Flight 93 : Shanksville Flyover

[Domenick]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXTAgFYyvUE

[Theobald]

1. Liar

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liar
li⋅ar   /ˈlaɪər/ Pronunciation –noun a person who tells lies.
Origin: bef. 950; ME lier, OE lēogere. See lie 1 , -ar 1
Synonyms: falsifier, perjurer, prevaricator.

How do we determine if the person who created this video is a liar? A liar is a person who tells lies. A liar is synonymous with someone who falsifies, perjures, or prevaricates. I think with the evidence at hand we can prove the videoographer is a liar. The person who created this video is trying to show us that flight 93 didn't crash in Shanksville, rather a missile crashed in Shanksville.

To prove his point he uses the testimony of John Fleegle. At 2:22 in the video it states that "Three miles past the alleged crash site...Indian Lake Marina Manager John Fleegle confirms flight 93 flew over Indian Lake prior to the explosion in Shanksville" Video of Fleegle is then proffered as confirmation; however in his testimony Fleegle never says that Flight 93 flew over him before the crash. He was inside a building and heard engine noises overhead, he does not state that flight 93 flew overhead. He does however say he was at the crash site in 45 seconds to a minute, which means that he traveled at over 180 mph from his location 3 miles away.

At 7:30 in the video he states that "Carol Delasko was working at Indian Lake Marina when she heard flight 93 overhead" Unfortunately she never said that and the video guy only proffers a quote for the Pittsburgh Tribune Review from 9/14/01 http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_12967.html where she doesn't say what he says she said.

Therefor I believe I have shown the videoographer to be a liar.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Theobald]

7. Obfuscation

I did not and do not dispute that he was at the marina.
I do not dispute that he heard engine noises overhead.
I do not claim that Carol was not at the marina; I believe she was there.

I did not imply and I find it hard to believe you inferred any of these things from my posting.

You, sir, claim that Fleegle confimed that flight 93 flew over Indian Lake. He never did so.
You, sir, claim that Carol heard flight 93 overhead, but never provided any source to back that up.
His marina is three miles away and I believe he was there, but he also states he got to the crash site in 45 seconds to one minute, which means he traveled at 180 miles per hour. I pointed this out to show that eyewitnesses testimony is not exact and timelines and time tend to get obscured so you can't just take testimoney at face value.
Domenick "barry lichty said "something sounding like a missile" flew over indian lake prior to the explosion and it was coming from the direction of the crash site. do you dispute this?"

I do not dispute that is what he said, but it would be difficult for the 'missle' to fly overhead and have the sound coming from the direction of the crash site which was not overhead.

[Domenick]

8. ok fair enough so riddle me this.....

while barry lichty was in his home and while john fleegle, jim brandt, carol delakso, & tom spinelli were in the marina and while chris smith was working at the golf course in indian lake they all heard a jet fly over.

what jet was it?

it wasn't a 'missile' that flew over barry's house. barry said it sounded like one and that 'they were goin that fast' and that 'it was coming from that direction '.

what do you propose this is?

as for fleegle the ride was probably like 4 - 5 minutes from the marina to the crash site. this was still before any authorities arrived. obviously he is mistaken by the amount of time it took him to get from a to b although i'm sure it could have been faster because odds are more traffic laws were being ignored such as things like speed limits.

anyway i would love to hear your explanation for what flew over indian lake prior the the explosion in the field and while you're doing that perhaps an explanation on why the 757 must have been invisible to susan mcelwain who clearly should have witnessed it nose diving into the ground.

then theres those pittsburgh papers reporting jim stop was fishing in indian lake and watched flight 93 flyover.

val mcclatchey said she heard it fly over her house and over indian lake as well.

and last but not least the pittsburgh papers reporting that indian lake residents called 911 and reported a low flying plane "falling apart on their homes".

feel free to explain.

we're all looking forward to it.

[Theobald]

9. Ok I will address each one of your questions in a subsequent response,

but I want to point out that I wasn't offering explanations, I was pointing out how you were prevaricating by making demonstrably false statements. Fleegle did not say that flight 93 flew over the marina; not once, not ever. You stated he said flight 93 flew over and that is a lie. You can take his testimony and the testimony of others and infer that flight 93 flew over Indian Lake but none of them said flight 93 flew over Indian Lake.

[Domenick]

12. fleegle said "they heard the engines roar overhead"

they = himself, delasko, brandt, & spinelli

corroboration = barry lichty, chris smith, jim stop <*lichty>

further corroboration = val mcclatchey who told the post gazette & trib review that she 'heard the engines roar over indian lake'

not one eyewitness to date says 'flight 93' was following another plane or being followed by a plane.

all witnesses located north of the crash site have it heading in the direction of the crash site which is the same direction as indian lake.

there are no witnesses to the 757 south of the crash site. this is because :

at indian lake there are multiple reports of a 757 being heard or seen flying over which is exactly where the plane heading towards the shanksville site would end up if it doesn't crash in shanksville.

by the time it gets to indian lake or even just seconds before the explosion in shanksville takes place. this is how val heard it before the explosion.

val was about a mile southeast of the crash site and a mile northwest of indian lake. she said she heard it flyover her house.

she is what you call the connecting dot.

i await your response.

[Theobald]

15. There is a big difference between saying you heard

the roar of engine overhead and saying a plane was overhead. I believe the roar of engines they heard was from flight 93 and I don't believe there were any other planes in the vicinity of flight 93 when it crashed or in your scenario when it didn't crash.


I live near the flight path of National airport, I drive near it, I walk near it and I kayak near it. I hear the roar of engines overhead from numerous different locations and terrains and I can promise you that determining exactly where the plane is located is not always easy and it is especially hard on the water. I've looked up for a plane in the direction I thought it was and have been off by a considerable distance; what sounds like it is directly overhead isn't necesarrily so.

[Domenick]

17. jim stop was fishing in the lake when he watched flight 93 fly over

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_47536.html

Investigators also are combing a second crime scene in nearby Indian Lake, where residents reported hearing the doomed jetliner flying over at a low altitude before "falling apart on their homes."

"People were calling in and reporting pieces of plane falling," a state trooper said. Jim Stop reported he had seen the hijacked Boeing 757 fly over him as he was fishing. He said he could see parts falling from the plane.





sinks your theory.

read again :

JIM STOP REPORTED HE HAD SEEN THE HIJACKED BOEING 757 FLY OVER HIM AS HE WAS FISHING.

This corroborates all the other witnesses who reported HEARING ITS ENGINES ROAR OVER INDIAN LAKE.

[Domenick]

19. do you still plan on doing this?

or do you concede my presentation is really what happened and you have no counter argument?

[Domenick]

20. well you've been posting in the forum but ignoring this thread for some reason....

is it because you have lost the debate?

[Domenick]

21. i cant think of anything more fitting....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXGhvoekY44

[Theobald]

10. Lets start with facts

Go to google maps and put in Indian Lake Marina and Skyline Rd and you will see that the marina is approximately 4.7 miles from the crash site by car and a little over two miles by crow. The crash site and the closet section of Indian Lake (The lake not the marina) is just over 1 mile away.

[Theobald]

11. Barry Lichty

Mayor of Indian Lake
Courage After the Crash http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0972103163/centerforcoop-20#reader Page 159 "We heard a load roar above the house that sounded like a missle." "You have to understand that Flight 93 came from the west and did not come over my house. I don't know what we heard."

So Barry doesn't believe flight 93 flew over his house. Now if we new where Barry lived it would help us out but all I can figure out based upon him living at Indian Lake Resort was that he was somewhere within a mile to three miles away from the crash site.

[Domenick]

13. whether barry believes it was flight 93 or not is irrelevant

barry lives here : http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=136+PUEBLO+PATH,+indian+lake,+pa&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=24.87208,56.601563&ie=UTF8&ll=40.034581,-78.877029&spn=0.023395,0.055275&t=h&z=14

it doesn't matter what barry believes flew over him the point is something flew over him.

when you eliminated all the possibilities whatever remains must be the truth.

we know there were no missiles.

we know there were no f16's.

we know there was a commercial airliner heading in that direction.

we know that commercial airliner turned its transponder back on after the crash site.

and now you know where barry lives. see if you can draw a line from pompey hill rd over the crash site over mcclatcheys house over lichtys house and near or over the marina or in very close proximity to those locations and you got your flight path for the 757 that did not crash in shanksville.

[Theobald]

14. I don't think it's irrelevant, but it certainly

does not disprove your theory.

Yes, there were no missles, there were no F-16's.

Headed in what direction?
I do not know that a commercial airliner turned it's transponder on after the crash site.

We know where Barry lives (I'll take your statement as true) and that is approximately 1.5 miles from the crash site. I do not have the locations for the rest of that.

[Domenick]

16. headed from the crash site towards indian lake....

'flight 93' flew over stoystown auto wreckers crossing route 30 then continued on passing over viola saylor's house on pompey hill rd in lambertsville. as viola saw the plane it was headed in the direction of the crash site . if the plane does not crash in shanksville and continues on this southeast flightpath it is pretty much going to fly over val mcclatcheys house and then over indian lake.

bob blair & doug miller whom i've spoken with watched flight 93 cross route 30 there and pass over stoystown auto wreckers. there was no plane in front of it or behind it.

viola only saw 1 plane. there was no plane in front of it or behind it.

all these accounts passed the crash site tell of 1 plane flying over. the only account we have that confirms which way it was heading was barry lichty who confirms it came from the crash site over indian lake.

so the plane was always heading southeast.

as for the transponder :

i'll post the relevant parts you can confirm they're there for yourself.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/14141827/NYC-B1-NTMO-East-Position-3-Fdr-Transcript

1405 (10:05 a.m.)

ntmo-e: ok united ninety three we're now receiving a transponder on and he is at eighty two hundred feet

doug: now transponder and he's eighty two-hundred

ntmo-e: southeastbound still

doug: eighty two hundred feet and now getting a transponder on him

10:06

ntmo-e: ok we've lost radar contact with united ninety three
doug: all right

10:07

ntmo-e: sixteen south of Johnstown where they lost united ninety three and it was heading turning one four zero heading

10:10

ntmo-e: I don't know if he's landed ok; the last position of united I'm going to give some coordinates united ninety three

doug: yes

ntmo-e: three nine five one north zero seven eight four six west

doug: zero seven eight four six

ntmo-e: west

doug: west

doug: all right

ntmo-e: you got the thirty nine fifty one north

doug: ya thirty nine fifty one north zero seven eighty four six west

ntmo-e: that's the last known position of united ninety three

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Beam Me Up]

2. I like witness videos.

I think it is great that citizens have taken it upon themselves to go out and document witness observations. It is difficult to put all the pieces together in one's head, though. the locations, where they were standing, what they saw -- and what it all means. Clearly, though, there is something more than a bit fishy about the alleged Flight 93 crash site. This second "white" plane is a complete mystery with no official accounting whatever, and yet it was observed by several people. The news that 93 was transponding beyond the crash site at above 8,000 feet is interesting. What does "coast mode" mean, exactly?

[NowHearThis]

3. But what about that crater. How did it get there?

Dynamite?

Maybe the crew that set it off was trying to signal the world that a scam was going on. Maybe they told their minders that the
reason why it looks so fake is that they ran out of time to make it look realistic.

[snooper2]

4. Sure

:rofl: :rofl:


I love how all you put the erie creepy ( DO DO DO, pause, DO DO DO ) piano music and angels humming in the background. Gives a real dramatic effect :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Domenick]

22. Truthers Note - Not One "Duhbunker" Will Touch My Shanksville Work

the official flight 93 story = dead

[William Seger]

25. You can't "debunk" anecdotes

... and you can't prove anything with them either, so arguing about them never leads anywhere. But since I see you're still pushing the "white plane" as a big mystery, it's hard to take your "Shanksville work" seriously, with or without the spooky music.

[SDuderstadt]

26. I concur...

that's why I never pay all that much attention to Domenick. I watched his "videos". The one with Wally Miller was a hoot, as the "filmmakers" kept mischaracterizing what Miller had said and was saying and his frustration boiled over at several spots.

[Domenick]

29. you're trying to take this off topic....gee i wonder why?

wally miller?

can you provide one example to back up your claims about me and miller?

[SDuderstadt]

31. Yeah, watch the fucking video...

Miller thinks you're contemptuous, dude. If you can't see that, I can't help you.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

40. Dude...he's contemptuous of you because...

he knows what he did and saw and he thinks you're full of shit. He's not "squirming" because he's "like a rat caught in a trap". He's uncomfortable because he has to share the same space with you. Do you think of yourself as some sort of uber-investigator or something? BTW, if, as you claim, Miller "contradicts himself repeatedly", why don't you go ahead and give us some examples? Surely, that shouldn't be hard. Please be specific.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

49. Then do it, dude...

you talk a good game but you're all mouth.

[Domenick]

53. you're just going to deny it.....why should i waste my time for you?

anyone with a brain can watch the interview and see it for themselves.

i post a link of contradictions and you'll post a link from the corporate press and claim it trumps millers own words and the bush appointed commission got it right despite so many of them going public and saying they didn't get it right.

its called shilling. i dont know how it allows you to sleep peacefully.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2456935081384261617&ei=NY0TSt_7Lcv3-AaS64DrBg&q=wally+miller&hl=en

[SDuderstadt]

60. I'm pretty sure accusing me of "shilling" violates DU rules....

you keep doing it because you cannot win the argument by other means. You don't know a fucking thing about me other than I am calling you on your nonsense. For example, there's this statement from your MySpace page:

I have sworn to expose them and do everything within my power to see the Death of the New World Order which aims to destroy and enslave us all in a corporate prison grid where we are all chipped, monitored, and controlled

The "New World Order"? Dude, are you fucking serious? Do you claim to be an impartial journalist? That doesn't seem very likely to me.

So, back to your claim of all the "contradictions" from Wally Miller. I'm calling your bluff, dude. I don't think you can produce them. And, by the way, I'll ask you politely one time to quit accusing me of "shilling". If you persist, we'll let the moderators deal with it. Good luck.

[Domenick]

63. heres some tissue, "mr. i dont care what you think" glad you're still here....

lets check your "impartiality".....

was david rockefeller telling the truth in his book memoirs when he wrote :

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."



yes or no will be suffice.

[SDuderstadt]

69. "yes or no will be suffice"

I'm not sure responding to someone with such a poor command of the English language is all that necessary.

As far as the Rockefeller quote, he's mocking you, dude.

[Domenick]

72. so you do not believe there is any such thing as a 'new world order' or people conspiring together?

correct?

[SDuderstadt]

75. Right, dude...

I don't think there is anything nearly as organized as that. Wait...is that a black helicopter hovering over your house?

[Domenick]

77. so when former president bush talks about forming a new world order he sounds like charlie browns ..

teacher to you?

do you only hear the former president saying 'wah wah wah wahhhhh'?????

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc7i0wCFf8g

[SDuderstadt]

80. No, dude...

I hear you misconstruing his words...

[Domenick]

86. really???? really?????? are you serious????? he says it here he is saying it again...and again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a9Syi12RJo

[SDuderstadt]

91. And what do you think he means when he says it, dude?

Do you honestly think he is advocating some sort of nefarious cabal or do you think he is urging the nations of the world to abandon war and conflict and address issues more peacefully and compassionately? Do you honestly think a "new world order perp" would just nonchalantly spill the beans in a nationally televised address? BTW, is Wally Miller part of the New World Order"?

How's that black helicopter doing?

[Domenick]

96. i think hes talking about what the federal reserve set out to do in 1913

how federal is the federal reserve?

how constitutional is the income tax "mr. know more about the constitution than me"?

[SDuderstadt]

103. Omigod....

are you also a tax denier? You're losing credibility by the minute. Do you even know what the Federal Reserve does? Do you deny that the Federal Reserve is an independent Federal Agency? Do you even know what that means?

Are you claiming the 16th Amendment was never adopted? Are you some sort of tax rebel? Excuse me for a moment.


Fellow DUers...if you need tax advice, please feel free to contact:

Domenick DiMaggio 14568456
Leavenworth Federal Penitentiary
Leavenworth, KS 66043

Dude, as I said before, you don't sound very educated.

[Domenick]

105. you are losing all credibility

what is an "independent" federal agency?

is federal express part of the us government?

and yes i do know what the federal reserve does. it creates money out of thin air.

and speaking of credibility.....where is your myspace page and what is your real name?

i know, i know, thats not fair. im not allowed to hold anonymous individuals to their words and claims.

see im already way more credible than you because i actually attach my real name to my words.

[SDuderstadt]

112. Well, if you don't mind being embarrassed, you shouldn't mind using your real name...

Do you honestly not know what an independent federal agency is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government

Have you ever taken a civics class?

is federal express part of the us government?

What a stupid fucking question.

and yes i do know what the federal reserve does. it creates money out of thin air

.

What is your source for info about the Fed? "Money as Debt" (written by a graphics designer who knows shit about monetary policy)? "The Creature from Jekyll Island" (written by a truly crazy person)? As far as "creating money out of thin air". Do you think the money supply should remain static? When new value is created in an economy, how would you propose to monetize it? Do you know what the FOMC is? Do you know what it does? Do you know what LIBOR is? Did you know that the Federal Reserve, among other things, functions as the bank for the Federal Government? Have you ever taken a political economy class? Did you know that the Federal Reserve returns everything it earns (minus operating costs) to the Federal Treasury? Do you think the Federal Reserve is privately owned? Do you know what subscription stock is? Do you know what the Discount Desk is? Do you know what it does or how it works?

I don't have a MySpace page.

see im already way more credible than you because i actually attach my real name to my words.

Dude, if you're so credible, why do you make such stupid claims?

[Domenick]

119. which explains why you hide yours....thank you.

the federal reserve is as federal as federal express.

independent means it is private. which means it can withhold anything it wants from the american people and has no accountability or oversight by the american people.

so this proves that america is being run by a PRIVATE BANKING CARTEL.

you're the constitution expert, right? how constitutional is this federal reserve?

[SDuderstadt]

128. Dude...my screenname is my first initial and last name...

And, you're dead wrong about the Federal Reserve. An independent federal agency means it isn't under the control of the executive branch to shield it from unnecessary politicization. It's pretty stupid of you to deny that the Federal Reserve isn't federal. What probably confuses you is that it has both public and private responsibilities, but trying to explain something like that to you would be too time-consuming.

It's also stupid to claim it can "withhold anything it wants from the american people and has no accountability by the American people". Have you ever read the Federal Reserve Act? Do you understand the audit requirements? Do you understand that the governors of the Federal Reserve require nomination by the President and confirmation by the Senate? Do you know how checks and balances work?

so this proves that america is being run by a PRIVATE BANKING CARTEL.

Dude, you've proven nothing of the sort. Did you know that the Federal Reserve isn't owned by anyone? I think you're confused by the fact that the REGIONAL Federal Reserve Banks are "owned" by the member banks, but not in the sense that you and I think of "ownership". Again, you need to learn about subscription stock.

how constitutional is this federal reserve?

Well, since YOU'RE such a constitional expert, I'm sure you understand how Marbury v Madison established that the SCOTUS has the sole power to decide the constitutionality of something. Ever heard of judicial review? So, "Mr. Constitution", can you point to any SC case in which they have declared either the Federal Reserve or the Federal Reserve Act unconstitutional? No? I didn't think so. And, guess what? The SCOTUS has, indeed, upheld the constitutionality of Central Banking twice, in McCulloch v Maryland and Osborn v Bank of the United States. Sorry, dude.

Lastly, a little friendly advice. You're in way over your head on matters like this. You might want to consider staying in the shallow end of the pool, dude.

[Domenick]

129. dude, i laugh dude, because dude, you say dude a lot dude and you insult me dude

and dude i dont get it dude. do you know what i mean dude? do you know what illiteracy is dude? do you know where the nearest beach is dude? dude, is there a headshop around these parts dude? do you know dude? dude?

well dude?

lol.

:)

[SDuderstadt]

131. It's a subtle way of mocking you...dude...n/t

[Domenick]

133. yeah dude, sure dude, cause i say dude

[OnTheOtherHand]

136. in one of my classes

I assign parts of Pat Robertson's The New World Order. I wasn't really expecting it to pop up here. Pretty entertaining self-derail.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Domenick]

28. eyewitnesses are anecdotal? if so there goes your impact theory....

since you dismiss eyewitness accounts as "anecdotes" prove a plane crashed here without using 1 single eyewitness account.

then when youre done show me the 90%+ of recovered 757. i don't care if its in an airport hangar or a moon base as long as it is the 90%+ of debris alleged to have been in this 8 foot deep hole.

btw, can you see the bottom of the impact crater?

if so what leads you to believe anything penetrated an inch further?

ever see an asteroid impact crater? ever hear of someone pulling an asteroid out from 150' deep out of a 20' deep impact crater? no? of course not. because the bottom of the crater shows where penetration ends.

that is reality.

you have no proof that anything was any deeper than 10 feet in shanksville.

show me a 40 foot hole in the ground there with debris exposed at the bottom?

cant?

of course not. because it wasn't there.

[William Seger]

30. Yeah, except for that plane-shaped hole filled with plane parts

... and what was left of the UA93 passengers, and the UA93 FDR and CVR. But I guess that's not enough for people who love to be mystified, huh. :eyes:

Prove to you that all of that wasn't faked? Nope, that's not how it works -- fortunately, since no proof would suit you. You're supposed to be proving that it was. Better get back to "work."

[Domenick]

33. Oh so you can show me remains of passengers inside the crater?

please do.

showing that there were human remains inside the crater would end this debate very quickly.

wouldn't you agree?

p.s. wally miller doesn't have any pictures of any human remains inside the crater so i'm real anxious to see yours.

also photos of the black boxes inside the crater to prove your claim are welcomed.

i'm not asking you to prove it is not fake, i am asking you to prove it exists. you claim it does.

[SDuderstadt]

36. Dude....what would you expect to find of the crash victims....

after the plane slammed into the ground at the speed it did? Are you accusing Miller of something?

Jesus, use your brain.

[Domenick]

37. are you claiming humans dematerialize when planes crash?

i know a former chief of police who worked the 1994 plane crash in aliquippa,pa. the plane fell out of the sky rocketing straight down from 32,000 feet.

he saw enough remains that he needed therapy for a year afterwards.

i work with someone who couldn't work the site because they could not handle it.

why do you think crematoriums exist?

[SDuderstadt]

39. Dude,,,simple questions...

do you think all crashes are the same? Why would you expect crash "a" to look like crash "b". More importantly, have you ever read the firsthand accounts of Miller as well as countless others who related their gut wrenching experiences in recovering the remains?

If it didn't crash there, what happened to it? What happened to all the people on board? BTW, no one really fucking cares whether you believe it or not.

[Domenick]

42. are you claiming humans dematerialize when planes crash?

i asked first.

dont duck and dodge. i will answer your questions when you answer mine.

[SDuderstadt]

45. Jesus Fucking Christ....

who said they "dematerialized"? However, what are you expecting to find? Whole bodies? Arms and legs? The difference between you and me is, given the circumstances of the crash, I wouldn't expect to find anything like what I've described. Apparently, you think that's suspicious. So, answer a question, Domenick. Including Miller and all the various entities who engaged in the recovery (funny, none of those people seem to be backing your goofy claims), are you claiming they are all "in on it"? Really?

[Domenick]

47. no i believe wally miller did what he said he did....

however you dont know the facts.

wally miller didn't recover shit except for half a human arm and 2 internal organs which he photographed. they were laying on dirt and nowhere near the crater.

the rest was brought into the lab by the fbi.

where did they recover it at? shanksville? indian lake? hyndman? camp david? who knows?????

THERE IS NO DOCUMENTATION OF ANY OF IT.

wally miller was provided with everything he needed to find what they needed him to find.

its like they gave him a paint by numbers book and all the paints to do it and then when its done you run around holding it up in the air calling it a van gogh.

and i would expect them to find human remains.....

torsos....severed heads, limbs, organs, BLOOD.

the kind of stuff that you FIND AT PLANE CRASHES.

WALLY MILLER NEVER EVEN SAW A DROP OF BLOOD.
NOT EVEN UNDERNEATH THE INTERNAL ORGANS OR HALF AN ARM HE PHOTOGRAPHED WHICH WASN'T BURNED. I KNOW I SAW THEM.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT?

[SDuderstadt]

52. Yeah, dude...

try deliberately crashing a plane into the ground at the speed UA 93 was and see what you have left. Tell me something, Domenick. There are people who do this for a living, you know, forensic pathologists? How many of them have joined you? None? Why is that?

[Domenick]

55. the aliquippa plane crashed at a high speed from 32,000 feet straight down....

tell me who all these "forensic pathologists" are that worked on this site whose words you believe.

[SDuderstadt]

61. That wasn't what I asked you and you know it...

again, why aren't forensic pathologists not flocking to join your cause? And, by the way, I'm pretty sure that a number of forensic pathologists worked on the DNA ID of the remains. Where are all your brand new recruits?

[Domenick]

64. who are these "forensic pathologists" you keep speaking about?

you believe them yet you dont know any of their names....

and you say i'm "partial"?

[SDuderstadt]

70. Dude...let me say this slower so you get this...

the question I am asking is why, if you're right about your goofy claims, aren't forensic pathologists flocking to your cause? Did you get it that time?

[Domenick]

71. oh i got it....you believe they exist so let me try typing slower for you.....

who

are

they?


i

will contact

them.


you believe

they

recovered

human

remains

at this

crash site.

[SDuderstadt]

78. Dude...for the last fucking time...

this started by my simply asking you why forensic pathologists have not flocked to your cause. Where are they? Can you point to any expert who thinks you got it right? You brought up the question about them being at the crash site later and all I said was I'm pretty sure you could find some forensic pathologists among those who did the DNA ID of the victims. You keep trying to turn this into something else. Again, why aren't experts in the field backing up your contentions? For example, has a single member of the recovery team come forward and said, "Look...Domenick is right"? No? Why not?

[greyl]

82. People who accuse others who disagree with them of being shills haven't earned the time. nt

[Domenick]

85. for starters - I'M NOT ASKING ANY OF THEM TO

because i don't care.

why did glenn cramer tell the fbi he listened to ed "warts" phone call on a spyphone and tell the fbi that "wart" said there was an explosion on the plane and white smoke was filling it up only to tell the media the same thing and then a year later recant it?

do you know what gag orders are?

do you know what national security is?

do you sibel edmonds and others testified in front of the 911 commission and never had their testimony entered into the official record?

do you know the 911 commission did not interview 1 single person that was a witness on 9/11?

have you ever heard of any investigation that had no interest in eyewitnesses? ever? any court hearing?

anything?

of course not.

the only time eyewitnesses are dismissed is when they cause the fairy tale written by bush's hand picked commission to fall apart.

[SDuderstadt]

99. "do you know the 911 commission did not interview 1 single person that was a witness on 9/11?"

Dude, why do you make such goofy claims? It can't be from actually reading the 9/11 Commission records because, if you did, you'd know this. Here's a partial witness list from just the first hearing:

Harry Waizer, Cantor Fitzgerald survivor
David Lim, Port Authority
Lee Ielpi, Fire Department of New York (retired)
Brian Birdwell, United States Army
Craig Sincock, United States Army (retired)

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/hearings/hearing1.htm

So, I just pretty handily debunked your unbelievably goofy claim. But one thing remains which is, where in the fuck are you getting your "info" and "critiques" of the Commission from? It's apparent you don't have firsthand knowledge of it. My guess would be that you are so simultaneously lazy and zealous about your cause that you just accept what some goofy CT site says uncritically and never bother to fact-check it. Do you want to make any more goofy, easily disproven claims or have you embarrassed yourself enough?

[Domenick]

100. let me restate that "not 1 single eyewitness to the shanksville event" - "debunk" that

go ahead and name the eyewitnesses from shanksville who the 911 commission interviewed.

[SDuderstadt]

104. Jesus, dude...

do you even understand what the purpose of the 9/11 Commission was? Why on earth would they have interviewed witnesses to the UA 93 crash? So they could convince people like you that a plane actually crashed there?

[Domenick]

106. so then youre saying that the 911 commission didn't interview a single eyewitness from shanksville?

then why bother interviewing other eyewitnesses to other events that day?

[SDuderstadt]

113. Dude...again, do you know what the purpose of the Commission was?

Have you ever read its charter? Do you think it existed to convinced a few diehard "no-planers" like you that a plane actually crashed in Shanksville?

[Domenick]

121. it was meant to discover everything about 911for the american public

pure and simple.

this is why bush cheney cartel fought its creation, underfunded it, handpicked its appointees, and testified only in private and not under oath.

do you understand that?

[SDuderstadt]

130. "it was meant to discover everything about 911for the american public"

Dude, have you ever read the charter of the commission? No? I didn't think so. I mean, do you honestly think it was created to convince a few diehard holdouts like you that UA 93 actually crashed in Shanksville when we can rely on the testimony of some of the 1100 recovery workers who held plane and human body parts in their hands? Sorry, dude...no one takes your "work" seriously.

As I have stated before, neither Clinton nor Gore testified under oath either. Do you think something was nefarious about that? BTW, do you know exactly how the members of the commission were selected? No? I didn't think so and I doubt you could explain how Gorelick, Kerrey, Roemer, Ben-Veniste, etc. were chosen.

No one is saying it was perfect, dude. However, if a new commission was selected and they concluded that UA 93 crashed near Shanksville, would that shut you up?

[Domenick]

134. dude if someone actually proved a plane crashed there dude i would shut up dude

i said clinton and gore are criminals. did you miss that?

would you like to discuss salem and the 93 wtc attack?

or how about 'the earth has a fever'....?

i do appreciate you pointing out that proven liars, fear mongers, and enemies of the united states received the same secret treatment as other proven liars, fear mongers, and enemies of the united states.

now you're up to 1100 recovery workers but i'm sure much like the 'forensic pathologists' that you're pulling things out your rear again.

wanna shut me up? support the creation of a new independent transparent investigation into the 9/11 attacks.

do you know flight 93's debbie welsh's husband believes the official theory of flight 93 is a lie?

[SDuderstadt]

139. You say that Clinton and Gore are criminals?

You really think they are enemies of the state? Really? Some Democrat you are.

'the earth has a fever'

Don't tell me. Let me guess. You're also a global warming denier? Why am I not surprised?

[greyl]

51. "only the tail was left"

Quote from an eyewitness to the scene of the crash in Indonesia tonight.

Of course that means if any other parts of the plane are found after that quote was made, they were planted.

[Domenick]

56. show me flight 93's tail section and i'll shut up and go away

forever.

i promise.

[greyl]

58. No, you'd say something like "How did the tail break into small pieces...

...when it didn't even penetrate the "soft soil"?"

No sensible person would expect to find the entire tail of the plane.
How large of a piece would you like to see?

[Domenick]

65. you just said they recovered the entire tail of a plane at another site as comparison to this....

i know there was no tail section in shanksville because a plane didnt crash there.

[greyl]

68. Wrong. It was a "single, off-the-cuf statement taken out of context from

the entirety of evidence" comparison.

[Domenick]

74. so your posting stuff completely irrelevant to this discussion then?

just making sure where you stand.

first you post a link about tail sections surviving plane crashes and then you say it was taken out of context and was off the cuff....

just trying to figure out what you're getting at.

[greyl]

81. It looks just like you're trying to NOT figure it out. Unimpressive. nt

[Domenick]

89. oh i am trying to figure it out which is why unlike you i actually speak to the witnesses

see the difference?

[greyl]

92. I don't buy it. If you spoke to a witness with the same brain you're using to achieve these posts,

I have little hope that any truth was discovered.

[Domenick]

95. are your insults within the du rules or do you have something to contribute to this discussion?

besides tails of planes here but not here but it all being not related.....

[Ghost in the Machine]

101. Don't hold your breath waiting for an intelligent, or relevant, response

:hi:

[Domenick]

102. im not....im waiting for them to find another typo to cling to....lol

:toast:

[SDuderstadt]

107. Dude...illiteracy is not a typo...n/t

[Domenick]

109. is insulting within the du rules? just curious because if i was illiterate i wouldnt be able to read

therefor i couldnt respond to your drivel.

[SDuderstadt]

114. Dude, if you weren't illiterate....

you could write cohesively.

[Domenick]

122. well at least now i've proven you to be a liar

your insistance that i am illiterate, no matter how many times you say, does not make it true.

just like how your regurgitating of disproven claims and unprovable claims in regards to the attack in shanksville on 9/11 doesn't make it true.

[Ghost in the Machine]

108. I've been following your posts.. you're doing a great job, Domenick

Keep up the good work...

:toast:

[Domenick]

110. thank you!

i must say i've been enjoying picking this one apart.

wonder how many more times he can drive it further off topic from the original presentation of the indian lake eyewitnesses which prove the flight 93 official story is false?

:toast:

[SDuderstadt]

117. "i must say i've been enjoying picking this one apart".

Dude, the truly hysterical thing is you think you're winning when you're actually getting your ass kicked.

[Domenick]

123. yeah im the one driving the indian lake witnesses thread off topic....lmao!!!

i think you might be insane.

[able1]

137. Why would someone do something that here?

" so your posting stuff completely irrelevant to this discussion then? "

[William Seger]

41. I believe Wally Miller

... and all the other people who helped clean up that mess. It appears that just about zero of them think that UA93 didn't crash there. You really have no idea how little I care about what you believe or don't believe.

[Domenick]

43. good i dont care what you believe either.....

because unlike you i have actually spoken to real eyewitnesses.

i have even spoken in depth with wally miller.

so i know way more about this than you ever will because on top of this i read all the same shit you are going to mention.

so unlike you, i base my statements on all the facts.

wanna prove a jet crash there?

ok. show me an epa report about jet fuel contamination for this site. shouldn't be hard you being right and all......

[William Seger]

48. Am I typing too fast for you?

It's not 2006 any more. Sorry you didn't get your 15 minutes of fame, but that was all a myth anyway. The crash of UA93 at Shanksville is an established fact -- look it up -- and you're still mystified. I was just trying to give you some insight into why you are generally ignored, but maybe you prefer being mystified about that, too.

[Domenick]

50. i understand you dont want to talk about indian lake and eyewitness accounts gripping your fairy tal

you've lost.

you're right its not 2006 anymore. yet youre still stuck in it. sucks to be you. uninformed and ignorant.

[SDuderstadt]

54. Yeah, only YOU know the truth, right Domenick?

Look up "true believer" syndrome.

[Domenick]

57. i have actually talked to these people so you would be the one suffering "true [bush] believer" synd

it is what it is.

how much time have you spent talking with eyewitnesses to this event?

[SDuderstadt]

62. More of your silly "false dilemmas"...

simply disagreeing with your goofy allegations doesn't make me or anyone else a "bush believer" dude, so you can stop with the rhetorical tricks.

I don't care how much fucking time you spent talking to eyewitnesses. That neither makes you an expert on the subject nor does it mean you're accurately reporting and characterizing what they said. I think your "New World Order" comment pretty much undermines whatever credibility you might have left.

[Domenick]

66. do you believe the 9/11 commission report got it right? yes or no please

its really that easy.

my answer is no.

[SDuderstadt]

73. Got what right? Everything?

No, I don't. But I believe they got things mostly right and have much more extensive evidence than you do. Have you actually READ the 9/11 Report? Have you reviewed the 2.5 million pages of documents? Have you read the staff reports? Or, are you just relying on some 9/11 CT website to tell you what you thin of the 9/11 CR?

[Domenick]

76. where can i read these 2.5 million documents you speak of that you must have read....

and if you don't believe the 911 commission got everything right then why are you opposed to a new one?

[SDuderstadt]

83. Dude...can you read?

I SAID 2.5 million pages of documents, not 2.5 million documents. With reading comprehension problems this great, no wonder you struggle to characterize what people said accurately.

BTW, who said I was opposed to a new 9/11 Commission? Why do you make so many strawman arguments? You might try responding to things I've actually said.

[Domenick]

87. so then you support a new 911 commission?

an open transparent one?

if so then i dont care if you disagree with my findings as long as you support the cause. thats all im asking for.

that is all i want to see for the 3000 who died that day and the countless thousands of others who have died, been injured, tortured, imprisoned, etc because of it.

[SDuderstadt]

93. Then you should quit mocking them with your goofy theories and claims, dude...

n/t

[Domenick]

97. no i mock them because they got so much wrong which is why i want a new open transparent one

not one with secret testimonies off oath and behind closed doors where evidence is withheld from the american people in regards to the largest attack to ever take place on american soil.

[SDuderstadt]

116. Dude...do you understand that neither Clinton nor Gore testified under oath?

Does it occur to you that some degree of testimony could not be divulged to the American people because it involved classified capabilities or information? Do you think after the "largest attack to ever take place on american soil" we should just divulge to anyone with the money to buy the report a lot of classified information? Does that make sense? Do you think transparency means we have to enter into a suicide pact?

BTW, I'll compare my knowledge about the Constitution to yours any day. I'm pretty sure my undergrad degree in Comparative Political Systems will come in handy. Do you know what the Schenck and Gitlow cases are? Do you know what a BFOQ is? Do you know what Gideon v Wainwright was about? How about the Escobedo case? Do you know what the "fighting words" exception to the 1st amendment is? How about the "clear and present danger" case? Do you know what was decided in Buckley v Valeo?

Here's some simple advice, dude. Don't read some conspiracy bullshit or anti-tax propaganda, then think you're some sort of expert on the Constitution.

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Domenick]

90. oh you didnt answer either - did you read those 2.5 million pages of documents?

while were at it.

and if you did how many pertain to shanksville and where can i find them?

[SDuderstadt]

120. Dude...I asked first if you even read the Report...

somehow, I seriously doubt that you did. And, no, I didn't read all 2.5 million pages of documents, but I did read the report from cover to cover, which is more than I can say for you.

[Domenick]

125. i've read a fair amount but not cover to cover like you i have a weak stomach....

i know a whitewash when i see one.

again we can go back to the secret testimony of people like sibel edmonds and the minneapolis fbi agents and so on that the american people are still not allowed to hear.

nothing to see here says officer barbrady......

[William Seger]

59. Nor do I wish to talk about the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, or UFOs

... even though things are far more interesting than what you are peddling, and more plausible, too, since they aren't refuted by established facts.

[Domenick]

67. the eyewitnesses to the 911 attacks are not mythical cyrptozoology beings....

youre comparison is foolish.

[SDuderstadt]

84. "You're comparison" is...

do you honestly not understand the difference between "your" and "you're"? You don't sound very educated.

[Domenick]

88. im not proofing this shit.....this is all you have no are typos?

desperate much?

[greyl]

94. I don't think you're even thinking about this shit twice. nt

[Domenick]

98. another brilliant well written contribution from mr. tail here but not here but were not talking

about plane crashes.

thanks einstein.

[Ghost in the Machine]

111. You should have just stopped at "I don't think..." and you would have been right for once

... however, you choose to remain willfully ignorant. Why don't you shock us all and post something intelligent or relevant just one time, ok?

I bet you can't do it...

[SDuderstadt]

118. Dude....mixing up "you're" and "your"....

is not a mere typo.

[Domenick]

126. yes it is but whatever i dont really care what you think grab whatever you can

just AVOID THE REAL TOPIC OF THIS THREAD.

[William Seger]

115. Your agenda is foolish

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand, but I'll give it one more try. All you've got is a tiny handful of anecdotes, and your interpretation of those anecdotes is refuted by all the evidence. That makes your interpretation considerably less credible than the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, and UFOs, since there's no hard evidence that the people who think they saw those things are mistaken. I don't know what any those people really saw or heard, and neither do you, but you're trying to claim that they refute all the evidence that UA93 crashed into that hole. You're so impressed with that irrational conclusion that you're willing to deny that all the evidence even exists and call everyone who says it does liars, for absolutely no reason other than they contradict your imaginary explanation of what happened. Over 1100 people worked on that cleanup, I believe, and you can't produce a single one of them who thinks UA93 didn't crash there. Then you try to convince me what an expert you are because you talked to a few people, years later. You set out on this project with the specific intent of finding some reason to think that UA93 didn't crash there, and this is the best you could do because nobody would tell you what you really wanted to hear. A rational person would at least recognize the weakness of that position and recognize how far short they were of proving any of it, but you claim "the official UA93 story is dead" and expect to be taken seriously. Well, good luck with that, but it seems that even what's left of the "truth movement" has passed you by. (One reason for that might be that most of them have figured out that UA93 really screws up all their MIHOP theories, since there's no plausible reason why the alleged "false flag" would have included faking UA93 crashing, so it seems most of them would prefer to ignore UA93 all together.) Sorry; better luck next conspiracy.

[Domenick]

127. show me 90% of the recovered 757 and i'll go away forever. its that easy.

youre the one without evidence to support your claims.

[William Seger]

132. Go ask United

It was given back to them. Oh, that's right; they're "in on it" too. That Cheney guy is soooooooo persuasive. :eyes:

[Domenick]

135. how can they have it if it doesn't exist? you claim it happened. prove it.

wheres the debris recovered from the site?

[William Seger]

138. Well, that's a good question

Perhaps you should take some time out of your busy schedule to think about it.



If you don't believe the people who cleaned up the mess or the photos, that's your prerogative. Mine is wondering why you expect people to take you seriously.

[ATH]

143. You can tell it's not United debris.

Need a hint?

[SDuderstadt]

146. Oh, jesus...

please tell us. Let me make sure I get this right. Do you expect us to believe the "perps" staged a fake plane crash, but forgot to make sure the "planted" debris was from the right airline?

[ATH]

147. Even Jesus can tell it's not United debris.

Of course he would know if all the stories about him are true.

[SDuderstadt]

149. So, please give us a hint...

I'm dying in anticipation.

[ATH]

153. I DID

Maybe you should pray to Jesus for help with the hint?

[SDuderstadt]

155. No, you didn't...

please point to said "hint". You also might want to review the DU rules about disrupting. Just saying.

[ATH]

157. Please show where I've been disrupting things.

I'm all eyes.

[SDuderstadt]

159. Please show me where I said you were...

I just said you might want to review the rules. You know, forewarned being forearmed and all that?

[ATH]

162. Um, thanks. You're a swell guy. Back to debating. -NT

[Name removed]

160. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[William Seger]

164. OK, I'll trade you. You give me a hint...

... and I'll give you a clue:

[ATH]

165. I started new thread about this.

Bring it over here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x248676

[ATH]

166. And thanks for that clue. Perhaps you can use it for my other thread. -nt

[William Seger]

167. Another clue

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate

Debate

Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, which only examine the consistency from axiom, and factual argument, which only examine what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is technique of persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy as well as some emotional appeal to audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting superior "context" and/or framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_argument

Argument

In logic, an argument is a set of one or more meaningful declarative sentences (or "propositions") known as the premises along with another meaningful declarative sentence (or "proposition") known as the conclusion. A deductive argument asserts that the truth of the conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises; an inductive argument asserts that the truth of the conclusion is supported by the premises. Deductive arguments are valid or invalid, and sound or not sound. An argument is valid if and only if the truth of the conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises and (consequently) its corresponding conditional is a necessary truth. A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises.

[Name removed]

170. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raphael Weber]

172. Well, you see the Cheney guy .....

as the German public television did exactly that and they were sent around the whole US and were never allowed to see the wreckage.
So maybe you should rethink your post here.

[SDuderstadt]

168. Hmmm....

I guess someone showed him what he was looking for.

[Name removed]

171. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

32. "Truther Logic"

"we can't tell if a plane actually crashed in Shanksville, because the government didn't share ever last piece of evidence with me".

[Domenick]

34. well now we know its alright with you for the government to keep you uninformed....

but the rest of us in this country who love it and its constitution have higher standards.

we believe in accountability and transparency.

you believe its alright for the government to conceal and withhold. now we all know where you stand.

[SDuderstadt]

38. You can stop with the "false dilemma", dude...

I bet I know more about the constitution than you ever will. What, precisely, is the government concealing? You make big, bold allegations, but several things stand out when watching your videos.

Do you really maintain that you approached the topic with an open-mind? Really? Then, why do you omit evidence which contradicts your claims? I really don't care whether you believe this or not, but I accept the "official story" provisionally until something better is developed. And, that's precisely where the "truth movement" falls short. Do you honestly think your videos conclusively prove something? Why was Miller so contemptuous towards you? Hint: because he thinks you're full of shit, dude. Please give us some sort of explanation as to why Wally Miller is not as dedicated to the truth as you are.

I'm sure you mean well. But, the fact is that sloppy efforts such as yours are part of the reason the "truth movement" is fading into the sunset.

[Domenick]

44. what precisely is the government concealing?? ask the 9/11 commissioners....

9/11 COMMISSIONERS ADMIT OFFICIAL 9/11 STORY IS FALSE AND A NEW INVESTIGATION IS NEEDED
Current mood: angry
Category: News and Politics

Highly-Credible People
Question 9/11



9/11 COMMISSIONERS

The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton) said that the CIA (and likely the White House) "obstructed our investigation".

The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission also said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).

Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political considerations.


9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only "the first draft" of history.





9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn't have access . . . ."





9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said "We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting"





Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up".





9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said that “We purposely put together a staff that had – in a way - conflicts of interest".


The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff's inquiry, said "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described .... The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years.... This is not spin. This is not true."

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Old and In the Way]

23. Very interesting about the transponder coming back on at 10:05.

Seems like another discrepancy with the 9/11 Commission Report. I believe they stated that it crashed at 10:03?

Anyways, it would be interesting to use that Google Map that you linked to in an earlier post and put the eyewitnesses/timelines/crash pins in so we can get a better understanding of what these witnesses are saying.

[Domenick]

24. Locations of Witnesses

viola saylors house to crash site :
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Unknown+road&daddr=1318+pompey+hill+rd.+lambertsville,+pa&geocode=FbocYwIdlgRM-w%3B&hl=en&mra=ls&sll=40.044635,-78.893251&sspn=0.030882,0.054073&ie=UTF8&ll=40.061388,-78.907671&spn=0.030875,0.054073&t=h&z=14


susan mcelwains location to crash site :
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=40.050942,-78.90398&daddr=Buckstown+Rd%2FSR1019&geocode=%3BFVDqYgId1QZM-w&hl=en&mra=dme&mrcr=0&mrsp=0&sz=14&sll=40.044635,-78.893251&sspn=0.030882,0.054073&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=14


barry lichty's house to crash site :
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Unknown+road&daddr=indian+lake+marina,+indian+lake,+pa&geocode=FbocYwIdlgRM-w%3B&hl=en&mra=ls&sll=40.061388,-78.907671&sspn=0.030875,0.054073&ie=UTF8&ll=40.037144,-78.886385&spn=0.030886,0.054073&t=h&z=14


indian lake marina to crash site :
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Unknown+road&daddr=indian+lake+marina,+indian+lake,+pa&geocode=FbocYwIdlgRM-w%3B&hl=en&mra=ls&sll=40.061388,-78.907671&sspn=0.030875,0.054073&ie=UTF8&ll=40.037144,-78.886385&spn=0.030886,0.054073&t=h&z=14

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

141. I think you're a little too late...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=235083

I sorta miss the little feller already.

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

144. Why don't you ask the moderators?

Members can't summarily ban other members. It might have to do with him accusing members here of shilling and being republicans and little to do with his "video". I also suspect his "new world order" nonsense didn't help. However, I did notice he didn't interview dozens of other witnesses who contradict his goofy claims.

I'm just curious. Are you part of CIT?

[ATH]

145. But you guys can accuse him of lying and fraud

and that is OK? Uh, ok.

Why do you ask and what concern is it of you?

[SDuderstadt]

148. Show me where I accused him of either....

And I ask because I wonder how long you'll observe the rules. CIT folks aren't known for their public relations skills.

[ATH]

151. And JREFy's are? -NT

[Name removed]

150. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

152. That's funny....you think I'm a "JREF"y?

You know this how? Hmm, you don't think Domenick was insulting?

[ATH]

154. You think I'm CIT

So there.

[SDuderstadt]

156. Gee, the first clue would have been the...

"Hi, Dom" post, doncha think?

[ATH]

158. Oh you got me!!!!!

Only CIT members are friends with Dom! Genius.

I'm done with this offtopic nonsense with you. Get back to debating.

[SDuderstadt]

161. Good...

I'd love to debate...let's start with your claim that it's obvious the jet debris was not from UA 77. Do you have any proof at all of that?

[Name removed]

163. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

169. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.