Like I said in my post, I was in the navy at the time. I had no immediate family. It's absurd to believe you could threaten hundreds of sailors' families and not one took a stand. There's no way I'd keep my mouth shut even with threats to my nonexistent family. I didn't even have a dog at the time. Even if I wanted to keep my mouth shut, I doubt I'd be able to after a bender at the bar. Never do crime with me; my guilty conscience will spill the beans after the right amount of beer and whiskey.
This whole FBI cover up for the US Navy is absurd. I wonder how many people who believe the navy shot down flight 800 have ever served in the navy. Or specifically on a Ticonderoga class cruiser or Arleigh Burke class destroyer with Aegis and SM-2 missiles.
When I read posts like yours, I immediately think of Sean Hannity and his dopey claim that “99% of FBI agents are fine, upstanding law enforcement officers.” And yet every piece of evidence I’ve seen since 2016 suggests it’s actually the opposite — AT BEST.
Missile or bomb detonation A review of recorded data from long-range and airport surveillance radars revealed multiple contacts of airplanes or objects in TWA 800's vicinity at the time of the accident.[1]:87–89 None of these contacts intersected TWA 800's position at any time.[1]:89 Attention was drawn to data from the Islip, New York, ARTCC facility that showed three tracks in the vicinity of TWA 800 that did not appear in any of the other radar data.[1]:93 None of these sequences intersected TWA 800's position at any time either.[1]:93 All the reviewed radar data showed no radar returns consistent with a missile or other projectile traveling toward TWA 800.[1]:89 The NTSB addressed allegations that the Islip radar data showed groups of military surface targets converging in a suspicious manner in an area around the accident, and that a 30-knot radar track, never identified and 3 nautical miles (5.6 km; 3.5 mi) from the crash site, was involved in foul play, as evidenced by its failure to divert from its course and assist with the search and rescue operations.[1]:93 Military records examined by the NTSB showed no military surface vessels within 15 nautical miles (28 km; 17 mi) of TWA 800 at the time of the accident.[1]:93 In addition, the records indicated that the closest area scheduled for military use, warning area W-387A/B, was 160 nautical miles (296 km; 184 mi) south.[1]:93 The NTSB reviewed the 30-knot target track to try to determine why it did not divert from its course and proceed to the area where the TWA 800 wreckage had fallen. TWA 800 was behind the target, and with the likely forward-looking perspective of the target's occupant(s), the occupants would not have been in a position to observe the aircraft's breakup or subsequent explosions or fireball(s).[1]:94 Additionally, it was unlikely that the occupants of the target track would have been able to hear the explosions over the sound of its engines and the noise of the hull traveling through water, even more so if the occupants were in an enclosed bridge or cabin.[1]:94 Further, review of the Islip radar data for other similar summer days and nights in 1999 indicated that the 30-knot track was consistent with normal commercial fishing, recreational, and cargo vessel traffic.[1]:94
A review of recorded data from long-range and airport surveillance radars revealed multiple contacts of airplanes or objects in TWA 800's vicinity at the time of the accident.[1]:87–89 None of these contacts intersected TWA 800's position at any time.[1]:89 Attention was drawn to data from the Islip, New York, ARTCC facility that showed three tracks in the vicinity of TWA 800 that did not appear in any of the other radar data.[1]:93 None of these sequences intersected TWA 800's position at any time either.[1]:93 All the reviewed radar data showed no radar returns consistent with a missile or other projectile traveling toward TWA 800.[1]:89
The NTSB addressed allegations that the Islip radar data showed groups of military surface targets converging in a suspicious manner in an area around the accident, and that a 30-knot radar track, never identified and 3 nautical miles (5.6 km; 3.5 mi) from the crash site, was involved in foul play, as evidenced by its failure to divert from its course and assist with the search and rescue operations.[1]:93 Military records examined by the NTSB showed no military surface vessels within 15 nautical miles (28 km; 17 mi) of TWA 800 at the time of the accident.[1]:93 In addition, the records indicated that the closest area scheduled for military use, warning area W-387A/B, was 160 nautical miles (296 km; 184 mi) south.[1]:93
The NTSB reviewed the 30-knot target track to try to determine why it did not divert from its course and proceed to the area where the TWA 800 wreckage had fallen. TWA 800 was behind the target, and with the likely forward-looking perspective of the target's occupant(s), the occupants would not have been in a position to observe the aircraft's breakup or subsequent explosions or fireball(s).[1]:94 Additionally, it was unlikely that the occupants of the target track would have been able to hear the explosions over the sound of its engines and the noise of the hull traveling through water, even more so if the occupants were in an enclosed bridge or cabin.[1]:94 Further, review of the Islip radar data for other similar summer days and nights in 1999 indicated that the 30-knot track was consistent with normal commercial fishing, recreational, and cargo vessel traffic.[1]:94
The four-year NTSB investigation concluded with the approval of the Aircraft Accident Report on August 23, 2000, ending the most extensive, complex and costly air disaster investigation in U.S. history at that time.[7][8] The report's conclusion was that the probable cause of the accident was explosion of flammable fuel vapors in the center fuel tank. Although it could not be determined with certainty, the likely ignition source was a short circuit.[1]:xvi Problems with the aircraft's wiring were found, including evidence of arcing in the Fuel Quantity Indication System (FQIS) wiring that enters the tank. The FQIS on Flight 800 is known to have been malfunctioning; the captain remarked on "crazy" readings from the system approximately two minutes and thirty seconds before the aircraft exploded. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800
You may have served, but think about it. How many people on board know where a launched missile is going?
As far as most sailors know, they were on a training excercise at the same time this happened. Not one sailor has said they saw the explosion from their ship.
Spilling the Beans:
Then there was that trip to the grocery store when your brakes did not fail in traffic ... but, had you said anything in that scenario, they would have. There is always a way to disappear those without families that are inconvenient or know too much - ask Jimmy H.
Other odd information:
There was a naval presence in the Sound that night, but according to the transponder (or whatever), the ships were too far away to hit the plane had they wanted to do so; some say it was a man-pad, but they things did not have the altitude range at the time; there was also a picture of a cop near the the shore on long Island standing next to a white 10 foot missile in a launcher; according to several stories there was a residue on some of the seats which could only have come from an HE detonation or rocket fuel residue.
None of those ship types you mentioned were present at the time - ships were small and from other classes AIR