ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Chadwick Brooks , William Lagasse

Reply
Old 28th March 2007, 10:49 PM   #201
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Uh yeah sorry I must have only gotten a C in crash science class.


Bottom line; the only remotely significant pieces of aircraft that were reported found are limited to these right here:
Why are truthers always wrong? Everything truthers say is just a lie or wrong. Why?

You are wrong, you failed to show all the other parts. Failure is a truther trait?

How many accident investigation courses have you taken?
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 10:50 PM   #202
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
I
And then we laughed.

A lot.

As one viewer put it- the video debunks itself. Amazing. I expect nothing less from a "researcher edition".
You laughed because you are in denial or you don't understand the implications.

No logical unbiased person denies that the plane was on the north side of the citgo after seeing this testimony.

Simply won't happen.

Unfortunately you can't find many of those in this forum.
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 10:51 PM   #203
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Why are truthers always wrong? Everything truthers say is just a lie or wrong. Why?

You are wrong, you failed to show all the other parts. Failure is a truther trait?

How many accident investigation courses have you taken?
Bust out!

Sure there are a few other scraps.

But nothing more significant.
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:00 PM   #204
pagan
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 399
Quote:
Hi everyone. After a long suspension due to "discrepancies" on my account I have been allowed back after literally proving my real identity to the moderators.

I found this to be an odd request since most discussion boards are anonymous and I had already been posting here for a few months but I am not trying to hide my identity so I complied.
Having to prove your real identity to the moderators before you can participate in an open and anonymus forum, must be highly irregular?

Well, I've already noticed that the forum moderators hardly can be described as unbiased. Any comments from the mods?
pagan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:00 PM   #205
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Bust out!

Sure there are a few other scraps.

But nothing more significant.
Why are you always wrong? Your witnesses who were inteviewed in 2001 make your whole story just a lie. Your false statement now about the crash scene and about DNA is another lie.

You are posting now just lies. Your film is a failure and with the interviews from 2001 and thousands of pieces of evidence and hundreds of witnesses your film is an outright lie.

You have said things that are not true and you have you own witnesses to debunk you 5 years before you published you lies.

Seeing as repition has failed to help make a point and your continued lies are boring. If you want to be a liar go ahead make your case. You are just a pathetic liar.

http://memory.loc.gov/learn/collecti...1/history.html

Here are your own witnesses contradicting every single thing you say!

American Airlines Flight 77 from Washington-Dulles International Airport crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. William Lagasse, Chadwick Brooks, and Donald Brennan were Pentagon police officers on duty at the time of the attack. Lagasse was in the process of refueling his police car when the American Airliner flew past him so low that its wind blast knocked him into his vehicle. In an interview conducted in December 2001 , Lagasse described the secondary explosions and the search and recovery of injured Pentagon personnel. Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon and described the ensuing scenes of chaos in his interview, taped November 25, 2001.

You can not even find witnesses to support your lies!

Debunked 5 years ago. This is a classic! Wow.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:01 PM   #206
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
I will admit I had higher hopes for the critical thinking skills of the people in this forum.

I figured at least a couple of you would be strong enough to rise above the groupthink and at least admit that the testimony is compelling and raises serious questions.

Pentagon police officers for god's sake!

I could see how you guys would blow it off if all we had was Robert Turcios but come on fellas!

Not one but 2 cops!

Who are so insanely certain about such a simple and significant claim.

I know deep down inside some of you are a bit wigged out by this.

I know it's hard to admit especially in this forum but simply to let your mind go there at all.

If any of you want to open an anonymous civil intellectual dialog with me in private about this feel free to hit me up on myspace or something.

I know you don't want to seem weak in front of the gang when dealing with a woowoo twoofer.

Anyway I just thought I'd throw that out there.
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:05 PM   #207
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
You can not even find witnesses to support your lies!

Debunked 5 years ago. This is a classic! Wow.
Why do you guys keep saying this over and over?

We are simply reporting what the witnesses claim they saw.

They ALL saw the plane on the north side of the station.

THAT is the smoking gun.

NOTHING from their previous interviews contradicts this.
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:06 PM   #208
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Why do you guys keep saying this over and over?

We are simply reporting what the witnesses claim they saw.

They ALL saw the plane on the north side of the station.

THAT is the smoking gun.

NOTHING from their previous interviews contradicts this.
http://memory.loc.gov/learn/collecti...1/history.html

Wrong you have not listened, they debunk everything you say, every single thing you say!

American Airlines Flight 77 from Washington-Dulles International Airport crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. William Lagasse, Chadwick Brooks, and Donald Brennan were Pentagon police officers on duty at the time of the attack. Lagasse was in the process of refueling his police car when the American Airliner flew past him so low that its wind blast knocked him into his vehicle. In an interview conducted in December 2001 , Lagasse described the secondary explosions and the search and recovery of injured Pentagon personnel. Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon and described the ensuing scenes of chaos in his interview, taped November 25, 2001.

Your witnesses do not support your lies!

Debunked 5 years before you knew it.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:08 PM   #209
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Why are you repeating yourself like a robot?

Plus you make no sense.

NOTHING contradicts the north side claim in those accounts.

NOTHING
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:10 PM   #210
Arus808
Philosopher
 
Arus808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,204
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
None specifically claim the plane was on the south of the citgo station therefore none directly contradict the citgo witnesses placement of the plane.
OMG you're being purposefully obtuse


THE WITNESSES WEREN'T NEAR THE CITGO STATION SO THEIR TESTIMONY WILL NOT SAY THAT IT WAS SOUTH OF CITGO! DAMN ITS LIKE ARGUING WITH A 4 YEAR OLD WHO DOESN'T KNOW WHAT TOP FROM BOTTOM IS!

All that matters from their testimony is;
what they saw
when they saw it
and where they were standing

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY WERE NEAR THE CITGO STATION OR NOT BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T BE USING THE CITGO STATION TO ESTABLISH WHERE THE PLANE FLEW IN FROM!!!
__________________
Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato.

“Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.”
“Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”
Arus808 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:14 PM   #211
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Why are you repeating yourself like a robot?

Plus you make no sense.

NOTHING contradicts the north side claim in those accounts.

NOTHING
You did not listen. Try again. Your own witnesses contradicts the north side. So does the FDR.

This is where Lyte's witnesses can be found debunking his whole theory five years before he even started to tell lies about 9/11. Ironic. These guys went through a tough event and it is fresh 5 years ago. Hear the guys who responded first on 9/11 at the Pentagon tell the story of flight 77 and the Pentagon. Not clouded by 5 years of tough memories.

http://memory.loc.gov/learn/collecti...1/history.html

American Airlines Flight 77 from Washington-Dulles International Airport crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. William Lagasse, Chadwick Brooks, and Donald Brennan were Pentagon police officers on duty at the time of the attack. Lagasse was in the process of refueling his police car when the American Airliner flew past him so low that its wind blast knocked him into his vehicle. In an interview conducted in December 2001 , Lagasse described the secondary explosions and the search and recovery of injured Pentagon personnel. Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon and described the ensuing scenes of chaos in his interview, taped November 25, 2001.

Your witnesses prove your video wrong, and you wrong. Listen please. It proves you wrong, if you do not listen you will not know.

Last edited by beachnut; 28th March 2007 at 11:16 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:14 PM   #212
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Arus808 View Post

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY WERE NEAR THE CITGO STATION OR NOT BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T BE USING THE CITGO STATION TO ESTABLISH WHERE THE PLANE FLEW IN FROM!!!
Well the citgo sation is the only visible landmark nearby for anyone that could see the alleged impact zone of the pentagon.

Besides.

All of the witnesses that WERE in a position to tell saw the same thing.



Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:16 PM   #213
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post

Your witnesses prove your video wrong, and you wrong. Listen please.
Dude I have listened many times.

They NEVER contradict the north side claim.
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:16 PM   #214
Arus808
Philosopher
 
Arus808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,204
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Well the citgo sation is the only visible landmark nearby for anyone that could see the alleged impact zone of the pentagon.
false.
the pentagon would be the visible landmark for those on the FREEWAY

Quote:
Besides.

All of the witnesses that WERE in a position to tell saw the same thing.
as pointed you several times, YOUR OWN witnesses tell a different story 5 years ago.

AGAIN;

PHYSICAL EVIDENCE TRUMPS EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY
__________________
Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato.

“Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.”
“Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”
Arus808 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:17 PM   #215
Arus808
Philosopher
 
Arus808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,204
lyte, when are you going to inteview the firefighters on duty?
the rescue workers?
the clean up crew?
the hundreds of witnesses who were on the freeway?

why haven't you interviewed these people?
__________________
Back home with a new sunburn...I look like a tomato.

“Life may begin at 30, but it doesn’t get real interesting until about 150.”
“Most motorcycle problems are caused by the nut that connects the handlebars to the saddle.”
Arus808 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:20 PM   #216
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
Originally Posted by Arus808 View Post
lyte, when are you going to inteview the firefighters on duty?
the rescue workers?
the clean up crew?
the hundreds of witnesses who were on the freeway?

why haven't you interviewed these people?
Because they didn't see the plane.
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:21 PM   #217
Lyte Trip
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,992
We interviewed anyone and everyone we could find that saw the plane.
Lyte Trip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:35 PM   #218
Brainache
Nasty Brutish and Tall
 
Brainache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,069
So Lyte, will the researchers edition have better camera work and audio than the smoking gun edition? Because the production values were woeful.

I realise you guys aren't professional film makers, but really how hard is it to hold a camera at least a bit steady or use a microphone?

One of the biggest drawbacks for me of your movie was that the technical aspects made it nearly totally unwatchable.

Sorry if this seems like nit-picking, but seriously, presentation is important.

OH and your witnesses were mistaken about the Northside flightpath. You might try to fix that little problem as well.
Brainache is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:40 PM   #219
Panoply_Prefect
Graduate Poster
 
Panoply_Prefect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,075
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
He said the same thing in our film so therefore there are no "differences".

But the fact is that if his placement of the plane was remotely correct then it can not be what caused the physical damage.
Aha, ok. But to me that gives this from your "dilemma"

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip
1. You believe that they were correct in their belief that the plane made impact.

2. You believe that they were remotely correct in their independent placement of the plane.
Statement 1 was made both in 2001 and in 2005
Statement 2 only in 2005

Am I correct?

Did you point out to Sgt Lagasse that his placement of the plane as going north of Citgo in your opinion makes the official record, and possibly his recollection of "American Airlines" hitting Pentagon, impossible? Something in the lines of:

"Sgt Lagasse, are you aware of the fact that if the plane went where you today, 2005, say it went, would mean that it couldn't have hit the lightpoles, that it goes against the testimony of the cab driver and that it would mean the plane couldn't have made the damages it allegedly did"?


Cheers,
S

Last edited by Panoply_Prefect; 28th March 2007 at 11:44 PM.
Panoply_Prefect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:44 PM   #220
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
Lyte.

How do you explain the DNA found at the scene, which fits the passengers on flight 77? There were 102 specialists analysing that DNA. There are family members that had relatives on that flight, who donated DNA samples for the positive ID. Are they all lying?

How do you explain, that not a single person in the world saw a fly-over?

How do you explain, that no radar in the world shows flight 77 after it hit the Pentagon?

How do you explain the damage, that fits that of a plane?

How do you explain the debris, that fits that of a flight 77?


If you only answer one of these, answer the first one please.
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2007, 11:53 PM   #221
tacodaemon
Muse
 
tacodaemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 571
Lyte, what did the eyewitnesses watching from the other side of the river (Scott P. Cook, Ken Ford) and the people watching from apartments in the Crystal City or Pentagon City area (Steve Storti, Tim Timmerman, Dave Winslow) -- most or all of whom probably would have been in a better position to see a flyover vs. a crash -- have to say about your theory?

Also, the reason there are a bunch of quotes from USA Today and Gannett people is because (1) the road was right on the way to the buildings where they were based then, and (2) they were right down the hall from lots of other reporters and therefore easy to interview and include in stories (rule #1 of the press: reporters are lazy).
__________________
"Killtown, your brain is like the four headed, man-eating haddock fish beast of Aberdeen." - Fr Ted @ LCF
tacodaemon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 01:30 AM   #222
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,088
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Dude I have listened many times.

They NEVER contradict the north side claim.
Once again you did not listen to the 2001 interviews. They contradict the north flight path.

http://memory.loc.gov/learn/collecti...1/history.html

American Airlines Flight 77 from Washington-Dulles International Airport crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. William Lagasse, Chadwick Brooks, and Donald Brennan were Pentagon police officers on duty at the time of the attack. Lagasse was in the process of refueling his police car when the American Airliner flew past him so low that its wind blast knocked him into his vehicle. In an interview conducted in December 2001 , Lagasse described the secondary explosions and the search and recovery of injured Pentagon personnel. Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon and described the ensuing scenes of chaos in his interview, taped November 25, 2001.

I am sorry but these interviews, which you have not listened to or you are unable to comprehend, contradict your north path.

Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon

Last edited by beachnut; 29th March 2007 at 01:34 AM. Reason: Brooks saw the hijacked plane clip lampposts and nosedive into the Pentagon
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 01:51 AM   #223
boloboffin
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,986
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Eyewitness accounts are never perfect.

But guess what?

You don't have to rely on just Lagasse!

All the other witnesses corroborate his claim!
What "all the other witnesses"? Two other guys? Get real.

On edit:

Lagasse is just as certain about where the light poles were knocked down and where the taxi cab was as he is about where the plane flew in.

He is wrong about the taxicab. He is wrong about the light poles.

He is wrong about the plane.

Last edited by boloboffin; 29th March 2007 at 02:15 AM. Reason: more stuff
boloboffin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 02:12 AM   #224
westprog
Philosopher
 
westprog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
...
Pentagon police officers for god's sake!

...
Not one but 2 cops!
...
This is the funny thing about CT thinking. There's an enormous respect for authority. Eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable. But cops! Police officers! Pentagon Police Officers! You have to believe them. Protect and serve, etc.

Then in the next paragraph we'll be accused of believing whatever the government feed us.
westprog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 02:24 AM   #225
cloudshipsrule
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,170
Here's a tasty little link on the topic of witnesses. Hope this isn't redundant:

http://analysis.batcave.net/trailer.html
cloudshipsrule is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 02:33 AM   #226
westprog
Philosopher
 
westprog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by boloboffin View Post
What "all the other witnesses"? Two other guys? Get real.

On edit:

Lagasse is just as certain about where the light poles were knocked down and where the taxi cab was as he is about where the plane flew in.

He is wrong about the taxicab. He is wrong about the light poles.

He is wrong about the plane.
And there's nothing unusual in this. Any event will elicit a range of witness recollections which deviate from each other and what actually happened. When the event is sudden, unexpected, and brief in duration, and the recollection is long after the event, witness statements are even less reliable.

In the case of the Pentagon, what's significant is the consensus between all the witness statements. No-one saw anything other than a large passenger aircraft which was flying low towards the Pentagon.

Ironically, the one set of people who know how unreliable detailed witness statements are - are cops.
westprog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 02:42 AM   #227
boloboffin
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,986
Originally Posted by westprog View Post
And there's nothing unusual in this. Any event will elicit a range of witness recollections which deviate from each other and what actually happened. When the event is sudden, unexpected, and brief in duration, and the recollection is long after the event, witness statements are even less reliable.

In the case of the Pentagon, what's significant is the consensus between all the witness statements. No-one saw anything other than a large passenger aircraft which was flying low towards the Pentagon.

Ironically, the one set of people who know how unreliable detailed witness statements are - are cops.
Yes, this is true. But Lagasse is on camera changing reality to fit his perception. He's told where the light poles were knocked down, and he utterly denies this. He says that the poles that were knocked down weren't, and that poles that weren't knocked down were. He also puts the taxicab in exactly the place it needs to be for his perception - not where it actually was.

Lagasse, in Lyte's own video, changes the facts on the ground to meet the requirements of his own perception. He is not a reliable witness, and the PentaCon proves this.
boloboffin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 02:55 AM   #228
westprog
Philosopher
 
westprog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by boloboffin View Post
Yes, this is true. But Lagasse is on camera changing reality to fit his perception. He's told where the light poles were knocked down, and he utterly denies this. He says that the poles that were knocked down weren't, and that poles that weren't knocked down were. He also puts the taxicab in exactly the place it needs to be for his perception - not where it actually was.

Lagasse, in Lyte's own video, changes the facts on the ground to meet the requirements of his own perception. He is not a reliable witness, and the PentaCon proves this.
As always with any witness statement, it should be matched up with circumstantial evidence to see where the discepancies are. In this case, the discrepancies are obvious. To assume that the witness statement is accurate and that the circumstantial evidence is wrong goes against everything Mr Legasse would have been taught at Police Academy.
westprog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 03:15 AM   #229
Panoply_Prefect
Graduate Poster
 
Panoply_Prefect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,075
Originally Posted by boloboffin View Post
Yes, this is true. But Lagasse is on camera changing reality to fit his perception. He's told where the light poles were knocked down, and he utterly denies this. He says that the poles that were knocked down weren't, and that poles that weren't knocked down were. He also puts the taxicab in exactly the place it needs to be for his perception - not where it actually was.

Lagasse, in Lyte's own video, changes the facts on the ground to meet the requirements of his own perception. He is not a reliable witness, and the PentaCon proves this.
So in short, back in -01, Lagasse is on record saying he saw the plane hit the Pentagon, and he is on record identifying it as belonging to American Airlines.

Then four years later, in -05 he is again asked to recap his recollection. He then goes on to confirm what he said back in -01, confirming everything but adding a new recollection, the flight path - which he puts "wrong" - at least visavi his prior testimony. He then tries to fit known facts with his 2005 recollection of the flight path.

To sum up, four years after the actual event his statement is correct save for one thing, the flightpath. That on the other hand is a four year old recollection.

If I havent misunderstood something crucial, its pretty obvious which part of his testimony to dismiss.

/S
Panoply_Prefect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 03:49 AM   #230
westprog
Philosopher
 
westprog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by SLOB View Post
If I havent misunderstood something crucial, its pretty obvious which part of his testimony to dismiss.

/S
Clearly we should dismiss the part of his testimony which agrees with all the other witnesses, and accept the part which disagrees with the other witnesses and all the circumstantial evidence.
westprog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 04:53 AM   #231
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,092
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Nobody is laughing at me sir.

We have a lot of people quite nervous though that's for sure.

I have no idea when or if the media and authorities will get their heads out of their asses.

But you better believe if there are any inquiries that these witnesses will be called.
Excuse me, but EVERYBODY is laughing at you. Everyone here, on the LC forums, children in Kindergarten, anyone with a still-functioning brain is LAUGHING AT YOUR RIDICULOUS NONSENSE!
Bug Bunny cartoons make more logical sense. Road Runner cartoons contain better physics. Scooby-Do cartoons have better examples of how to do investigations. You, however, do contain more laughs-per-minute than they do.
Maybe Warner Brothers could use you. Think their animation department could use some good humor writers.
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom

Last edited by JimBenArm; 29th March 2007 at 04:54 AM. Reason: typo
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 05:44 AM   #232
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Uh yeah sorry I must have only gotten a C in crash science class.


Bottom line; the only remotely significant pieces of aircraft that were reported found are limited to these right here:

...

You completely avoided the question, bottom line. You have no explanation for "the only remotely significant pieces" (interesting choice of words, but it shows a tremendous amount of bias). You have no evidence to support your theory, you have no witnesses which support your version of the events, you have no explanation for the evidence which contradicts your theory...

There's nothing left to do with your claims. The video is a joke- there are threads detailing the many inaccuracies and false claims throughout this forum- observations which you don't respond to.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 05:45 AM   #233
alexg
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 539
Lyte, if they saw the plane hit that would trump the path discrepancy, yes?

I understand you have something a little ambiguous from Lagassee abou the impact. This simply needs to be cleared up. I made this suggestion in an earlier post but didnot see a response. Long thread, sorry if I just missed it, but here it is again:

Quote:
Lyte, here is an idea; interview Lagasse again, if he confirms that he did not actually see the point of impact simply ask him if there was enough room between the plane and the wall for a pull up when he lost sight of it. I gotta say I can almost hear him guffawing but I think that's what you're going to need to do. What he said about missing the impact is simply ambiguous. No way you can take that to the bank for a fly over.

Even better: give him a model plane and a rough model of the wall and get him to demonstrate what he saw, all of this without ANY coaching. Then ask him if there was room in his mind for a flyover.

Simple test. It will resolve a lot. Why not?
I thought he made it clear there was no doubt about the plane hitting the building. If the impact detail was obscurred by the explosion that is not necessarily room for a flyover, he seemed to see the plane and building nose to face, as it were.

Last edited by alexg; 29th March 2007 at 05:57 AM.
alexg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 05:48 AM   #234
uk_dave
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,154
Ahhh but apparently the pentagon (military) has instructed the Police (civilian) not to speak with the cits again.

Or something.

I'm sure it was posted on LCF.

Russell will probably know where........
uk_dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 05:55 AM   #235
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,154
Originally Posted by ConspiRaider View Post
No one is laughing at you, as far as you know.
<snip>
I am, and now he knows. (and knowing is half the battle)
Arkan_Wolfshade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 05:57 AM   #236
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
You laughed because you are in denial or you don't understand the implications.

No logical unbiased person denies that the plane was on the north side of the citgo after seeing this testimony.

Simply won't happen.

Unfortunately you can't find many of those in this forum.


It takes an amazing amount of delusion to not only ignore all the evidence, but ignore all the laughing and ridicule for ignoring the evidence- and then pretend that you're being rational...

It is not unbiased to exclude eyewitness testimony you don't like.

It is not unbiased to simply ignore evidence you do not like.

It is not unbiased to create a theory against the evidence- and in complete lack of it.

It is not unbiased to have a predetermined conclusion, hand pick your witnesses, and then contradict selected portions of their statements in order to make a video.

Get it through your head: the majority of the witnesses, the flight path damage, the physical evidence, DNA evidence, etc- all place the plane on the official flight path, which is south of the Citgo. To deny that is to contradict all of the evidence and the majority of the eyewitness testimony.

You have no explanation for that contradiction and instead try to weasel your way into some sort of agreeable position.

I repeat- if you were simply confirming the official flight path, you would not have made a video. You can't have a "shocking expose which will bring about a grand jury and indictments" and then pretend you aren't contradicting the official flight path and all the witnesses that confirm it.

It's nuts.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 06:02 AM   #237
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,321
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
You must not understand English.

Yes I said I believed there will be a Grand Jury this year.

Yes I STAND BY that statement.

No I did not ever say that our film would result in a Grand Jury.

Stop lying about my claims.
You're trying to change the context of your statements. Anyone involved with that thread- or willing to go and read it can see that you were beating your chest over this video- claiming it would bring about a grand jury and indictments.

And now you're trying to change what you said earlier in this very thread.
__________________
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." --Jonathan Swift
Blog - Corrected By Reality. My debunking videos, and philosophy on YouTube


Totovader's 9/11 Conspiracy Challenge Still unanswered!
Totovader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 06:05 AM   #238
Mobyseven
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,671
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Neither.

They ALL saw a plane on the north side of the station and then witnessed a big fireball that concealed the impact/flyover.

Like this:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a3...on/Flyover.gif
So, after the fireball had cleared, where do your witnesses place the plane?

Even if the fireball lasted for half a minute (quite a generous time for me to be allowing, the real time wuld be much less), the plane would not be able to fly far enough in this time for it to no longer be visible. With the number of witnesses present, who saw this happen, where do they place the plane once the fireball had cleared?
Mobyseven is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 06:08 AM   #239
Mobyseven
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,671
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Because they didn't see the plane.
How do you know this if you haven't interviewed them?
Mobyseven is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2007, 06:10 AM   #240
stateofgrace
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,843
Originally Posted by Lyte Trip View Post
Why do you guys keep saying this over and over?

We are simply reporting what the witnesses claim they saw.

They ALL saw the plane on the north side of the station.

THAT is the smoking gun.

NOTHING from their previous interviews contradicts this.

THEN DO SOMETHING.GET OFF THE NET AND DO SOMETHING.

I am fed up with your garbage, your self centred, self pitifully whining on this and other forums.

Take it to the mains stream media, take it the authorities, do something other than post your "smoking gun " on internet forums and making DVD's.

Your evidence is that solid, do something with it, get off your backside and do the right thing, help the families to put some closure on this.

I look forward to seeing in the worlds media.
stateofgrace is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:54 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.