• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Susan McElwein Interview

I think Mrs. McElwain presents as a reliable witness with no agenda. The guys making the film clearly have an agenda though. Clearly the woman saw something and didn't know what it was. She says it was small and low and I see no reason to question that. Here's an example of a missile fitting the proportions, color (if you take away the markings), sub-sonic speed and molded (no rivets) fiberglass look.

I think at least her testimony would warrant investigation by the authorities. It is hard to imagine why the FBI would tell her to "have faith in her country".
 
GregoryUrich said:
Here's an example of a missile fitting the proportions, color (if you take away the markings), sub-sonic speed and molded (no rivets) fiberglass look.
Click to expand...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-86_ALCM
Speed AGM-86B: 550 mph (890 km/h, Mach 0.73); AGM 86C: classified (nominal high subsonic)
...
Launch platform B-52H bomber
Click to expand...



So you think it's reasonable that she saw a missile traveling at 550 MPH in enough detail to ID it, that no one else reports a B-52 in the area, and that, for some reason, they used a cruise missile to do ----- something, I'm not sure what, but it sure wasn't to shoot down flight 93?





And she missed the fact that this missile has wings?
 
TC329 said:
The media is lying to you. Always been.
Click to expand...
All the media in every country?

TC329 said:
Do you know what a police lineup is and how it works?

Was it like this : 757 NO
Was it like this : Falcon20 NO
Was it like this : a10 Warthog NO
Was it like this : (missile/unmanned drone plane) YES

Imagine that. Being shown a picture of something used in a crime and the eyewitness saying "Yes, That is What/Who I Saw"..........

You're kidding me, right?
Click to expand...
You are familiar with studies that have shown over and over again how eyewitnesses in such lineup situations get it wrong?

Also, missiles, especially ones that would be used for an air-to-air intercept, leave smoke trails which would persist in the air for a few moments at least and would be quite visible to anyone.
 
Devil's Advocate said:
I LOLed for real.
:D

Nice Avtar, B.T.W
Click to expand...

dimebag.jpg
 
So she was show pictures with no commentary, and just asked to choose?

From what I can see, she was told based on her DESCRIPTION, that what she saw was MOST LIKELY X or Y. There is a big difference in the two.

But TC, like I said, if you are convinced, get the impeachment under way...lol

TAM:)
 
Pardalis said:

Those big powerful beasts... Their shape oddly reminiscent of something...
Click to expand...
Rocket-powered suppositories: the only way the medication they need can be administered to 9/11 deniers.
 
Horatius said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-86_ALCM

So you think it's reasonable that she saw a missile traveling at 550 MPH in enough detail to ID it, that no one else reports a B-52 in the area, and that, for some reason, they used a cruise missile to do ----- something, I'm not sure what, but it sure wasn't to shoot down flight 93?

And she missed the fact that this missile has wings?
Click to expand...

I just gave that as an example. Clearly, she saw something she couldn't identify as a normal airplane.

If I put on my tin hat, I would imagine that since the AGM-86 is air to ground maybe that's what made the crater...where very little identifiable reckage was found. Engines were found at WTC and the Pentagon. Not at Shanksville as far as I am aware. A B-52 could have let that sucker go from hundreds of miles away.

...if I put on my tin hat anyway.
 
Horatius said:
And she missed the fact that this missile has wings?
Click to expand...
You are arguing with an utterly hopeless case, who has repeatedly refused to answer my questions or contact the witnesses whose contact information I gave him. Oh, and remember that this is the plane that TC329 (AKA Terrorcell) believes crashed in Somerset:

8790469acc3121adc.jpg
 
GregoryUrich said:
I just gave that as an example. Clearly, she saw something she couldn't identify as a normal airplane.

If I put on my tin hat, I would imagine that since the AGM-86 is air to ground maybe that's what made the crater...where very little identifiable reckage was found. Engines were found at WTC and the Pentagon. Not at Shanksville as far as I am aware. A B-52 could have let that sucker go from hundreds of miles away.

...if I put on my tin hat anyway.
Click to expand...
You are wrong. Much identifiable wreckage was found at Shanksville, including engines, both black boxes, and the remains of every single passenger were positively identified. The FDR showed that the plane's systems were functioning normally when it hit the ground at 580 mph: as fast as a bullet fired from a .45.

Please stop this sad nonsense.
 
GregoryUrich said:
I just gave that as an example. Clearly, she saw something she couldn't identify as a normal airplane.
Click to expand...
Thought she saw. She was mistaken. The plane was moving very fast. It was not 50 feet over her head and the size of her mini-van.

Other witnesses who were right there saw the airliner roll to its right, turn upside-down, and dive, followed by the explosion, all of which corresponds to the FDR data.

Please stop this nonsense. It is undignified.
 
Unsecured Coins said:
[qimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v295/Jaye77/dimebag.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I've never seen a missle that looked like that. It must be the latest secret weapon...

What is that thing? It looks kind of like a Gibson Explorer/Flying-V mutant except for the headstock. Is it a Washburn Green Munky?
 
Gravy said:
Thought she saw. She was mistaken. The plane was moving very fast. It was not 50 feet over her head and the size of her mini-van.

Other witnesses who were right there saw the airliner roll to its right, turn upside-down, and dive, followed by the explosion, all of which corresponds to the FDR data.

Please stop this nonsense. It is undignified.
Click to expand...

You know she is mistaken. God, what arrogance. Stop your nonsense and I'll stop mine.
 
So which missiles have all those spoilers and rivets, but are also completely silent and don't blow leave of trees? Which ones are flown 10 feet off the ground to hit a target much higher up? Why were no missile parts found?

Why do they keep using magical missiles?
 
Jonnyclueless said:
So which missiles have all those spoilers and rivets, but are also completely silent and don't blow leave of trees? Which ones are flown 10 feet off the ground to hit a target much higher up? Why were no missile parts found?

Why do they keep using magical missiles?
Click to expand...

They were attacking the darkness!

/Dead AleWives
 
Revolutionary91 said:
If you want to avoid spin then watch the video. I deliberately didnt give my opinion in the opening post so you could make your own mind up.

I'm going out on a limb here and making the prediction that the "skeptics" here will just accuse her of lying or being confused.
Click to expand...

Why do you not get that since the evidence doesn't point to missiles, that's the only thing a reasonable person can conclude? Especially when you want us to base our opinions on the slipshod "testimony" that's always provided.

You can't have a room full of blue furbles, see one pink furble come running out the door, and conclude the room must be full of pink furbles instead. This isn't how it works.

Please do yourself a favor (never mind us) and learn sometihng about how to argue, what evidence is, what fallacies are, and the ways in which eye-witness testimony can be unreliable. Please. Learn something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom