ThePentaCON releases trailer

We know that his movie is a farce

Even his witnesses state that the plane hit the pentagon; this shows that he is quote mining and cherry picking their statements to fit his preconceceived conclusions.


We know that lyte headed is nothing more than an attention seeker, and we are happily giving it to him. let him bask in his "greatness" at the LCF forum where they dont mind kissing his @$$.
 
Arus808 said:
avoidance of questions asked over 20 times through this thread noted.

Lyte, come back when you have answers. stop posturing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Lyte is very boring and I'm almost out of Johnnie Walker (it took me three tries to spell that right).
 
Last edited:
Lyte Trip said:
But there is no variation.
Click to expand...

when there is no variation, then the "claims' are actually very dubious. That is the sign of COACHING or colluding to make their story sound the same.

In a court trial, when testimonies sound exactly the same from witness to witness, those testimonies are actually questioned to their validity.

You've never been to court have you? Never served on a jury have you.
 
The same government that choreographed the aerial ballet couldn't plant evidence of WMD in Iraq.

:monkeyr: :mdance:

:id:
 
Yo Lyte...you didn't answer the question. It is the line that ends in a question mark...
~enigma~ said:
Let's for a second assume that you are right and the witnesses will be subpoenaed to a grand jury. You will be subpoenaed to a court trail asking why you withheld this evidence in a criminal case from the time of the interviews until the time you release your video. How would you answer so that you aren't found guilty of withholding evidence?
Click to expand...
 
boloboffin said:
The same government that choreographed the aerial ballet couldn't plant evidence of WMD in Iraq.

:monkeyr: :mdance:

:id:
Click to expand...

And yet that same government will be prosecuted because of Lyte Trip's video.

So basically, Lyte Trip will be the hero who toppled the Bush administration, no less.
 
Lyte Trip said:
But there is no variation.

ALL of the witnesses at the citgo say the same thing!

And emphatically.

And they point it out for you on location.

And they draw it for you on the famous image that we have been reposting.

And they laugh at the notion that anyone would suggest otherwise.

You will be forced to call them all liars or insane or accept that 9/11 was an inside job.

It is quite compelling.
Click to expand...

... or that they're simply mistaken, or prompted by you.


I'd be curious to know- what do they say when you tell them that this means there was a government coverup? Or what is their answer to the mountains of contradicting evidence, scientific data, and other eyewitnesses?

They laugh at science? They laugh at the other eyewitnesses? Under what authority?

You realize you're separating these 4 people into your camp- by specifically claiming (and speaking on their behalf) that they laugh at people who believe otherwise.

If you're wrong about that claim, it will be devastating to your credibility.
 
Lyte, this is the last time I'm going to ask you these questions. If you don't answer them, I will conclude that you cannot.

Lyte,

Why are you ignoring the mountain of physical evidence that supports the official story?

Why are you taking eyewitness testimony over physical evidence? Physical evidence > eyewitness testimony.

If the physical evidence was falsified or planted, please provide evidence of this. If not, answer the two questions above.
 
boloboffin said:
Mark Bright contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO (bright, shiny object):



D.S. Khavkin contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Stephen McGraw contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Mary Ann Owens contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Wanda Ramey contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Steve Rickus contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Noel Sepulveda contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Mike Walter contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Rodney Washington contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



Afework Hagos contradicts your north-of-the-Citgo BSO:



That is ten people who saw the plane hit the street lights, ten people with a direct physical marker of where the plane's flight path was.

Your witnesses are mistaken. Your movie is a farce. You are wrong.

http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm
Click to expand...


Of the witnesses you present ONLY Wanda Ramey specifically claims that she actually "saw" the light poles get hit.

Stephen McGraw is one of the 13 witnesses we will present and he ADMITS to us that he did NOT see the light poles get hit but merely deduced it after the fact.

This is quite odd when no fewer than 2 of the downed light poles were directly in front of him.

287e-1.jpg
 
Coritani said:
Lyte, this is the last time I'm going to ask you these questions. If you don't answer them, I will conclude that you cannot.

Lyte,

Why are you ignoring the mountain of physical evidence that supports the official story?

Why are you taking eyewitness testimony over physical evidence? Physical evidence > eyewitness testimony.

If the physical evidence was falsified or planted, please provide evidence of this. If not, answer the two questions above.
Click to expand...


This was an operation of deception.

The physical evidence was staged.

The independently corroborated eyewitness testimony makes this clear.

You will see very soon.
 
Lyte Trip said:
Of the witnesses you present ONLY Wanda Ramey specifically claims that she actually "saw" the light poles get hit.

Stephen McGraw is one of the 13 witnesses we will present and he ADMITS to us that he did NOT see the light poles get hit but merely deduced it after the fact.

This is quite odd when no fewer than 2 of the downed light poles were directly in front of him.

[qimg]http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Pentagon/287e-1.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

You interviewed all ten of these witnesses?
 
Lyte Trip said:
This was an operation of deception.

The physical evidence was staged.

The independently corroborated eyewitness testimony makes this clear.

You will see very soon.
Click to expand...

You said this before. I asked you to prove it and you did not.

So, Lyte, prove your claim that the physical evidence was staged or retract it.
 
When I showed up to court to testify as a witness to a drunk driver (as noted in previous threads to this one, and in this thread as well) who struck a light pole that nearly hit the car we were in, there were 10 witnesses and three police officers there. Guess what happened between all 10 of us? Neither one of our stories matched as to what happened.

I was wrong about the guys shirt color (i said it was white, when he was actually wearing grey)

Another witness said that he had short brown hair (he had a crew cut and had blonde hair because he was in the military)

Another witness said he was in the 2nd most right lane; I stated that he was in the lane right next to us (middle lane which was the 3rd lane on the road).

I could name the model and year of his car (a Black 1995 Mazda RX-7 FD Turbo) because I can identify sport cars pretty damn good (and my roommate had one as well). This was based on the few seconds he was in front of us, until he booked it. The other witnesses just stated it was a sport car, one said it was a Nissan 240sx, and another stated it was a Toyota Supra.

Remember, we all witnessed the same accident. All of us were involved in the carnage he created yet we varied on our stories of what happened that evening.


The only thing that was the same between all of us was the color description of the guys car, his license plate number, how many people were in the car (him and one passenger) and the direction he took when he booked it out of there.


Why did i post this? Because in real life, there's hardly a time when witness testimony of the same event match so close enough without variation. Variation of testimony is TO BE expected and is accepted and anticipated. When witness testimony match "perfectly" or there is no variation; then the testimony becomes very questionable and actually shows that the witnesses were COACHED for their answers or were offered "open ended" questions that any answer they give will give you the answer you were looking for in the first place. Or, that all the witnesses got together to "formulate" their story so they did match and that means a conspiracy on their part or that they are lying/trying to hide something.

So if Lyte is claiming that there is no variation of his 4 witnesses (up from 3) on the flight path, then their testimony becomes questionable.

Since we do not know how the interviews were conducted or if lyte prepped his "wintesses" prior to film interview, we can safely assume that hteir testimony can be ingnored because of circumstances (ie, coached? its been 5 years; memory is fallable), and that they were simply mistaken and misinformed.
 
Last edited:
Arus808 said:
When I showed up to court to testify as a witness to a drunk driver (as noted in previous threads to this one, and in this thread as well) who struck a light pole that nearly hit the car we were in, there were 10 witnesses and three police officers there. Guess what happened between all 10 of us? Neither one of our stories matched as to what happened.

I was wrong about the guys shirt color (i said it was white, when he was actually wearing grey)

Another witness said that he had short brown hair (he had a crew cut and had blonde hair because he was in the military)
Click to expand...
Well there's you problem, it was obviously a psyop.

Another witness said he was in the 2nd most right lane; I stated that he was in the lane right next to us (middle lane which was the 3rd lane on the road).

I could name the model and year of his car (a Black 1995 Mazda RX-7 FD Turbo) because I can identify sport cars pretty damn good (and my roommate had one as well). This was based on the few seconds he was in front of us, until he booked it. The other witnesses just stated it was a sport car, one said it was a Nissan 240sx, and another stated it was a Toyota Supra.

Remember, we all witnessed the same accident. All of us were involved in the carnage he created yet we varied on our stories of what happened that evening.


The only thing that was the same between all of us was the color description of the guys car, his license plate number, how many people were in the car (him and one passenger) and the direction he took when he booked it out of there.
Click to expand...
Did anyone see the black helicopter that picked it up and flew away.

Now I'm out of whiskey and going to bed. Goodninewgiklrnlkra.
 
Lyte Trip said:
But there is no variation.

ALL of the witnesses at the citgo say the same thing!

And emphatically.
Click to expand...

Actually, that raises a giant
99024525c71053c56.gif
.
Its kinda like when a teacher reads exam essays and finds a number of them to be pretty much the same....it's likely someones been cheating.

I find it quite hard to believe that they can all perfectly recall a 2 second event that happened 5 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Lyte Trip said:
Of the witnesses you present ONLY Wanda Ramey specifically claims that she actually "saw" the light poles get hit.

Stephen McGraw is one of the 13 witnesses we will present and he ADMITS to us that he did NOT see the light poles get hit but merely deduced it after the fact.

This is quite odd when no fewer than 2 of the downed light poles were directly in front of him.
Click to expand...

Again, you had previously claimed that "your" witnesses did not contradict any of the other witnesses. Clearly, you were lying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom