LCFC - Coming soon to a cinema near you...

Russell Pickering said:
I can't wait until Thursday.
Click to expand...

It's Thursday. I'm back. Have you "researched" your response to my offer yet?
 
Thanks all who appreciated my post.

I have to say, though, it doesn't feel like my best work. I expected to find that Russell's accusations were based on misinterpretations and flimsy evidence, but when I discovered just how flimsy it was, I got angry.

In some ways I actually pity Russell. The real morons who deserve the harshest treatment (cough cough Killtown) won't get it, simply because they never say anything solid enough to refute, and their English and compositional skills are generally subpar to boot. Russell, sadly, presented an organized argument -- unfortunately, one that was dead wrong, but one that I had no trouble following.

I guess as long as people learn from the exchange, it's for the best.
 
R.Mackey said:
Thanks all who appreciated my post.

I have to say, though, it doesn't feel like my best work. I expected to find that Russell's accusations were based on misinterpretations and flimsy evidence, but when I discovered just how flimsy it was, I got angry.

In some ways I actually pity Russell. The real morons who deserve the harshest treatment (cough cough Killtown) won't get it, simply because they never say anything solid enough to refute, and their English and compositional skills are generally subpar to boot. Russell, sadly, presented an organized argument -- unfortunately, one that was dead wrong, but one that I had no trouble following.

I guess as long as people learn from the exchange, it's for the best.
Click to expand...

Agreed, entirely. The reason that it's important to refute the "organized" arguments is precisely because they are most often just as dead wrong and superficial as the disorganized and easily dismissed ones of those less articulate than, say, Russell. His arguments are often just as lame, just as unsubstantiated, and usually just as dead wrong as those of Killtown or Usual Suspect or Jessicarabbit etal or (insert name of other CTer here), but he tries to dress them up prettier and tries to appear as though he's sourcing them properly, (although he rarely actually does).

I think that he's worked hard at trying to look like "the rational one" among tinhatters and he hopes/thinks/expects that because of that, people won't take notice of the fact that he is usually just spouting the same nonsense as the most raving among the CT crowd. And it probably works on many tinhatters and it has the potential to work on others, who are not tinhatters but who do not think critically, if they do not look deeper.

That's why it is important to look at such "apparently" coherent and organized posts and tear them apart, such as you did above. It doesn't have to be your "best work". Heck, you probably didn't even have to break a sweat to refute it, but taking the time to do so is just as important as every other refutation of nonsense here, and you did it beautifully, with detail, with sources, and with aplomb.

And that's why I nominated your post, too :)
 
Last edited:
R. Mackey,

That was the best twisting yet by somebody here.

If you are satisfied with it, I am.

Try talking to somebody involved.

You also stated something to the effect of I had no alternate theory which was totally false. If you had actually read the work you would have known that.

You omitted so many facts from the report in relation to this topic it amazes me.

You also did not catch me "lying" about anything. That is your number one deception here.

My time here now is going to be very limited due to the non productive nature of the communication. I will try and occasionally post the other side of issues that you neglect to do.

Enjoy your end zone celebration on your review, but also for your own sake look inside and at least don't try and fool yourself. Apparently winning an argument and getting nominations is not worth it.

The one success that I hand to JREFers with no question is your purposeful tactics as a group to discredit a person. You are coordinated and relentless. Fortunately I adhere to "actions speak louder than words".

Good luck to you guys and I really hope you are not precluding the truly objective person from truth.

Russell
 
Last edited:
LashL,

I am not going to entertain your offer.

After our private communications I have determined that at the very least you are unpredictable. Apparently nice on one hand but malicious in public.

Russell
 
Russell Pickering said:
R. Mackey,

[bunch of unsubstantiated complaints deleted]
Click to expand...

Weak, Russell, very weak. You didn't even try to refute.

That doesn't bother me.

However, you also didn't even try to learn from it. Heck, I don't think you even read it.

Your loss.

----

ETA: You know what, that's not good enough. Russell, you were the guy on "Loose Change" who argued so passionately that opposing viewpoint should be allowed over there.

Now you're here. Opposing viewpoints are guaranteed. And you choose to ignore them.

Ultimately, what's the difference?
 
Last edited:
Russell Pickering said:
I can't wait until Thursday.
Click to expand...

Me said:
It's Thursday. I'm back. Have you "researched" your response to my offer yet?
Click to expand...

...

Okay, it's the early hours of Friday now. I said on Tuesday that I'd be back on Thursday evening, and I was. I'll assume that you've completed whatever "research" you claimed was required in order to respond to a simple yes or no question by now.

So, your response?

I'll look for it in the morning. Surely, you won't disappoint, right?
 
So, no rebuttal from Russell to R.Mackey's thoughtful post, and a rejection of LashL's very generous offer after a hopeful "I can't wait until Thursday."

These things make me sad.
 
Maybe Russell Pickering is actually a disinfo agent on behalf of the no-planers to discredit any attempt to prove that a holographic beam weapon was used to knock the billiard balls into the bowl of termites thus causing the pentagon light poles to fall over which in turn damaged WTC7 and caused a massive small fire within the concrete core of the WTC towers which spread to the Windsor Tower in madrid where toilet paper resulted in a plane hitting the pentagon.

It's just a theory though.
 
You should all go back and nominate my first post on the "Russell Pickering is coming" thread where I let you all know (before 600 of his posts mind you) that the guy is a fruitcake with woo written all over him.

What a turd.
 
LashL said:
Oh, is he "leaving" again?

When the going gets tough... usual CT response.
Click to expand...

Oh, he'll probably keep reading posts and eventually come back, once another CTer or Pdoh Sock arrives to agree with him or he thinks we've forgotten R.Mackey's above post.
 
Russell Pickering said:
LashL,

I am not going to entertain your offer.

After our private communications I have determined that at the very least you are unpredictable. Apparently nice on one hand but malicious in public.

Russell
Click to expand...

That's BS, Russell, and you know it. The only reason that you're not accepting my offer/challenge is because you can't.

Your alluding to our private communications is disengenuous at best and dishonest at worst. You seem to be trying to suggest that they were something other than what they were in an effort to get out of responding to my legitimate offer to investigate your alleged evidence and to interview your alleged witnesses and to present the results verbatim to you and to a D.A. on your behalf.

It is obvious that you are running away like a little boy with his tail between his legs, and it is obvious that you cannot back up what you said.

Nobody here is going to be fooled. You might fool the losers, loosers, and idiots who hang out at the LC forums, and you might fool other troofers incapable of rational or logical thought, but as you knew long before you got here, you're not going to fool anyone here with such pathetic and lame responses devoid of facts, evidence, or critical thought.

If you're "really" leaving this time, it's because you know you're out of your league and because you cannot produce that which you have promised to produce. Around here, we actually expect people to deliver on their promises and you have failed miserably in that regard.

So, I'll ask you once again.

I've offered to interview each and every one of the witnesses you claim to have, I've offered to provide you with verbatim transcripts of same for your input and comment before taking it to a D.A. on your behalf.

What exactly is your objection?

I think your objection is, in simple terms, "Damn, I didn't really want someone to call me on this because I can't actually support what I said, and I'd be embarrassed to take it to a D.A. myself."

So, either prove me wrong and send me that contact information and I'll get on it immediately, or admit that you're talking through your hat.

Those are really the only two options.
 
Last edited:
Russell Pickering said:
R. Mackey,

That was the best twisting yet by somebody here.

If you are satisfied with it, I am.

Try talking to somebody involved.

You also stated something to the effect of I had no alternate theory which was totally false. If you had actually read the work you would have known that.

You omitted so many facts from the report in relation to this topic it amazes me.

You also did not catch me "lying" about anything. That is your number one deception here.

My time here now is going to be very limited due to the non productive nature of the communication. I will try and occasionally post the other side of issues that you neglect to do.

Enjoy your end zone celebration on your review, but also for your own sake look inside and at least don't try and fool yourself. Apparently winning an argument and getting nominations is not worth it.

The one success that I hand to JREFers with no question is your purposeful tactics as a group to discredit a person. You are coordinated and relentless. Fortunately I adhere to "actions speak louder than words".

Good luck to you guys and I really hope you are not precluding the truly objective person from truth.

Russell
Click to expand...

jesus..i wish you would take your own advice and go and talk to the people invovled with WTC7
 
Russell Pickering said:
R. Mackey,

That was the best twisting yet by somebody here.

If you are satisfied with it, I am.

Try talking to somebody involved.

You also stated something to the effect of I had no alternate theory which was totally false. If you had actually read the work you would have known that.

You omitted so many facts from the report in relation to this topic it amazes me.

You also did not catch me "lying" about anything. That is your number one deception here.

My time here now is going to be very limited due to the non productive nature of the communication. I will try and occasionally post the other side of issues that you neglect to do.

Enjoy your end zone celebration on your review, but also for your own sake look inside and at least don't try and fool yourself. Apparently winning an argument and getting nominations is not worth it.

The one success that I hand to JREFers with no question is your purposeful tactics as a group to discredit a person. You are coordinated and relentless. Fortunately I adhere to "actions speak louder than words".

Good luck to you guys and I really hope you are not precluding the truly objective person from truth.

Russell
Click to expand...

Oh, please.

Mackey wasn't the one twisting here. But you know that. And if you were honest with yourself for even a nanosecond, you would admit that.

Instead, you're trying to play to your waning tinhat audience that lurks here in hopes that they'll see you as a hero for coming here and taking on the critical thinkers. Alas, you've lost in that gambit because you have shown, even to the tinhatters, that you cannot respond intelligently or meaningfully to the numerous intelligent posters here who have called you on your posts in good faith over the past several weeks ~ and in the past week or so, you've gone into full tinhat mode trying to reanimate support among the tinhat lurkers ... and even that has failed.

Now, you are reduced to abandoning all pretense that you were initially clothing yourself in; abandoning all pretense at legitimate research; abandoning all pretense of being a legitimate researcher; abandoning all pretense that you were dealing with reality and instead being reduced to spouting the same old tired long debunked conspiracy theories without a scintilla of evidence to back up anything you say. All in hopes that the remaining tinhat lurkers from the other forums you visit might see you as a hero still, despite the fact that they, too, are disappointed with your poor showing here and elsewhere; all in hopes that those few stragglers might somehow see you as a hero even while you are forced to admit defeat here and slink away.

If those last few dregs at the bottom of the tinhat barrel are the kind of people whose admiration and handslapping makes you feel good about yourself, well, all I can say is that I feel sorry for you. And given that even most of them have no respect for you, all I can say is, I feel very, very sorry for you.
 
Last edited:
R.Mackey said:
Weak, Russell, very weak. You didn't even try to refute.

That doesn't bother me.

However, you also didn't even try to learn from it. Heck, I don't think you even read it.

Your loss.

----

ETA: You know what, that's not good enough. Russell, you were the guy on "Loose Change" who argued so passionately that opposing viewpoint should be allowed over there.

Now you're here. Opposing viewpoints are guaranteed. And you choose to ignore them.

Ultimately, what's the difference?
Click to expand...

R. Mackey,

I read it 100%.

The time to refute here is no longer worth it.

No matter the effort or documentation it always results in name calling, insinuation and accusation of being a liar.

When the standards here are raised then full participation may be worth the time.

Russell
 
LashL said:
That's BS, Russell, and you know it. The only reason that you're not accepting my offer/challenge is because you can't.

Your alluding to our private communications is disengenuous at best and dishonest at worst. You seem to be trying to suggest that they were something other than what they were in an effort to get out of responding to my legitimate offer to investigate your alleged evidence and to interview your alleged witnesses and to present the results verbatim to you and to a D.A. on your behalf.

It is obvious that you are running away like a little boy with his tail between his legs, and it is obvious that you cannot back up what you said.

Nobody here is going to be fooled. You might fool the losers, loosers, and idiots who hang out at the LC forums, and you might fool other troofers incapable of rational or logical thought, but as you knew long before you got here, you're not going to fool anyone here with such pathetic and lame responses devoid of facts, evidence, or critical thought.

If you're "really" leaving this time, it's because you know you're out of your league and because you cannot produce that which you have promised to produce. Around here, we actually expect people to deliver on their promises and you have failed miserably in that regard.

So, I'll ask you once again.

I've offered to interview each and every one of the witnesses you claim to have, I've offered to provide you with verbatim transcripts of same for your input and comment before taking it to a D.A. on your behalf.

What exactly is your objection?

I think your objection is, in simple terms, "Damn, I didn't really want someone to call me on this because I can't actually support what I said, and I'd be embarrassed to take it to a D.A. myself."

So, either prove me wrong and send me that contact information and I'll get on it immediately, or admit that you're talking through your hat.

Those are really the only two options.
Click to expand...

I OBJECT your honor. Pure speculation.

I have told the truth. Literally almost everything you said here exists only in your own thoughts.

I am bored of the rhetoric here and find the style of argument way below what it should be.

Trust me!
 
Russell Pickering said:
R. Mackey,

I read it 100%.

The time to refute here is no longer worth it.

No matter the effort or documentation it always results in name calling, insinuation and accusation of being a liar.

When the standards here are raised then full participation may be worth the time.

Russell
Click to expand...
Just who do you think you're fooling, Russell?
 
LashL said:
Oh, please.

Mackey wasn't the one twisting here. But you know that. And if you were honest with yourself for even a nanosecond, you would admit that.

Instead, you're trying to play to your waning tinhat audience that lurks here in hopes that they'll see you as a hero for coming here and taking on the critical thinkers. Alas, you've lost because you have shown that you cannot respond intelligently or meaningfully to the numerous posters who have called you on your posts in good faith over the past several weeks, and in the past week, you've gone into full tinhat mode trying to reanimate support among the tinhat lurkers ... and even that has failed.

Now, you are reduced to pretending that reality is something entirely different than what it actually is in hopes that the remaining tinhat lurkers from the other forums you visit might see you as a hero still, despite the fact that they, too, are disappointed with your poor showing here, and you hope that those few stragglers will somehow see you as a hero even while you are forced to admit defeat here and slink away.

If those last few dregs are the kind of people whose admiration and handslapping makes you feel good about yourself, well, all I can say is "I feel sorry for you." And given that even most of them have no respect for you, all I can say is, I feel very, very sorry for you.
Click to expand...

LashL,

R. Mackey's response was very inaccurate and distorted.

Please remember the Universal principle of accusing others and attacking others in regards to what we ourselves do and don't like about ourselves.

It will help you when you get carried away and off balance like this.

Russell
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom