1) Lloyde England is a bit of a weird guy--and I don't think that's an act--I think that deep down Lloyde is eccentric. Not saying whether I think he is being coerced or bribed to participate in the cover-up, just that if he is either of those, or innocently mixed up with this, I don't think he can help acting weird about it. He may well have been honestly interested in David Icke--that wouldn't surprise me. It also wouldn't surprise me if the Icke book was planted in his cab, though this would mean that he and his wife would have to be in on the planting, whatever the purpose may have been.

2)"We aren't asking you to believe us casseia. We are asking you to believe the witnesses."

Since you collected and publicized the witness statements, we have to believe or disbelieve both they and you, Craig, together. I say this because I don't think it's likely that somehow the witnesses were lined up with false testimony in the hope you or someone else would come to interview them. The possibilities are a) that you and the witnesses are honest or that b) you are in cahoots with the witnesses for some disinfo purpose. Sorry if that offends you, but what good would it do me or anyone to give you the benefit of the doubt on this? If someone were to say that I, Gretavo, *could* in theory be a disinfo agent I would congratulate them on their healthy skepticism and remind them as I do often that I am absolutely 100% trustworthy and honest, but that they would be fools to take my word for it.

"For you to put us on the same level of ANY of the disruptors who attack us online and who have NOT provided a shred of evidence exposing the Pentagon attack deception is unconscionable."

And yet you say that if we think there is more direct evidence for controlled demolition than for the north side flyover the *we* are acting like Jon Gold. I think that's not only hypocritical but that it's simply wrong. Witness testimony is not the same as physical evidence. Something inferred based on indisputable physical evidence (free-fall collapse implying use of explosives) is not the same as something inferred from witness testimony (north of citgo flight path implying flyover) because those witnesses COULD be lying whereas it is much less likely that the free fall of WTC7 could somehow be a deception.