• 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

Can we see the pictures she positively identified as being the object which flew over her head please.
 
Didntcha know? The 9/11 cult movement is just a means of getting into the film industry. If you can't make it as a PA, you can make conspiracy videos for Youtube.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
Didntcha know? The 9/11 cult movement is just a means of getting into the film industry.
Click to expand...

Please. It takes talent to "make it" in the film industry. A cut-and-paste video every 3 years won't do it. I mean, really, where does Avery go from there? He obviously doesn't have the talent to succeed as a true filmmaker; and I think even he would admit that.
 
Great! Another "film" by another top notch "investigator"!
I'm sure we'll find out Flight 93 went North of the K-Mart or some such nonsense soon.
Arrogance and ignorance are not an attractive combination.
 
Well I managed to watch about 5 minutes of it.

And even within those five minutes (minus the terrible opening shots and music) there are some troubling anomalies.

Such as:

It starts off with shaven headed guy (who I understand to be mr terrorcell himself) doing a piece to camera about how this lady's always been quoted as having said that she saw a plane, but that this is wrong.

Now, I'm not sure if he means to imply that she has been wrongly represented in the media (perhaps TC could confirm his intent?) but considering that as she and the other guy are getting into her car she confirms that she'd always described it as a plane, we can hardly be accusing the media of twisting her words. Correct, TC?

(ETA: He (the other guy) even discusses with her that she called it a plane when they were at her house)

She then also says that it was some guy in california (she can't remember his name) who contacted her and convinced her that it wasn't a plane she had seen.

Now, this lady seems to be a very trusting person. So trusting that she is apparently prepared to drive a couple of strange men (strange as in 'not known to her':D) to the crash site while being interviewed on camera (I bet TC was pleased when that journey ended if he was the cameraman down in the passenger footwell). So trusting in fact that her belief in what she saw could be influenced by a some guy in california.

But I think the most surprising comment she made was concerning her interpretation of what this flying object was doing. She thinks it was there to make sure there was nothing left at the crash site. Meaning the crash had already happened.

Shall I spell it out? She doesn't think it was flight 93 because that had already crashed.

She IS talking about the dassault falcon.

Please may we see the picture she positively identified as having been the craft which flew over her vehicle?
 
I see Dylan has asked for Koreys expert opinion on the matter and Korey thinks it was a Predator{giggle}. I was on exercise in '98 and we were working with a Predator unit from the Air Force and we were able to achieve some firsts in UAV history(I could tell you, but I'd have to kill you.......I'm not joking ;) ), but one thing that stood out to me about these aircraft was how slow they were, they just appeared to hover at times. I dont think they are able to break the 100 mph mark. They also sound very much like a Cessna and nothing like a missile.

This topic is actually fascinating. What the witness described sounds nothing like a airliner.....or anything else for that matter. But if I had to guess, I'd imagine that this person saw the Falcon 20 flying low, less than 1000' or so and simply didnt see the wings or notice the wings because she saw the plane side-on. If you can find multiple witnesses to this wingless, rivetless, spoilered missile - I'd be impressed TC.
 
Bumping for TC coz I really really want to see the picture his witness pointed to and said "That's it!! There! That one! That's what flew over me"
 
TC329 said:
Which is why I started my own investigation. Which is why I am putting together a documentary of the eyewitness accounts.
Click to expand...

Nooooo! Please, please God no! I'll pay you $3 a month for every month you don't produce your little video, payable at the end of every year.
 
Mince said:
Nooooo! Please, please God no! I'll pay you $3 a month for every month you don't produce your little video, payable at the end of every year.
Click to expand...

That's gotta be tax deductible. Send form 23/i/refund/23j to dept 23/9/11 in green ink on 80gsm paper ...oh just put it down as 'sund rational expenses'
 
Devil's Advocate said:
So, you read the post (or maybe not), make an assumption of who I am and what I am about, then get pissy like a spoiled child and expect me to follow your advice on what I should do about anything?
Why don't you do a little background on someone before you get on your flimsy little soap box. Ok, little one?
Click to expand...

Yes, I made an assumption. You came to a message forum on the internet with "evidence". Someone truly out for justice will take the evidence where something can be done with it.

And if that's what you consider "pissy", you have a LOT to learn in life. That's what's called motivation.

So, go do something useful with your evidence. You've obviously got it all figured out, so why are you coming here at all?
 
Yaters said:
Yes, I made an assumption. You came to a message forum on the internet with "evidence". Someone truly out for justice will take the evidence where something can be done with it.

And if that's what you consider "pissy", you have a LOT to learn in life. That's what's called motivation.

So, go do something useful with your evidence. You've obviously got it all figured out, so why are you coming here at all?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about?
Do you even know?
When I came to this forum I did so to look at research, get questions answered, and debate topics.
Thats what you do at a forum, genius.
Forum: "an assembly, meeting place, television program, etc., for the discussion of questions of public interest."
 
Gravy said:
Yet more nonsense? Do you take classes to learn this? They were watching the spot where the explosion was. There was no little white plane there. They did, however, see an airliner.

Contacted those witnesses and investigators yet, little boy?
Click to expand...

So your new claim is UA93 turned away from Washington DC and was heading north or that Susan McElwain (and many others) is lying?

Please clarify.
 
TC329 said:
So your new claim is UA93 turned away from Washington DC and was heading north or that Susan McElwain (and many others) is lying?

Please clarify.
Click to expand...
Have you ever, once, just once, just one time, gotten anything right?

"Then it disappeared behind some trees. A few seconds later I heard this great explosion and saw this fireball rise up over the trees, so I figured the jet had crashed. The ground really shook. So I dialled 911 and told them what happened.

...The plane I saw was heading right to the point where Flight 93 crashed and must have been there at the very moment it came down.
Click to expand...
1) She was looking at the spot where the fireball rose.
2) That's exactly where the plane she says she saw was headed.
3) That's exactly when the plane she says she saw was there.
4) Several people were looking at that exact spot at that exact time.
5) There was only one explosion and fireball.
6) There was only one airliner.
7) No one saw a different plane there at that time.
8) Your see-saw analogy does not render calculations moot.
9) Grow up. Your behavior is despicable.
 
Devil's Advocate said:
.....the fact that there is nothing in the FDR data to indicate that the warning(s) would have activated, as no trigger conditions were encountered by the GPWC [should be GPWS] or recorded by the FDR.
Click to expand...

The GPWS is radar-based and I'll bet it point down when the plane isn't doing acrobatics and since the plane was inverted, the radar was pointing up to the sky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom