ThePentaCON releases trailer

I hate quoting myself, but I'd really like an answer

Lyte,
You may have missed my post as it probably got drowned out in Bobert's posts.

chillzero said:
Lyte,
I have some questions that I hope you will respond to.

I will even allow for the sake of argument that you have indeed got witness testimony that says they saw / heard the plane fly to the north, and that they were being honest when they said so.


Have you gone to the Citgo station with these witnesses?
If so:
- while you were all there did you ask them to point to 'north'?
- did you ask them to point to exactly where they perceived the plane to be?
If not:
- did you ask them to identify on a map of the area exactly where they perceived the plane to be?

I hope you will answer these for me, because I am genuinely interested.
Click to expand...
 
Brainster said:
Horse-puckey. One side is right and one side is wrong on this; on that we can all agree, even if which side is which remains in debate. There is no middle ground where we can all just get along.



Battle against the neo-cons and the invasion of Iran the old-fashioned way; demonstrate and work for the election of those who will oppose them. This 9-11 conspiracy nonsense strikes me as the equivalent of the Hail Mary pass in football; a desperation heave by a team that has failed to win the game the normal way. This is not how you will get rid of Bush; you'll get rid of him in a little under two years' time through him being term-limited out.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Russell, how does trying to find middle ground over a set of 9/11 red herrings pressure Bush to be dovish on Iran? You seem to be under the impression that the best course of action to halt "the neo-con agenda" is to explore their possible involvement in the 9/11 attacks. You've had 5 and a half years. Do you suppose you'll uncover anything truly incriminating in the next 2? Wouldn't your energy be better spent (extending Brainster's analogy) playing defense to help ensure a turnover on downs?
 
Brainster said:
Horse-puckey. One side is right and one side is wrong on this; on that we can all agree, even if which side is which remains in debate. There is no middle ground where we can all just get along.
Click to expand...

I think, on this rare occasion, I would actually disagree with you here Brainster. I think there is a middle ground, If both parties agree that the REAL TRUTH is paramount. That THE EVIDENCE is prime. I think that if RUSSELL and others like him could accept that what ever conclusion the evidence leads to, that THE EVIDENCE is the key, than I could work along side them to find the REAL TRUTH. It would be difficult, and opinions and speculation would have to be put aside, but I think there is a middle ground...it is just very hard for most people to reach, and stay there.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
I think, on this rare occasion, I would actually disagree with you here Brainster. I think there is a middle ground, If both parties agree that the REAL TRUTH is paramount. That THE EVIDENCE is prime. I think that if RUSSELL and others like him could accept that what ever conclusion the evidence leads to, that THE EVIDENCE is the key, than I could work along side them to find the REAL TRUTH. It would be difficult, and opinions and speculation would have to be put aside, but I think there is a middle ground...it is just very hard for most people to reach, and stay there.

TAM:)
Click to expand...


What you've said is true, but it's also a hypothetical that does not reflect the real world. Truthers are not remotely interested in "truth". They aren't even interested in explaining what DID happen on 9/11. All they are interested in is showing that anything the government is saying DID NOT happen.

This is why they have so many theories. This is why they debate minute details that do not relate to the overall event.

They can't concede even a single fact presented by the government. Look at NORAD. They refuse to accept the account supported by audio tape from both NORAD and the FAA. Why? If their argument is "NORAD Standdown" all they need to claim is the admin intentionally refused to issue a shoot-down order. All else can be as the timelines indicate. It reduces the conspiracy enormously. No lying NORAD officers. No lying pilots. No lying ATCs. No fake audio recordings.

It would allow them to dismiss the entire Norman Mineta mess out of hand.

But they can't do that. Because they have do prove false EVERYTHING the government says. So instead they produce this inter-connected web of hundreds of little theories disproving every single official account, and the conspiracy network is increased ten-fold, just to explain one tiny aspect of that day.

This is why there can never be middle ground between the 9/11 truth movement and skeptics. Skeptics accept that sometimes governments tell the truth. The truth movement is built on a foundation of proving that governments ONLY lie.

-Gumboot
 
beachnut said:
Snip.....

I think it is funny, ironic, even sad you are blasting them without cleaning your own house.
Click to expand...

This sentence is the closest to a truthful thing you said. That is a good point.

However, I do not claim to have solved any crimes and am not promoting myself or attempting to capitalize financially from 9/11. I am not ego driven and running around the Internet proclaiming myself as any sort of a guru either.

There are multiple factors as to why my site sits in limbo. The main point is for you to understand that if I decide to update it as opposed to take it down, the only thing that will change significantly is that it will become more biased in support of the evidence of a 757 hitting the Pentagon.

There will be the obvious factual corrections that need to be made that literally exist in all works in progress done by people who are not specialists in each particular field they attempt to discuss. But if you were totally honest with yourself there is no major life changing information there in regards to specific facts.

My overall opinions are expressed as such and have only strengthened in terms of what the neo-cons intend for our future. There is still no doubt in my mind 9/11 played an integral part of them executing their pre-planned reorganization of the Middle east.

As for your delusional belief that I have some dark and malicious plan to deceive people into being "truthers" I would have to say you are getting a little conspiratorial.

Drone on if you wish.
 
Brainster said:
Horse-puckey. One side is right and one side is wrong on this; on that we can all agree, even if which side is which remains in debate. There is no middle ground where we can all just get along.



snip....
Click to expand...

I might suggest an inquisition or a crusade. Dogmatic people always love that sort of thing.
 
stateofgrace said:
Russell thank for your candid reply, I will be equally candid with you.

At this moment it appears the truth movement is at a junction. It is starting to get the mainstream media attention it has been crying out to get for years. Over in the UK, although I have not seen it yet, a documentary was broadcast on the BBC about the conspiracies and three central characters emerged. Ok from all accounts this documentary did them no favors; this seems to be the general opinion. Equally so the Guardian has run an article and as the Daily Mail, these are both high volume new papers, they have a very large audience, again it was not favorable.

You guys are hoping to get LC: FC into theaters, I don’t doubt it may play and I don’t doubt it will be show in the UK, so lets just say I take this for granted at the moment. The mainstream media coverage you have received so far, could actually be nothing compared to what is coming your way when and if this does happen. The UK media is notorious for ripping people apart, they love scandals, the juicer the better, I’m sure it is the same in the US. If you get the media attention that you want, you may very well find that the reaction from them is swift and brutal. If annoyed they will start digging, they love to do this. They will attack your leaders credibility’s. I have seen it happen so many times in the UK. Celebes, footballers, politicians, the media loves nothing better than to destroy them. Don’t get me wrong I am not saying you personally but the more vocal leaders; like Dylan, Felzer and Jones may very well find that life suddenly becomes very uncomfortable for them.

So what is the point I am trying to make with regard these guys, Merc and Lytle? It’s simple they are part of your movement; they will be seen to be part of your movement.
You may very well be on the point of waking the sleeping giant, that being the mainstream media. These guys you will have to carry, for they are easy targets. Whether you agree with them or not is irrelevant, they will be seen as part of it all. The truth movement’s house is not in order; you need to get it in order before this happens. You need to ditch the dross and clear out the wing nuts or you will go down with them.

As I have said the media loves nothing better than to tear people apart, with guys like these two tagging along, you may very well find that the medias job is made all the more easier.

Just my two pennies worth
Click to expand...

You are 100% correct.

I have never had an experience like this before. My personal concerns and questions regarding the Pentagon kind of took on a life of their own. The conspiracy world was brand new to me 4 years ago. As I have learned in that time 9/11 is a magnet for a mentality of people emotionally predisposed to delusion.

I do not believe the truth movement will "get in order". Just the people that push themselves to the forefront that have been discussed here are so egotistical, self-serving, vindictive, divisive and "anti-truth" that you can see what I mean. Throw in the cult followers and people willing to imagine anything to escape physical facts and you have a recipe for disaster. Ice the cake with various degrees of OCD and..........

I myself am on the verge of removing myself to the position of an observer. It is a wretched little world of misfits and kooks who have no honest regard for true understanding and seeking facts.

With that said there are also plenty of very good human beings involved in 9/11 research. They are progressive, humble, willing to admit mistakes and move forward. I count Dylan and a few others in this category despite the ridicule they receive here. I will maintain those friendships.

This has ALL been a huge learning experience.

I never have regrets about learning.
 
Hi Russell. I hope you are well.

Russell Pickering said:
...Hopefully there will be an equal and opposite reaction to it. That somebody will come forward with a rebuttal or new evidence in response to it that truly does shed further light on the actual facts of the 3 dimensional world is our only hope.
Click to expand...
The same old evidence will do just fine. No one anywhere has presented a shred of evidence that flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon. It is a patently idiotic idea.
 
Russell Pickering said:
Hush.

The grown ups are trying to talk.
Click to expand...

Russell Pickering said:
This has ALL been a huge learning experience.

I never have regrets about learning.
Click to expand...

One is still left wondering precisely what it is that you have learned... to avoid silly conspiracy theories, or to utilize critical thinking to arrive at truth?

[sarcasm]
I guess it's a toss up, hopefully you land in the middle...
[/sarcasm]
 
CTers can usually be called up on the simple aspect of Conspiracy Theory scope.

It is a basic direct relationship, that the more people know about a secret, the harder it is to keep a secret. Likewise, the less control you have over those individuals, the harder it is to keep a secret.

The CTers add unnecessary details to their theories that exponentially increase the number of people involved. Worse still, this quickly includes people the government has less control over. Thus CTers have to elaborate further in order to explain the leverage the government has to keep them silent. These theories in turn bring MORE people into the conspiracy net. And so on.

This is because CTers only want to disprove the official account, not explain facts.

Russell appears to be no different in this regard. While he accepts that a boeing airliner hit The Pentagon, he continues to avoid accepting it was AA77.

This simple avoidance immediately increases the number of people involved in the conspiracy. One must actually consider the mechanics of carrying out a theory, not just present it willy-nilly.

Witnesses say they saw a American Airlines jet. Evidence shows an AA jet. So was it ANOTHER AA jet? Or did someone paint another jet to look like it?

Either scenario presents a host of issues. Things in the real world simply don't happen without people noticing. An American Airlines aircraft can't simply disappear without hundreds of people being aware of it. If you paint another aircraft, someone has to paint it. I know for a fact that painting aircraft takes a long time and a lot of people. It also takes some pretty specialist equipment. You need a hanger.

These are all expansions on those involved. Hundreds and hundreds of people.

Then there's the switch-over. No matter when you claim AA77 and this other aircraft were swapped, you will have dozens or hundreds of people who NOTICED.

And on it goes.

CTers refute the "no whistleblowers" claim by asserting that a small group of people could pull off 9/11. That's true. A single government agent could encourage Al Qaeda to carry out the operation. But everything else would still happen exactly as the official story claims.

CTers don't buy that, though. Their theories reveal their dishonesty. Yes, a small group COULD pull off 9/11 as an inside job. But not the way the CTers claim it happened. Their theories, in their myriad, require hundreds, thousands, in some cases MILLIONS of people to be involved.

-Gumboot
 
Last edited:
Imagine some deep cover CIA guy kicking himself and saying": "D'oh! Why the ◊◊◊◊ did I show the Lone Gunmen pilot to that Khalid Sheik Mohammad bloke?".
 
Gravy said:
Hi Russell. I hope you are well.

The same old evidence will do just fine. No one anywhere has presented a shred of evidence that flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon. It is a patently idiotic idea.
Click to expand...

Gravy,

The transition back to Seattle is challenging and a bit more consuming than I had anticipated. Family health and all is not the best. I appreciate your comment.

I hope things are good for you as well.

The post above indicates that I will be here discussing the PentaCON without criticism for my outdated site.

I look forward to the dialogue!

Russell
 
Russell Pickering said:
Gravy,

The transition back to Seattle is challenging and a bit more consuming than I had anticipated. Family health and all is not the best. I appreciate your comment.

I hope things are good for you as well.

The post above indicates that I will be here discussing the PentaCON without criticism for my outdated site.

I look forward to the dialogue!

Russell
Click to expand...

You have the start of a good memorial history for the 9/11 Pentagon attack. Many could help you clean up the facts to help fill in the experiences needed in the major systems involved on 9/11 when the terrorist stuck. Decouple the event 9/11 from everyone's political biases.

My ideas of malicious deception are melting away. (your web site was better than Jim Hoffman's web site. His web site is just keeps going and going uncontroled and self debunking; open loop.)
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
You have the start of a good memorial history for the 9/11 Pentagon attack. Many could help you clean up the facts to help fill in the experiences needed in the major systems involved on 9/11 when the terrorist stuck. Decouple the event 9/11 from everyone's political biases.

My ideas of malicious deception are melting away. (your web site was better than Jim Hoffman's web site. His web site is just keeps going and going uncontroled and self debunking; open loop.)
Click to expand...

Fair is fair and inconsistency is a pet peeve of mine as well. I just made less of an issue about the outdated information on my site than perhaps it actually was.

I did not initiate my quest into understanding 9/11 on any political motive. I have no political motive. If the neo-con agenda was being perpetrated by Buddhist monks I would respond exactly the same way.

In that case it would not be a religious/spiritual motive either.

I don't like bad things from anybody.
 
Russell Pickering said:
OK - In response to a point well made I have taken my website down temporarily.

Now everybody is fair game.

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/
Click to expand...


Well done Russell. You have consistantly been the only "conspiracy theorist" to come to this forum and display any integrity or desire to discover genuine truth surrounding 9/11.

I hope your efforts to find the truth continue and are successful.

-Gumboot
 
gumboot said:
Well done Russell. You have consistantly been the only "conspiracy theorist" to come to this forum and display any integrity or desire to discover genuine truth surrounding 9/11.

I hope your efforts to find the truth continue and are successful.

-Gumboot
Click to expand...
I'll just add "me too!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom