Russ stuffs "Quadruple verified" Lyte

Exactly.

It's astonishing the credence given to the various 'no plane' theories concerning the Pentagon, whereas the WTC no-plane stuff gets (more or less) shot down over there.
Remember, the tin hatters don't believe anything (that goes against their CT) if they can't see it on video. Even if it's on video, they'll fight tooth and nails to deny it. The Pentagon plane wasn't on video, ergo, it doesn't exist. At that point every theory is as good (or bad) as the next one.
 
The best part of all this, is they havent returned here to discuss (I should say defend) their video, simply because they have their hands full defending it to their own crowd.

TAM:)
 
well merc is spending about 60% of his day defending his video on the myspace forum.
 
while we are on the lyte/merc topic...while lurking over at LCF, I have noticed they seem to indicate that of the witnesses they have interviewed, most do not actually state that they saw the plane hit the pentagon...

So for someone without the knowledge, like myself, just how many witnesses have openly testified they saw the plane hit the pentagon? Do we have a list of names? Do we have links to their comments? anyone?

Thanks in advance.

TAM:)
 
By Merc.
Here is MY theory ........................etc, etc

Having read this utter tripe, who on earth would come up with and approve such a mind blowing stupid plan?

It gets worse for these guys the further on this thread goes.
posted by Merc @ LC forum.

Or distracted by fire, smoke, and a big hole in the Pentagon. Oh I am sure all the fire engines and police car sirens and lights weren't helpful. Oh and what about all those injured people.

You are NOT thinking.

This was PRE-9/11 mindset. THIS WAS ON 9/11.

You really think people are going to be attention to a guy pulling a cover off a car with a hole in the windshield? When they would have simply thought it was damage from the plane that just screamed over.

"oh man that guys car must have got hit by a piece of debris."

What if they did it under the bridge within the first 10 minutes while all the cops were distracted?

Cab is unloaded under the bridge.

Cab drives up to first spot where the plane ACTUALLY flew over, then moves up to the phony flight path spot.

Trailer is left on highway by truck that is about to drop pole 1. He removes the trailer
BECAUSE he is about to drop the pole.

I mean I am sure we can think of plenty scenarios.

How many people do you think would have seen this?

And how many of those people do you think would have studied the flight path damage and all the accounts?

Do think these people were staring at the cab/truck/trailer?

Or at the pentagon?

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4834&st=100

Merc YOU are not thinking at all, truly and utterly appalling.
 
Hahahaha! What a bunch of retards. Thats so dumb. Just invent all this crap to fit into your world. This is worse then psychics and people who think they talk to the dead.

I cant even begin to think how he expects this to be true.
How could absolutely no one have noticed all this theoretical crap he is spinning. Hahaha its comedy! stupid kooks.
 
Hey merc, isnt it easier to fly the plane into the pentagon even if it all was a conspiracy? Would save a lot of effort!
 
Remember, the tin hatters don't believe anything (that goes against their CT) if they can't see it on video. Even if it's on video, they'll fight tooth and nails to deny it. The Pentagon plane wasn't on video, ergo, it doesn't exist. At that point every theory is as good (or bad) as the next one.

That's why they always prefer to argue their points via video. It's wearing because it is relatively easy to skim through a twenty page paper and pick out egregious errors. It's more difficult and time consuming to do the same thing with a video.
 
Its just a game for them. They of course can't possibly believe it. They look at it as if its a plausibility contest. It is a creative fiction writing class over there where everybody gets a "D". Nobody can be that stupid to believe what they spew.
 
Hey merc, isnt it easier to fly the plane into the pentagon even if it all was a conspiracy? Would save a lot of effort!

Ahh, but that would mean the plane would have flown to the south of the gas station, which it "obviously" didn't. :rolleyes:

It's disturbingly amusing how they blossom this alleged fact into a process that even Rube Goldberg would go, "Wtf," at... instead of realizing that 4 out of many dozens of people may just be wrong in their recollection.
 
I've tried to understand it.

Would someone please, PLEASE tell me how three witnesses saying they saw the plane hit the Pentagon is somehow proof that no plane hit the Pentagon?

My brain hurts.
 
So, does this mean the sale price of the "Pentacon-Researcher's Edition" is dropping?
 
Does this mean that Merc and Lyte are claiming the the Taxi Cab driver is "in on it"? I was unaware of their stance on this gentleman before (other than saying that his account was impossible), but it appears that they are pretty much accusing him of lying.
 
I've tried to understand it.

Would someone please, PLEASE tell me how three witnesses saying they saw the plane hit the Pentagon is somehow proof that no plane hit the Pentagon?

My brain hurts.

They are as serious as a heart attack. Here's their story and they're sticking to it...

They have QUADRUPLE CORROBORATED TESTIMONY (LOL) that the plane flew north of the Citgo. That FACT makes it impossible for the plane to have hit the Pentagon as the official story shows because the flight path COULD NOT have downed the light poles.

Now, the first witness was a couple of blocks away so of course he couldn't have seen the impact. But, the other three all say the plane hit the Pentagon. How, do you ask, does Lyte and Merc explain this???

They were MISTAKEN in this minor detail. The diversion of the explosion and the flyover (that no one, anywhere witnessed), made them only believe that the plane hit.

So, the IMPORTANT testimony is their rememberence of the exact flight path 5 years later. The MINOR detail that they were "fooled" on was that a 757 hit a building just yards from where they were.

Get it now? Good because they're getting tired of us and everybody else asking such STUPID questions!


P.S. Bonaveda posted this earlier in the thread but the information is so significant to Merc's explanation that it bears repeating.


Merc's theory:


"Here is MY theory that I didn't want to put in the film. Theories are always seemingly picked out before the evidence that cause the theory in the first place.

The Five poles are removed at night through a phony late night road construction detail the week(s) or months prior to 9/11.

Then EARLY on the morning of 9/11 laid out poles 2-5 in the grass. Everyone drives by not noticing 4 poles laid out, inconspicuously, in the grass.

Then shortly before the entrance of our mystery flyover plane...
Perps drive large truck with pole and/or with cab on trailer(cab can also be on another car perhaps car 2 in the southbound lane) northbound throw crushed up glass out by the off ramp by pole 3, and go under bridge drive up on the south bound loop. (Variant: or there are two teams in cars that throw out glass and/or bulb housing debris. One car on northbound loop exit and one southbound lanes near pole 1 and eventual resting spot of the cab.)

Right after the plane flies over and explosion goes off...
Police(blue) get diverted from gas station, the truck/trailer perps stop on loop as if they are shocked. Taxi is unloaded off trailer(yellow) while all are staring at the Pentagon. Truck continues up on the on ramp drops pole 1(green) in the fast/middle southbound lane street on bridge and perhaps bulb/glass debris. Cab eases his way up on the highway with "damage". Our police officer was adamant when he said he was sure the cab was over near that overhead sign (the one the plane flew over), near the on ramp...not on the bridge.

As everyone is distracted, the cabbie pulls up to the final point, the faceless guys in the Saturn pull up and move the pole making the scratch in the asphalt, so they can park their car. And with the assistance of the faceless shirt and tie men in the fire dept Saturn he turns his cab sideways near the pole, giving the appearance that he is helping block traffic going soutbound. Then, perhaps the shirt and tie guys (instead the variant -car 2 sthbound lane) in the Saturn stand around and maybe even drop the glass, bulb pieces perhaps even the little pieces of leaves."
 
Last edited:
In particular, Lyte and Merc say that the three witnesses' recollection of whether the plane passed to the North or South of the Citgo, is more reliable than their recollection of whether it hit the building, because they were closer to it when it was at the Citgo. No sh**.
 
Does this mean that Merc and Lyte are claiming the the Taxi Cab driver is "in on it"? I was unaware of their stance on this gentleman before (other than saying that his account was impossible), but it appears that they are pretty much accusing him of lying.

I don't think they've ever come right out and said it. Like most twoofers, they just imply he's lying, and then act all pissy when you say they're accusing him of lying.
 

Back
Top Bottom