Susan McElwains little plane

From the precise descriptions of Susan McElwain (e.g. wingspan, neary noiseless, no tree-leaves moved and the overall behaviour) Iīm absolute convinced that Susans plane was an UAV similar to the "Orbiter" as already discussed here:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?s...dpost&p=1496700

And not:
1.) an anti-aircraft missile:
These have speeds between Mach 2 and Mach 5. This would have given Susan an observation time of only a friction of a second.

2.) as very often claimed: a Falcon business jet who was allegedly seeking for the crash of UA93 on itīs landing approach to the airport Johnstown (JST):

The best answer is from Susan herself: "before the crash?"
And note please: JST was already closed at least 5 minutes before this time for any plane!

So Iīm convinced that Susans plane was an "airborne eye".
And the plotmakers need it!

Even in a carefully planed controlled demolition the events sometimes develop not in the intendet direction.
In NY and at the Pentagon you can place dozends of cameras around the targets without beeing detected. But this is not possible at the "crash"-site of UA93!

Note in this context:
If there was a ground crew for preparing the last minute "make-up" of the site (e.g airplane-debris in the forest), that the "crash"-site had to been abandoned just for safety reasons or to be not detected some time before the explosion.

Although the probability is not very high it is also not "zero" that evidence is produced by mistake which will ruin the whole plan when not removed before witnesses appear at the scene.

Please note in this particular case:
In Shanksville we have the absolute perfect situation that we have a lot of civil citizen eyewitnesses who were for a really long time direct at the "crash"-site before the officials were able to fabricate a big "security"-perimeter around the scene.

This was not possible neither in NY nor at the Pentagon!

Might look funny at the first view but itīs not impossible that an animal e.g. a crow appeared at the "crash"-site in the second the explosion happened.
The explosion will kill the bird, but it will fell down near or even in the middle of the "crater".

Now try to convince e.g. the coroner Wally Miller that 92% of the passengers bodys evaporated while he sees a crow - dead but more or less in one piece - laying around there.

Iīm not married with this "crow-idea". There can be thousand other reasons which require immediate "cleanup"!

And now remember that Bob Blair and Doug Miller who were the first responders werenīt the very first on the scene!

There was already an anonymous man who told them that there a plane had crashed. Then this guy went to his car and drove off.
The behaviour of this mysterious man is already criminal because he obviously refused to help saving lives. ( or did he know in advance that there were no survivers?)

I see a direct connection between this man and Susans plane.

But if my ideas are correct then I had for a longer time a real problem with a detail Susan described.
This was this "silly" banking.


The left picture shows Susan standing on Bridge St.. Her plane followed the street with a heading direct towards us.
In the right picture Susan shows the planes banking to the right.

I thought: "Hey Susan, if we want to fly to the "crash"-party we should continue the path over Bridge St in a straight line. This banking to the right is the total false direction!"

Iīve to admit that because of this for quite some time I had serious doubts if I can trust Susan or not.

But then I found thanks to the film "Reichstag 911" from Domenick this scene, which shows the situation from the opposite direction.


And now the "silly" banking makes total sense!

With some triangulation with g-earth and topographic maps I could determine Susans position with an error of less than 30ft.

Note the high trees very close to the crater (height is at least 70ft maybe even more than 80ft). And they were uninjured and full of leaves in the moment when Susans plane climbed at treetoplevel over the trees at Buckstown Rd.

Due to the trees at the "crater" it would be impossible to see the "crash"-site from Susans position uphill !

But if we fly her plane to the bigger trees at the horizon at the upper left corner of the picture (at this point Susan has long lost the eye contact) then we are in a position that we can see the "crater" but are also in a save position outside the shockwave of the explosion.

This means: That without this "silly" banking Susans plane would have missed the most exiting part of the film!

Note that a lot of witnesses reported that they have seen a plane very similar to the description of Susan circling over the "crash"-site after the "crash" as "if it was searching for something". Then this plane disappeared direct into the sun which was at this time at about the position of the Indian Lake Marina.

If this is all correct: then Susans plane approached from the SE and disappeard in the same direction. And if the idea it was an UAV similar to e.g an "Orbiter" then Iīve from the technical specifications some ideas where to find the "mummy" of Susans little plane.

Iīve to admit at this moment that this is absolute speculative, because I couldnīt find any witness who can prove that. But it seems logical to me.

I hope I can find the time to produce some maps to visualize my thoughts.

I have to say mate, I admire your tenacity in looking at THE most difficult op of 9/11 to fully take in and a terrain that requires a lot of research to visualize, especially when trying to put it on paper for others to see.

The Susan McElwaine interview was actually the first time I really "woke up".
Hopefully I can help you and Dom out in the not too distant future.

What about a Tomahawk missle? Top speed is 550mph. Could it hover though? but that is subsonic flight. I saw video of a Tomahawk taken from ground level by media crew as it was going over rooftops and it appeared slower moving but I can't find the video right now.

Here is footage of one that this soldier says they can circle their target:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzvFZnew41U

Someone left this question on that video:

What does it mean when a missile has the loitering ability??
anbrin 8 months ago jaglavaksoldier
8 months ago The missiles will circle around the target area, take pictures of the target and wait for the command to attack the target.

Next Generation Guided Missles:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jPnTLVQzek

These look like miniature planes too. But the witness should be shown these to rule out.

i have to agree. mr. speiker's contributions to shanksville research are immeasurable.

it's not a missile.

viola saylor, rich chaney, and a few undisclosed witnesses saw it afterwards.

Yeah I would agree it is not a missle (per Marina witness) but the post said Missles are supersonic so I had to interject. They can control the speed on that last clip so who knows what is out there flying around. We only know what we have seen or been shown by military and you can bet there are more classified weapons for sure.

oh i agree, but instead of missiles think more along the lines of something like this :

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/11/phantom_ray_rollout/

Yes and may I say it all depends on if we can prove anything, if we can
the 9/11 OCT goes even further down the sinkhole if we cant we still
have moot we need enough evidence to convince a jury and any normal
open minded person, like our much resented foes the RANDI'S have said it is all a matter of evidence not what anyone thinks I agree CIT has some pretty good strong evidence and of course unfortunatley they are right but it still is not enough to completely slice through the cake we still need more evidence i just posted a topic which I hope would blow everything wide open starting with THE PENTAGOOSE but it seems I cannot prove shit excuse my language without doing a realistic reconstruction of that aspect of the event impact so it looks like for now our glass is only
half full, I really hope you guys can prove something in this thread
with this topic keep up the good work.

So as to sum it up between us and the skeptics it all a matter of whoever
has the biggest stick wins.

well 14 north of citgo witnesses and 6 indian lake witnesses proves the official story is a fabrication. there is no 'if'.

there is enough evidence to justify a new investigation in the witnesses alone. subpoena powers can handle the rest once the ball starts rolling.

its enough to get the ball rolling. that is all that is needed.

you should spend a little time here and go through all the shanksville threads and become more well versed on this topic. once you understand that if the plane flies over indian lake then it didn't crash in that field you will realize just because phony patriot websites don't post it doesn't mean it isn't legitimate or credible or factual.

shanksville, just like the pentagon, is PROVEN.

no, its whoever has the truth. they don't. they're habitual liars and some are anonymous 'pentagon bloggers' who are part of a cointelpro operation against the 9/11 truth movement. they can say all the things they want but in the end it comes down to the PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE AND WITNESSED IT.

NORTHSIDE OF CITGO + INDIAN LAKE = FALSE FLAG OPERATION EXPOSED

@ Domenick and onesliceshort:
Thank you very much for your friendly compliments.

Itīs an honour and a pleasure for me when I can contribute a little bit.

But please note: I wouldnīt be able to write a single sentence about the Shanksville-attack without the big work a lot of others and especially Domenick have made in the last years.

In the bottom line I do nothing more than dropping the one or other stone into the soup.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_soup

If Iīve understood only one single thing:

One of the "secrets" of the Shanksville-attack is the terrain!

And this not only in a small scale aroud the "crash"-site but also in a bigger radius.

Iīm absolute convinced that it would be impossible even in theory to reproduce an attack similar as in Shanksville at any other place in the US.

Without a detailed knowledge of the terrain and how the observations of the witnesses are distributed in space and time one has a high risk to loose the orientation in a jungle of halftruth, desinformation and rumors.

btw: This is the normal fate of the debunkers. They remember me to a thirsty running to search water in a big circle through the desert and not recognizing that he follows fata morganas or the trace of his own footprints.

Although Iīm a geographer who should find the geographical orientation better than the average layman I have to admit that I was very often confused when reading written reports of the witnesses because of the relative huge and complicated area where they are distributet.

So I said to myself: "Do your damned homework that every geographer has to to when he wants to go into a region which is for him personnaly a terra incognita"

Yes onescliceshort, this means a lot of tenacity and work!
But if it can help to find out what really happened at Shanksville then Iīm thankful that I have some skills in research and visualization.

Didnīt JFK say already: "We want to fly to the moon! Not because itīs easy but because itīs hard"?

And I have a high personal motivation for caring about Shanksville.

This has to do with the Whiskey-rebellion which happened exact in or near this region.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

For me these people had the absolute correct understanding what "freedom, solidarity, independance and patriotism" really means.

And when I see the interviews Domenick has made Iīve the strong feeling that the people there have a lot of the blood of their forefathers in their veins.

This is what I admire. I wish we had more of them in the whole world.