• 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

TC329 said:
That's an unfair biased diagram which I asked you repeatedly to correct. The reason the fuselage appeared to be so wide was because the engines were mounted on the tail of the plane instead of the wings. You push things you know to be bogus because you're a fraud Mark.
Click to expand...
No, it's drawn exactly to your specs. You said you are looking for a plane with a 60-foot wingspan and a fuselage that's 16 feet wide and 20 feet high. You didn't specify the location of the engines.

I, of course, have evidence of your ignorant statements. You, of course, have still not contacted the witnesses and investigators whose contact information I gave you. That's pure intellectual cowardice.
 
TC329 said:
Please provide the positive identification for the CVR.
Click to expand...

you can get that from the NTSB. its your claim that it was faked. its not our job to prove that it wasn't. you make an extraordinary claim, you have to provide proof or retract your claim

this kind of "round" robin debate doesn't help your case. only shows that you have lies to tell.


prove your case or retract your claim
 
TC329 said:
The media is lying to you. Always been.
Click to expand...

Really? Have you any idea just how paranoid that makes you appear?

Ironic really, since the biggest proven liars in this whole sad affair are the CT websites who spin and manipulate details to fit their agenda, tell the faithful what to see and what to believe (we need to be told because rarely is it obvious precisely what the CTer is seeing) and then profit off of the gullible sheeple who get a buzz out of thinking they're part of some great new rebellion against 'da man'.
 
Gravy said:
No, it's drawn exactly to your specs. You said you are looking for a plane with a 60-foot wingspan and a fuselage that's 16 feet wide and 20 feet high. You didn't specify the location of the engines.

I, of course, have evidence of your ignorant statements. You, of course, have still not contacted the witnesses and investigators whose contact information I gave you. That's pure intellectual cowardice.
Click to expand...

When I described the circumference of the crater's fuselage impression I stated 16-20' and you were well aware that I believed at the time of that statement that the plane had 2 rear mounted engines on the tail and I immediately corrected you in order for you to correct your mistake. That is also evident in the thread. No spin, Mark.
 
TC329 said:
No, you can't get that from the NTSB.
Click to expand...

and how does this negate you from your responsibility to back up your claim? dont dodge tc, otherwise retract your claim


ntsb, fbi - they'd have it. ntsb WOULD have it, tc, no matter how much you say otherwise. it belongs to them. FBI wouldl get it from them for their case they are building, and then it would be returned to the NTSB for their records.


again, prove that the CVR was faked or retract your claim
 
T.A.M. said:
While I have been following your posts enough to know that you try to post as per your username sake, others may not. On a busy forum, where CTers posting such shaite to infuriate is common, I think it is a little much to expect someone to "background check" each poster who posts such things. As I suggested earlier, you need some form of posting entry line to identify your role as D.A., or else be prepared for much more of this...but you know that.

TAM;)
Click to expand...


There are Devil's Advocate tags available, viz:

[/da]Devil's Advocate: "

Devil's Advocate: "Why wouldn't the air traffic controllers have realized the planes had been hijacked as soon as they turned off their transponders?""
 
SpitfireIX said:
There are Devil's Advocate tags available, viz:

[/da]Devil's Advocate: "

Devil's Advocate: "Why wouldn't the air traffic controllers have realized the planes had been hijacked as soon as they turned off their transponders?""
Click to expand...
Devil's Advocate: "

WTF?
I never said that. Lies!
Screen Shot or it didn't happen.
:)"
 
TC329 said:
When I described the circumference of the crater's fuselage impression I stated 16-20' and you were well aware that I believed at the time of that statement that the plane had 2 rear mounted engines on the tail and I immediately corrected you in order for you to correct your mistake. That is also evident in the thread. No spin, Mark.
Click to expand...
Any particular reason that you make this crap up? Do you really forget that I use evidence to back my claims?

TC329 said:
I never once stated anywhere that someone dug a fake impact crater. I happen to believe that the crater in Shanksville was made by a plane. One with a 60 foot wingspan and a fuselage that is 16' wide x 20' high.

http://z15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=13706&view=findpost&p=7653829
Click to expand...


Remember this? Still waiting for your response, Mr. Cell.

(Here's my recap, since I don't expect anyone to read TC329's drivel):

You have posited that:
  • Fiight 93 was shot down in PA, passenger remains were recovered. Evidence from the scene is real. The other three flights contained CIA agents and crew, not the passengers on the manifests. Phone calls from passengers and crew were faked. Investigation into "passengers" needed.
  • Flight 11 was shot down in PA.
  • Flight 93 was shot down in PA after passengers regained control of the plane from hijackers, necessitating, for some reason, that it be shot down.
  • Flight 93 landed in Cleveland.
  • "The plane in Shanksville hit its target," whatever that means.
  • Currently: flight 93's disposition unknown. Some other plane crashed at Shanksville, all evidence to the contrary is faked. First responders and investigators are liars.
Reading that list is so disturbing to me that I actually get chills. It is the product of an agonized mind.
 
Last edited:
It's really obvious that this woman saw the business jet that was asked to check on UA93. I honestly don't understand why Conspiracy Theorists are so mentally inept.

-Gumboot
 
TC329 said:
No, you can't get that from the NTSB.
Click to expand...
You can't get a copy of the actual CVR recording, because it's against the law for the NTSB to release audio copies. You can, however, get transcripts of the CVR. In fact, there are web sites out there which have on them the transcripts of CVRs from air crashes; it can make for interesting, if sobering, reading. Here's one such site.
 
The crater was exactly the right size and shape to have been made by a 757 or some such aircraft of comparable size. THe round hole is about 20 feet wide. That fits, considering that the fuselage of an aircraft crushes very easily. There are chevron-like trenches out to the side, suggesting that a pair of wings with a dihedral matching that of a 757 dug in there. There is a tail print slightly cocked to one side, suggesting that the fuselage had begun to tear apart shortly after impact. A lot of people take the word of a Colonel Nelson, an alleged aircraft accident investigator, that the crater was too small. He cites figures for the round hole only.

Bear in mind that the colonel is going a little outside hios AFSC when he addresses the crash scene. He was an aircraft maintenance officer. He was called in, by his own admission, on a rotational basis, to assist with various aircrafdt incidents. His role was to analyse the piles of pieces that people like me would pick up at the crash scene for transport to some site usually miles from the scene to see if he could find evidence of things like over-torque bolts and fitting, bearings that had no been lubricated, little birdy skeletons sucked into engines and that sort of thing.

I have not had time to sit through the google video. My computer takes something on the order of a day or two to download 40 minutes of google. I might not need to. I caught a reference to the alleged witness' describing a "spoiler" on the back of the missile.

Someone tried to sell her the idea that it was a Global Hawk, apparently.

And there is no way a Global Hawk would dig the crater at Shanksville, any more thaan there is a possibility that a Global Hawk made the hole in the Pentagon.
 
Welcome to the forums, leftysergeant, and thanks for your interesting contributions. A little history: we've been all through this and presented mountains of evidence to TC329 and his ilk. Evidence makes no impression on the bizarre delusions of the true believer, and they won't attempt to justify their claims. What's most telling, and disturbing, is that they refuse to talk to the people who were there.

Cowards.
 
Yawn.

That's all I had in mind at the moment. Keep on doing what you were doing.
 
"Because it was so low I ducked in my van and when I did I shut off my radio. And thats when I knew there was no sound."
Click to expand...

Even missiles make sounds.

"It cleared those trees, it was fall, no leaves moved on the tree..."
Click to expand...

September 11 is Fall?

Why would the leaves have moved?
 
Alferd_Packer said:
September 11 is Fall?

Why would the leaves have moved?
Click to expand...

I know, suspicious eh?

Either it was a sooper seekrit missile/plane with the ability to not cause any turbulence........


......or it was a plane flying too high to cause any turbulence.
 
Corsair 115 said:
It seems you missed this part of Gravy's statement (bolding added):

How much weight do you give these other witnesses and the FDR data, GU? Why does McElwain's account take precedence over what others have testified to seeing and the physical evidence?
Click to expand...

Don't put words in my mouth Corsair. I never said McElwain's account took precedent over anything. I simply said it should be investigated by the authorities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom