| 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! |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| general shanksville discussion..... | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 13 2008, 06:56 AM (1,494 Views) | |
| Domenick DiMaggio | Oct 13 2008, 06:56 AM Post #1 |
|
my appearance on the new world order disorder radio show with dr. gianni hayes..... these are the 1st 3 parts of 6. i should have the other 3 online tomorrow. hope you enjoy..... 
|
 |
 
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Oct 15 2008, 07:36 PM Post #2 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Michal | Dec 1 2008, 03:46 AM Post #3 |
|
Domenick, I am of full respect the work you have done with regards to this, I am posting my thoughts here as you probably know the most about it. I am trying to put all parts back to one (more or less) logic piece. So there was a passenger plane flyover followed by corporate jet flyover. It seems that passenger jet (whatever it was) was imitating UA93 and the corporate jet was doing the on-ground mess (the hole and the debris). Both passenger jet and the corporate jet flew away towards unknown location. In addition to this we have got CeeCee calling her husband ... this is really terrifying thing, still got shivers on my back ... Edited by Michal, Dec 1 2008, 03:47 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Dec 2 2008, 12:18 AM Post #4 |
|
you're partially right. my beliefs currently are that there was a flyover and the little white plane [not a corporate plane - not one eyewitness to either white jet says it was a corporate plane] caused the 8 foot deep circular impact seen inside the drainage ditch. this has been confirmed not to be a corporate jet by susan mcelwain and several other witnesses i have been in contact with who don't wish to be identified. i have not seen any evidence supporting the impact of a 100ton aircraft. there is not 100 tons of debris and there definitely isn't enough displaced dirt to accomodate an airplane and we can see the crater floor which all eyewitnesses seem to estimate as being 8 feet deep. also note that not one single eyewitness on the scene makes any mention to a 100 foot gash in the earth which would roughly account for the actual size of the planes 124 foot wingspan. no human remains were seen on that day yet the few images of human remains wally miller did have were in plain site laying in dirt. the only dirt in that vacinity is the dirt road. these remains would have easily been seen on the 11th. one of them was half a severed arm. wally miller also confirmed not a single drop of blood was ever seen anywhere. a large white military jet arrived at the scene just a few minutes after the explosion. this has been confirmed not to have been a corporate jet to me by bob blair, doug miller, & viola saylor. beamer continued to make cell phone calls to a location in new jersey for nearly 10 hours after the alleged impact of the plane he was said to be on. how can that happen? it can't. |
|
|
|
| m0n3yman | Dec 2 2008, 12:20 AM Post #5 |
|
Can you explain this? Not heard of it. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Dec 2 2008, 12:59 AM Post #6 |
|
check this thread
|
|
|
|
| Michal | Dec 4 2008, 02:20 PM Post #7 |
|
right, so there was (supposedly) small plane crushing and "making the mess on the ground" and a supervising plane, following the small plane ... probably spreading the remains over the forest nearby passengers ... well. I'm scared to think what happened with them … but it looks as if they were 100% conscious about what is their future … |
|
|
|
| Michal | Dec 17 2008, 12:29 PM Post #8 |
|
just one more question Domenick, what is this thing about shooting down the plane? What is your best idea with regards to this? |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Dec 18 2008, 03:56 AM Post #9 |
|
the small white plane definitely approached the crash site and was immediately above it just over treetop level at the time of the explosion. no pilot would have dared been flying a kamikaze path head on towards a 757 barreling out of control just above the trees. i have nothing that corroborates any claim that this plane was dropping debris. that is pure speculation. i do believe something impacted the ground there making the circular impression inside the drainage ditch blasting into the trees. the lack of human remains and any identifiable airplane debris leaves open the possibility as to what made this eight foot deep hole. since i have spoken to an eyewitness who saw the plane above the trees and watched the smoke rise up from underneath of where it was i have no choice but to believe a 757 did not crash at that site. i have no reason to believe for a second this witness is lying especially when the account of the plane approaching prior to the explosion is established by mrs. mcelwain and its presence above the site then corroborated by rick chaney. viola saylor witnesses the plane several minutes after the event as it was already high up in the sky and flying away from the site. i have corroborated these 3 witnesses accounts with 2 unnamed eyewitnesses from the area who are my ties in on what happened between susan and rick. i have encouraged these witnesses to come public. perhaps as more people are documented they will as well. the evidence is what it is. the evidence shows beamer's airphone call lasted long past the alleged impact time of the plane he was allegedly on. on top of this mr. beamer somehow managed to retain possession of his cell phone which he used to call an address in new jersey until roughly 8:00pm that evening. this was obviously an attempt to alert someone he was still alive. who was the recipient of the phone call? this information is redacted in the foia release. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Dec 18 2008, 04:03 AM Post #10 |
|
since residents for the most part witnessed the 2 white planes after the event and all recognize those planes as being 'military' in appearance and the incredible lack of debris at the site leads a lot of the locals here to believe the government shot it down and that event is what is responsible for the large amount of plane debris not being visible. as per my interview with wally miller, i'm not interested in getting into debates about what happened or not. i know wally miller knows worked that scene. i've been told by someone that miller himself told him the plane had been shot down thats why they recovered so little of it. i know bringing up the words shot down to miller was going to get an interesting reaction. he did not disappoint in this regard. it is possible that the plane really was shot down. perhaps beamer was a plane different than the one ed felt was one? the plane could be shot down and the crash site could be the camp david site and the shanksville site is a diversion perhaps because the plane wasn't really flight 93. there's still lots of possibilities in my mind because i still have a lot of unanswered questions. what i still haven't completely answered for myself what took place in that field although i know what was there and when. i dont have an eyewitness to its actions and due to the topography of the area the only possible witnesses would have to have had a reason to be in that spot. you have to be there to understand this. |
|
|
|
| BoneZ | Dec 18 2008, 03:39 PM Post #11 |
|
Dominick, do you have a transcript or video of the descriptions of the two planes from the witnesses? I'd like to try to identify the planes as I did with the E-4B.
Edited by BoneZ, Dec 19 2008, 11:23 AM.
|
|
|
| Michal | Dec 19 2008, 11:00 AM Post #12 |
|
Having mentioned the plane making mess on the ground I meant the debris dropped in the forest nearby. Certainly something went wrong, not according to the plan as you can not have those from the plane that disappears in the ground entirely … |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Dec 22 2008, 12:20 AM Post #13 |
|
i'll give you what i got from the various witnesses. i spoke to rick chaney on the phone. he was completely open and honest but did not wish to participate in any sort of documentation whether it be video or audio. i have 2 witnesses who wish the same and wish not to be identified but would be willing to tell their accounts in a court room. i spoke with bob blair on the phone for over a year. he was open and honest with me. he agreed to be documented in a video format and so did doug miller. everything was arranged and neither showed up to meet me and both changed their phone numbers. very suspicious. i cannot tell you the hours i spent on the phone with bob and he was well aware of the implications of his account. they both had watched susan mcelwain's account before i ever spoke to them so they knew who i was and what i was doing before i ever called them. bob even told me he asked doug whether or not it was possible the plane pulled up out of that dive because there was so little wreckage there and they extinguished all the fires themselves before even stoystown arrived on the scene. so 2 guys with 2 fire extinguishers in their truck put out the fires from a 757 plane crash near the woods before the first response team even arrived on the scene which would have been somewhere around 10 minutes. if i missed something from viola saylor's account i will be releasing her full interview within the next few days for public viewing. susan mcelwain's full account here but here is a condensed version that address the specifics. susan mcelwain - 1) all white 2) did not notice wings 3) described tail with a spolier 4) silent 5) cylinder shaped body 6) very small 7) treetop level 8) amazing abilit to manuever rick chaney - 1) all white 2) wings slicked back like a fighter but said it made him think it was something more of a 'scout' 3) 'funny' tail 4) did not associate any sound with it but was about a mile away 5) very small 6) small window in the front 7) could not accomodate 'passengers' [ala corporate jet] 8) tree top level unidentified witness 1 - 1) all white 2) wings slicked back 3) very strange tail 4) silent [was close] 5) very small 6) small window in the front 7) said it took off almost vertical 8 ) said they spent a year on the internet trying to find an image of it and couldn't 9) tree top level confirmed that the following image of an israeli orbiter was the closest thing they had ever seen like it in their life through an email exchange i had :  also in prior emails thought a global hawk had a similar appearance. unidentified witness 2 - 1) all white 2) very small 3) silent 4) tree top level ***both unidentified eyewitnesses would be willing to tell their accounts in a court room*** viola saylor [saw it from a distance as it was leaving] 1) all white [or maybe silver - very bright] 2) very small 3) very high leaving towards the south viola saylor [larger white plane] 1) all white 2) "eyeballs" on the back 3) much larger than the other white plane 4) treetop level 5) very fast 6) said it definitely wasn't civilian and she don't know what it was bob blair - 1) all white 2) very large 3) treetop level [directly over his head at the crash site] 4) slicked back wings doug miller - 1) all white 2) very large 3) treetop level [was with bob blair] 4) said it looked military 5) fbi told him it was a c130 cargo plane 6) confirmed plane did not have propellers [later corroborated on the phone by bob blair] |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Dec 22 2008, 12:23 AM Post #14 |
|
i have reason to believe now that this location was planned in advance. this is the case then a 'target' [or debris] could have been put their the day or night before the attack. |
|
|
|
| Michal | Dec 23 2008, 04:58 AM Post #15 |
|
did they confirm the plane ? ... or at least the shape ? |
|
|
|
| Zaphod 36 | Dec 29 2008, 07:28 AM Post #16 |
|
7) said it took off almost vertical Could it have been a "Vertical Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle"(VTUAV)? Mcelwain claims she has seen no wings on the plane. Did other witnesses saw any wings on that plane? Is it possible that this plane was propelled with a rotor, like the Boeing X-50 Dragonfly UAV? Link Is it possible for a jet-propelled plane to take off almost vertical? |
|
|
|
| noeffects | Dec 29 2008, 11:21 AM Post #17 |
|
well , that israeli orbiter is pretty small (7+ft wingspan.1.5 hr flight time) although it would fit nicely in an Urban Moving Systems van. |
|
|
|
| DoYouEverWonder | Dec 29 2008, 11:31 AM Post #18 |
|
Is it possible that the site had been used for the Stoysville Vol Fire Dept's 'terrorist attack' training before 9/11? |
|
|
|
| noeffects | Dec 29 2008, 11:45 AM Post #19 |
|
To me it really looks like some big landscape job with a missle/buried bomb crater. Anyone see Killtowns' "Fairy Tail"? i think it is hard to comprehend why they didn't just crash a real plane, or leave better debris. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Jan 6 2009, 12:02 AM Post #20 |
|
no one has positively identified the white planes to date if thats what you're asking. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Jan 6 2009, 12:04 AM Post #21 |
|
that is most certainly an odd looking plane but no witnesses ever made any mention of any sort of propeller. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Jan 6 2009, 12:05 AM Post #22 |
|
i don't have reason to believe so but that would definitely be a question if i meet with someone from the fire department. |
|
|
|
| DoYouEverWonder | Jan 6 2009, 06:19 AM Post #23 |
|
The reason why I raised the questions is that I came across some pictures of the Stoystown Fire Dept doing hazmat and terror attack training. They are all dressed the same has on 9/11 and at least a few of the guys in the training pictures are the same ones pictured on 9/11. Also, the fact that they only sent an antique fire engine to respond to a passenger jet crash seems odd to say the least. The response to the Crash of Flight 93 on 9/11 |
|
|
|
| JFK | Jan 6 2009, 08:09 AM Post #24 |
|
Most likey the reason that that particular truck was sent is because the location was off road and that truck weighs much less than a standard pumper loaded with 3000 gallons of water, tons of gear and hose, and is less likely to get stuck. Here they still use 1950's vintage military vehicles converted to firetrucks for off road emergencies. |
|
|
|
| Domenick DiMaggio | Jan 7 2009, 01:05 AM Post #25 |
|
that little red truck actually is the entire stoystown fire department. they just happened to be the first on the scene. i do believe there is video from later in the day that shows a shanksville truck at the crash site but i need to check that so don't hold me to saying any shanksville truck actually was at the site. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Shanksville · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
6:55 PM Nov 26
