread again. My Posts are deleted so don't have to respond anymore to me!

It was strange since your own arguement has shown your preferred theory to be impossible.

Ruby gray

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Lloyd England story was he was driving near the Pentagon and one pole knocked down by a plane hit the front of his taxi.On 9/11 his story was broadcast around the world and his importance for the government official narrative about 9/11 cannot be underestimated.

A video describing his story ...
(I cannot post links and images since I am a new subscriber here)

Unfortunately for the planners he let slip off camera this event was planned (staged) and came over the highway with the planners. We also now he was not in the near the area he said he was because we got video and photographs of this to prove it. He is the first guy exposed to be involved in the false flag. Many of the eyewitnesses at the Pentagon who talked on camera could also be staged actors involved in the plot?

Here is the video Lloyd got exposed ...

It is a shame that this thread derailed itself by running off at tangents for over 200 pages.

The title and the opening post alone provide sufficient material for an interesting discussion, without all the vacuous waffle that quickly swamped the topic of the thread.

Without the benefit of links and images, I will attempt to get the thread back on track.

Firstly I will state that I have great admiration for (much of) the work done by CIT, Citizen Investigation Team, being Aldo Marquis and Craig Ranke.

However, they did make some major blunders, especially concerning the very first witness they ever interviewed, who happened to be the taxi driver LLOYDE ENGLAND. Also with other eyewitnesses who were in any way connected wit Lloyde England or his alleged position on the Columbia Pike overpass bridge, over which the alleged plane AA77 allegedly flew, allegedly hitting 5 lightpoles, one of which allegedly smashed the windshield of Lloyde England's Capitol Cab.

Aldo and Craig came from a background of having contributed to forums on 9/11 at the Pentagon, viewing what images were available and being unconvinced by the official story. Like so many, they voiced their suspicions, and postulated theories as to what might have really occurred.

The story of ...
* Lloyde England and his Cab
* being randomly hit by a 38 foot lightpole
* severed by a 90 ton plane
* flying at over 530 mph,
* with the pole allegedly having been knocked far to the LEFT northwards up Route 27
* to impact Lloyde's cab,
* by the swept-back RIGHT wing of the speeding jet
* on a northeast trajectory,
* without doing more than shattering the windscreen,
* then the pole being returned by the stopping cab to lie within its own original shadow ..

Well all this is too absurd to be believed, and Aldo did not believe it. He argued various details for years, before he and Craig were invited along on a trip to Washington by filmmaker Dylan Avery, to assist with his film LOOSE CHANGE, in 2006.

Aldo, Craig and Russell Pickering first interviewed Lloyde England, and some of this footage was used in Dylan's film.

LLOYDE told them his story graciously, fully and frankly, but Aldo and Craig didn't believe Lloyde's own account, either.

But Craig soon edited it into their own first video,

THE FIRST KNOWN ACCOMPLICE? FEATURING LLOYDE ENGLAND.

Two years later, after CIT had been officially formed, Craig Ranke returned to Arlington and interviewed Lloyde England again, this time with CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR.

Yet again, Craig refused to believe the story Lloyde so painstakingly explained to him.

Christopher actually started to get it, and Lloyde was so relieved to see that at last somebody was listening to him, but it all ended in misunderstanding again.

Craig then edited CIT's second video on Lloyde in 2008, titled

LLOYDE ENGLAND AND HIS TAXI CAB - THE EYE OF THE STORM.

Normally, Craig Ranke was a superb interviewer who allowed eyewitnesses to express themselves freely without interruption.
But his extreme frustration with Lloyde's seemingly impossible account skewed his logic, and he harangued and mocked Lloyde mercilessly. Craig jumped to many false assumptions, and although he was privileged to be personally escorted on an inspection tour of the damaged taxi, then twice driven by the precise location where Lloyde was driving when the pole speared his windshield, Craig obtusely and vociferously argued with Lloyde.

But as Lloyde so simply pointed out, he was there and Craig wasn't.
Lloyde was a lifetime local taxi driver who knew the area perfectly well, and he knew EXACTLY where he was at that most auspicious moment in his life.

Lloyde knew that, despite what many glossy photos appeared to prove about his cab having been on top of the bridge when the pole hit,
...

THAT'S NOT WHERE IT HAPPENED.

He was actually about 400 yards NORTH of there, NORTH of the Heliport Tower, NORTH of the Columbia Pike exit sign.

Lloyde could not figure out how the discrepancy had occurred, but he was not bothered by other people's opinion.
He KNEW WHERE HE WAS, and that was all he needed to know.

It was only Craig and Aldo and all the others who had a problem with that.

And it turns out, many years after the internet wrangling had died down, that Lloyde England's story with all its many disbelieved and derided details, was 100% TRUE in every point.

Videos and photos taken from many perspectives within the first 20 minutes from the explosion at the Pentagon, prove that LLOYDE ENGLAND was not a liar, not forgetful, not confused, not mistaken, NOT AN ACCOMPLICE.

Lloyde was a victim, pre-selected, manipulated to be in the precise location at a predetermined time, then lined up and targeted. He and his cab were then separated, and individually relocated by well-rehearsed vehicles driven by complicit operatives, to the top of the overpass bridge, where 3 officers just happened to materialize to closely guard Lloyde England for a brief photo opportunity beside a downed lightpole, conducted by a navy photographer.

This operation took just about 20 minutes from start to finish, but it served to convince the world that AA77 was hijacked by 6 Muslims and flown on a particular trajectory, diagonally across the bridge, knocking down 5 lightpoles before hitting the Pentagon.

The details required to pull off this stunt seem so outrageous, but they are true. An enormous amount of planning and rehearsal went into ensuring that this stageplay went off without a hitch.

For 17 years, nobody noticed the many recorded candid-camera snippets of this scam being perpetrated right there in broad daylight, behind the backs of all those watching the Pentagon burn.

But these many snippets have now been analysed and collated into a coherent story that vindicates Lloyde England, explains what he never could about the circumstsntial-evidence pictures taken on top of the bridge, and definitively proves that 9/11 was a premeditated false flag attack.

Dohnjoe

Ruby gray wrote: »

definitively proves that 9/11 was a premeditated false flag attack.

Please detail the "false flag" that took place. Provide a basic timeline, what happened, and we'll go from there.

Cheerful Spring2

Ruby gray: I have changed my position about the Pentagon attack. I believe a large plane mostly likely flight 77 hit the west wall on 9/11.

There's lot of evidence something very big hit the wall and there pieces of plane wreckage debris outside and inside the Pentagon. That's lot of effort to stage?
That scenario with Lloyde seems more elaborate then what i thought happened!. Lloyd testimony confusing here, and was never clarified i agree what he meant we came down to the "highway together" seems his hinting something got moved from the scene?

I do believe the official report wrong about the plane/ air speed on approach to the Pentagon though and they got the direction of the plane wrong before it hit.. The problem is we know flight 77 got hijacked so had to end up somewhere? The most logical explanation it crashed at the Pentagon.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Ruby gray: I have changed my position about the Pentagon attack. I believe a large plane mostly likely flight 77 hit the west wall on 9/11.

There's lot of evidence something very big hit the wall and there pieces of plane wreckage debris outside and inside the Pentagon. That's lot of effort to stage?
That scenario with Lloyde seems more elaborate then what i thought happened!. Lloyd testimony confusing here, and was never clarified i agree what he meant we came down to the "highway together" seems his hinting something got moved from the scene?

I do believe the official report wrong about the plane/ air speed on approach to the Pentagon though and they got the direction of the plane wrong before it hit.. The problem is we know flight 77 got hijacked so had to end up somewhere? The most logical explanation it crashed at the Pentagon.

Lol again, you used all the same arguments to "prove" that it wasn't flight 77.
You "changed your position" only after you painted yourself into a corner and realised you couldn't defend your "proof" any more.
It was really funny.

King Mob

Ruby gray wrote: »

I
Lloyde was a victim, pre-selected, manipulated to be in the precise location at a predetermined time, then lined up and targeted. He and his cab were then separated, and individually relocated by well-rehearsed vehicles driven by complicit operatives, to the top of the overpass bridge, where 3 officers just happened to materialize to closely guard Lloyde England for a brief photo opportunity beside a downed lightpole, conducted by a navy photographer.

But why though?
None of that makes any sense for them to do.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Ruby gray: I have changed my position about the Pentagon attack. I believe a large plane mostly likely flight 77 hit the west wall on 9/11.

There's lot of evidence something very big hit the wall and there pieces of plane wreckage debris outside and inside the Pentagon. That's lot of effort to stage?
That scenario with Lloyde seems more elaborate then what i thought happened!. Lloyd testimony confusing here, and was never clarified i agree what he meant we came down to the "highway together" seems his hinting something got moved from the scene?

I do believe the official report wrong about the plane/ air speed on approach to the Pentagon though and they got the direction of the plane wrong before it hit.. The problem is we know flight 77 got hijacked so had to end up somewhere? The most logical explanation it crashed at the Pentagon.

Hilarious. You made up a bunch of crap about the Pentagon (missile, military jet), ran out of ideas so you just took the lazy option of pretending the plane hit at a slightly different angle

The equivalent of claiming that the moon landing was a conspiracy by making up a story that the lunar module landed a few degrees off. That's the level of "logic" we're dealing with here.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Hilarious. You made up a bunch of crap about the Pentagon (missile, military jet), ran out of ideas so you just took the lazy option of pretending the plane hit at a slightly different angle

The equivalent of claiming that the moon landing was a conspiracy by making up a story that the lunar module landed a few degrees off. That's the level of "logic" we're dealing with here.

You can understand people's frustration here when they’re no clear video or photograph of the plane hitting the Pentagon.

Quit pretending you considered all details to what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. The 9/11 commission report says the plane was heading down Columbia BLvd (highway) a flight approach heading Southwest to the Pentagon.

I now understand why the CIT crowd dismissed the official story and i did too based off an location error in the official report.

The reality is you have to do the research, and look at all the data, and read every report, something debunkers don’t ever do

Fact is the raw natural data shows the object/ plane was heading Northeast towards the Pentagon-it flew above the Navy Annex to the left (CIT group right and the official direction, Southwest/highway approach is nonsense. . You not interested in certainty and accurancy here.

Could the same airplane still hit light poles heading Northeast? Yes it may have the length of the plane was 124 feet across (wing to wing) however the angle of the plane is completely different when it hit the west wall. Where i differ to CIT i don't believe the plane kept going over the Pentagon and landed somewhere else.

I still understand Ruby point of view. Undoubtedly a false flag happened in New York. A false flag in Washington therefore can’t be ruled out. The eyewitness details, data, current information about the attack in Washington point to a plane attack. They're still unknowns what led to that wide C- Hole blast in the three rings at the back of the Pentagon? This is all pointless telling you this because you only believe the official story about the attacks in New York. Conspiracy nonsense to you.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You can understand people's frustration here when they’re no clear video or photograph of the plane hitting the Pentagon.

Well these people are idiots, there is no excuse for them to hold such stupid views

1) There is footage. As expected it's fairly crap. That's because most security cameras in 2001 were pretty bad in comparison to today's standards

2) Most cameras are pointed down at the ground, at parking lots, at foyers, etc. Not at the horizon.

3) The Pentagon might have better footage (or not), they have zero obligation or reason to release it because we know exactly what happened without the footage, there is no mystery to it

4) Footage is not required, there is overwhelming evidence that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Again, there is no mystery. Likewise we don't require "footage" of the Battle of Hastings to know it happened.

5) This has been explained to you many times. A child can understand this stuff, but you seem to either have difficulty grasping it, or refuse to accept it. Cool. That's your personal issue. I've seen basic explanations provided to people who believe the world is flat, and like you they either have difficulty grasping it or they refuse to accept it.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You can understand people's frustration here when they’re no clear video or photograph of the plane hitting the Pentagon.

Quit pretending you considered all details to what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. The 9/11 commission report says the plane was heading down Columbia BLvd (highway) a flight approach heading Southwest to the Pentagon.

I now understand why the CIT crowd dismissed the official story and i did too based off an location error in the official report.

The reality is you have to do the research, and look at all the data, and read every report, something debunkers don’t ever do

Fact is the raw natural data shows the object/ plane was heading Northeast towards the Pentagon-it flew above the Navy Annex to the left (CIT group right and the official direction, Southwest/highway approach is nonsense. . You not interested in certainty and accurancy here.

Could the same airplane still hit light poles heading Northeast? Yes it may have the length of the plane was 124 feet across (wing to wing) however the angle of the plane is completely different when it hit the west wall. Where i differ to CIT i don't believe the plane kept going over the Pentagon and landed somewhere else.

I still understand Ruby point of view. Undoubtedly a false flag happened in New York. A false flag in Washington therefore can’t be ruled out. The eyewitness details, data, current information about the attack in Washington point to a plane attack. They're still unknowns what led to that wide C- Hole blast in the three rings at the back of the Pentagon? This is all pointless telling you this because you only believe the official story about the attacks in New York. Conspiracy nonsense to you.

Remember you claimed that they did all of this because there was a secret vault inside the pentagon they had to blow up because there was there was some papers in there they had to destroy.
They could only destroy these papers by slamming a passenger liner into the pentagon a specific angle. But then for some reason they couldn't use a good pilot. Or a paper shredder.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Well these people are idiots, there is no excuse for them to hold such stupid views

1) There is footage. As expected it's fairly crap. That's because most security cameras in 2001 were pretty bad in comparison to today's standards

2) Most cameras are pointed down at the ground, at parking lots, at foyers, etc. Not at the horizon.

3) The Pentagon might have better footage (or not), they have zero obligation or reason to release it because we know exactly what happened without the footage, there is no mystery to it

4) Footage is not required, there is overwhelming evidence that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Again, there is no mystery. Likewise we don't require "footage" of the Battle of Hastings to know it happened.

5) This has been explained to you many times. A child can understand this stuff, but you seem to either have difficulty grasping it, or refuse to accept it. Cool. That's your personal issue. I've seen basic explanations provided to people who believe the world is flat, and like you they either have difficulty grasping it or they refuse to accept it.

Insight into Dohnjoe mind. Are you sure, you not in the CIA :eek: You don't care if they have better footage or not

The Pentagon might have better footage (or not), they have zero obligation or reason to release it because we know exactly what happened without the footage, there is no mystery to it

Evidence was shown to you. The Pentagon on the side that was hit, had four cameras on the roof, spread across and along the wall. All four are facing out to the highway. The virginia/traffic highway had a camera on a pole supposedly on the day it had no tape inserted? The Firehouse next to the west wall had three cameras, no footage? The FBI confiscated all hotel and shop cameras nearby and nobody saw the raw footage till a decade later, why?

There legitimate concerns here.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

The had four cameras on the roof spread across and along the wall all of them facing out to the highway

Already addressed in my post

There legitimate concerns here.

Your personal lack of basic understanding is the only legitimate concern here

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Insight into Dohnjoe mind. Are you sure, you not in the CIA :eek: You don't care if they have better footage or not



Evidence was shown to you. The Pentagon on the side that was hit, had four cameras on the roof, spread across and along the wall. All four are facing out to the highway. The virginia/traffic highway had a camera on a pole supposedly on the day it had no tape inserted? The Firehouse next to the west wall had three cameras, no footage? The FBI confiscated all hotel and shop cameras nearby and nobody saw the raw footage till a decade later, why?

There legitimate concerns here.

What about all the eye witnesses who saw the plane hit the Pentagon?

All of these people?

Cheerful Spring2

The Nal wrote: »

What about all the eye witnesses who saw the plane hit the Pentagon?

All of these people?

Debunkers never look at the reports with an critical eye. Example for two here. No wing hit the ground thats evidence. The grass was unscathed here all photographs show that. What did he actually see here?

I witnessed the jet hit the Pentagon on September 11. From my office on the 19th floor of the USA TODAY building in Arlington, Va., I have a view of Arlington Cemetery, Crystal City, the Pentagon, National Airport and the Potomac River. ... Shortly after watching the second tragedy, I heard jet engines pass our building, which, being so close to the airport is very common. But I thought the airport was closed. I figured it was a plane coming in for landing. A few moments later, as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye. It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Debunkers never look at the reports with an critical eye. Example for two here. No wing hit the ground thats evidence. The grass was unscathed here all photographs show that. What did he actually see here?

Jesus Christ..

If 100 people see something, explain why some of the eye-witness accounts differ

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Debunkers never look at the reports with an critical eye. Example for two here. No wing hit the ground thats evidence. The grass was unscathed here all photographs show that. What did he actually see here?

What about the 80 odd people that saw the plane?

Dohnjoe

The Nal wrote: »

What about the 80 odd people that saw the plane?

They can be discredited by the one person who described something slightly different

It's all about casting doubt on everything, that's the game being played here..

The Nal

Dohnjoe wrote: »

They can be discredited by the one person who described something slightly different

It's all about casting doubt on everything, that's the game being played here..

Like pick any of them at random. Steve Anderson. Does Cheerful think that he make it up? Along with dozens of other people? And the hundreds who saw plane and body parts in the aftermath?

Anderson, Steve

I witnessed the jet hit the Pentagon on September 11. From my office on the 19th floor of the USA TODAY building in Arlington, Va., I have a view of Arlington Cemetery, Crystal City, the Pentagon, National Airport and the Potomac River. ... Shortly after watching the second tragedy, I heard jet engines pass our building, which, being so close to the airport is very common. But I thought the airport was closed. I figured it was a plane coming in for landing. A few moments later, as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye. It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke.

Cheerful Spring2

The Nal wrote: »

What about the 80 odd people that saw the plane?

There no evidence 80 people saw the event. We know this because we have photographs of the highway minutes after the explosion. Very little traffic on either side. This is not a public walkway for people to stop and stare at a plane.
Hundreds of thousands of people have witnessed UFOS, do you believe everyone of them? With any event, there is a large portion who make it all up and pretend they witnessed it. It very difficult to rout out the fakers and the honest people here.

Cheerful Spring2

The Nal wrote: »

Like pick any of them at random. Steve Anderson. Does Cheerful think that he make it up? Along with dozens of other people? And the hundreds who saw plane and body parts in the aftermath?

Anderson, Steve

I witnessed the jet hit the Pentagon on September 11. From my office on the 19th floor of the USA TODAY building in Arlington, Va., I have a view of Arlington Cemetery, Crystal City, the Pentagon, National Airport and the Potomac River. ... Shortly after watching the second tragedy, I heard jet engines pass our building, which, being so close to the airport is very common. But I thought the airport was closed. I figured it was a plane coming in for landing. A few moments later, as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye. It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke.

His claiming to have witnessed the plane hitting the west wall. He claims the wing hit the grass. If that happened the plane would have exploded before it even reached the wall. Details like above make people question what they truly saw.

Reporters who were there said they saw little to know plane wreckage outside, You have't looked into so now passing around false details.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

There no evidence 80 people saw the event

Yes there is

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Reporters who were there said they saw little to know plane wreckage outside,

Did they? Thats big news if true.

What about this photo of the plane wreckage outside? A photo taken by... a reporter.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Yes there is

Why did four planes pilots not radio they got hijacked? Every pilot on the day neglected protocol. What took place that day onboard the planes still an enigma?
FBI still claims 5 men hijacked flight 77 and yet both callers who contacted from the plane, Barbara Olsen ( CNN employee) a passenger and a flight attendent said there was 6 hijackers onboard. Whos the 6th guy?
All we know for a fact is a large plane disappeared off radar and a plane reappeared over Washington and crashed at the Pentagon. Beyond that i not sure about the official story.
Hani the pilot who couldn’t command a small Cessna weeks before 9/11 somehow took this large jet to 20 feet above ground at 530 mph an hour? Bull****.

Cheerful Spring2

The Nal wrote: »

Did they? Thats big news if true.

What about this photo of the plane wreckage outside? A photo taken by... a reporter.

Piece of metal with American airlines colors proves nothing. You can paint a CIA/Air America plane or any flying objct with those colors and nobody be the wiser after it crashes.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Piece of metal with American airlines colors proves nothing. You can paint a CIA/Air America plane or any flying objct with those colors and nobody be the wiser after it crashes.

So if it was a painted CIA plane what happened to the passengers on Flight 77?

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Why did four planes pilots not radio they got hijacked?

Dunno. They were probably too busy tackling the hijackers who rushed the cockpits. Are you claiming something else happened, then what is it?

Why do you just repeatedly try to pour doubt on the event but never answer these questions yourself or provide a proper explanation..

FBI still claims 5 men hijacked flight 77 and yet both callers who contacted from the plane, Barbara Olsen ( CNN employee) a passenger and a flight attendent said there was 6 hijackers onboard. Whos the 6th guy?

Likely doesn't exist, they were probably mistaken. Again, another attempt to cast doubt, with no effort made to explain this using an alternative explanation

All we know for a fact is a large plane disappeared off radar and a plane reappeared over Washington and crashed at the Pentagon.

Nope, we know the path it took from it's FDR, from radar, from ATC. When a transponder is switched off it doesn't mean a plane dematerialises

Beyond that i not sure about the official story.

Of course you aren't, like Alex Jones, all you do is endlessly try to discredit it to hint at some vague conspiracy you never detail.

Hani the pilot who couldn’t command a small Cessna weeks before 9/11 somehow took this large jet to 20 feet above ground at 530 mph an hour? Bull****.

This has been explained repeatedly. A novice with approx the same experience as Hani sat into a proper simulator and managed to pull the same manoeuvres and hit the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times. You can't explain that so you attack it.

Countless pilots have explained it was fully possible for someone with that level of experience. You can't explain otherwise but so you just attack and try to discredit that.

Try it. Okay, Hani didn't crash the plane into the Pentagon, what happened, give your full details and timeline with exactly what alternative happened?

You can't. All you are here to do is deny. Note how that's the same as every single truther in this thread, every member of AE911, every truther who thinks Sandy Hook was an inside job, every moon landing hoaxer, every Boston bombing truther..

Deny the details of the event to hint at some vague unspecified theory. Rinse, repeat. It's dumb as bricks. And no matter how many times someone adequately explains something, like clockwork, a few weeks/months later you bring up exactly the same point.

Cheerful Spring2

The Nal wrote: »

So if it was a painted CIA plane what happened to the passengers on Flight 77?

58 passengers onboard, apparently. The airplane was not full.

There is no video of them at the airport? How do we know they're genuine people when the families have never spoken on TV about their loved ones?

58 passengers and only one passenger phoned from the plane and she just happened to be Barbara Olsen, a CNN person whos married to Ted Olsen an associate and friend of Cheney and Bush?

Why did the 57 others there not attempt a phone call? Apparently Olsen phoned Ted's office three times at different periods during the flight. Something smells off about the flight and reaction of other passengers to their situation.

Considering the planes already crashed at the towers, why was the Flight 77 pilot so poor here to react to the takeover of the plane?
To me it seems like someone had cut off communication inside the cockpit, so they couldn’t radio the control towers?

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Piece of metal with American airlines colors proves nothing. You can paint a CIA/Air America plane or any flying objct with those colors and nobody be the wiser after it crashes.

You are so obsessed with blindly attacking/denying everything that you keep denying the plane hit, despite the fact that you believe the plane hit

It's absolutely mental.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful, you think flight 77 hit the Pentagon, yet here you are, repeatedly denying every detail about it. What more evidence do you need that you are completely irrational about this event.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You are so obsessed with blindly attacking/denying everything that you keep denying the plane hit, despite the fact that you believe the plane hit

It's absolutely mental.

The official story makes no sense. Eight pilots with different airlines just forgot to radio in middle eastern men outside their cockpit door were hijacking the planes. The lack of communication here make zero sense, and only make sense if the communications on the plane got jammed.