| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| The Pentagon Threads Appreciation Thread | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Feb 26 2008, 07:48 PM (139 Views) | |
| blarney fife | Feb 26 2008, 07:48 PM Post #1 |
|
Since joining this forum in October of last year, I have found these to be some of the most compelling threads posted so far. I'm starting this thread for those who have not (or only marginally) participated in the debate side of the issues. It is not intended as another thread to debate the variety or veracity of the issues presented, but rather, as a medium to reflect how the discussion has affected the reader's perspectives. It is totally open to both sides of the issues because it wouldn't be much of a debate without opposing viewpoints, now would it? I'll start. The tenacity with which the "official" siders try to discredit the North of Citgo (NOC) witnesses, while simultaneously giving more credibility to the mainstream witnesses, is the most compelling to me. See the Rick Renzi thread for at least one reason why this should not be the case. Of course, conceding the NOC witness accounts means only one thing, the "official" story is simply not true. The second is the Lloyd England pole through the windshield discussion. The most compelling point on this issue to me is what I consider to be the one-in-a-million nature of this occuring without causing any other damage to the outside of the cab. I'm not saying it's impossible that a plane flying at 300 or 400 or 500 mph couldn't strike a light pole and fly almost horizontally through a windshield, but c'mon, what are the odds of that happening in such a violent and random act? Same thing goes for an old man (falling down mind you) and a helper removing said pole and not even leaving a visible scratch on the paint in the photos available. Again, concession on the issue can only mean one thing. What say you? PS...thanks to the CIT guys, SPreston, Bitterman, JFK, Stundie, 22205, bret 08, tether, sevon, PBnJ, and all the others to numerous to mention. Very interesting stuff! |
 |
 
|
| Bitterman | Feb 26 2008, 08:44 PM Post #2 |
|
The perfect outside view point. One that hasn't debated too much or taken any one side on the subject but has watched all from afar. A good indication that CITs' work is making people think, and hopefully making the skeptics think about their arguments and how much affect they really have on things. Good on ya and good to hear Blarney. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Pentagon · Next Topic » |
10:32 AM Nov 28
