Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judith Miller, TWA 800 and the Death of Press Freedom
NewsMax ^ | 7/6/05 | James D. Sanders

Posted on 07/05/2005 5:57:37 PM PDT by wagglebee

The New York Times, NBC and other dominant media have destroyed the Constitution's Freedom of the Press. Today giant tears are shed at the New York Times because one of their own, Judith Miller, appears to be on the way to prison for up to 120-days because she nobly refused to give up a source. The Supreme Court recently ruled that she, as a journalist, must assist a federal government investigation when ordered to do so.

The First Amendment, in pertinent part, says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. . . .

"Abridging" means placing limits on. The Supreme Court ruled that these words must be interpreted from the perspective of the federal government. The Government's ability to use journalists as agents of the federal government when so desired cannot be abridged.

The American National Security State is supposed to grab all the power it can. Its mission is to project power. It is not entrusted with the mission of maintaining a healthy First Amendment Freedom of the Press. To the contrary, it is in the best interest of the National Security State to whittle, attack, whine and cry at every opportunity to turn dominant media into a tool by which federal propaganda is spewed across the nation twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.

The Founding Fathers gave dominant media the mission of counterbalancing the State's natural inclination to destroy the Constitution. Dominant media, as envisioned, was to probe and question the National Security State, especially when it displeased the National Security State.

But that takes courage and a willingness to be called very bad names by National Security State propagandists. It means being leaned on by the Justice Department, snarled at by its biggest, meanest federal legal guns; careers threatened, wives intimidated. It means watching your Rolodex go up in smoke.

All those wonderful federal sources who spoon-fed you, the dominant media journalist, story after story for which you were praised and rewarded with even better stories – as long as you did not demand that officially sanctioned stories be backed up with actual documents and other provable facts.

These "sources" would never again be available to you if you ever crossed the Beast, the National Security State. You'd actually have to push away from your desk, get out of your chair, go out into the cold, cruel world, walk past your favorite pub and find sources.

Real sources, not the federal shills that made you a household name and provided a very comfortable living, feeding propaganda you knowingly and willingly placed into the collective mind of the masses. Now you would have to join those journalists you so despise and look down on – the "bottom-feeders," "conspiracy theorists," Internet journalists and other journalistic lowlifes who continually bang away at the National Security State.

So, when the tough stories appeared, stories like TWA Flight 800, you shuddered at the thought of challenging a very determined cover-up, even though you knew the federal propagandists were feeding you garbage. You shuddered and then folded, jumping into the warm, safe lap of the Beast, wagging your tail, whispering "feed me, feed me."

According to three media sources - one deep inside NBC on July 17, 1996, when missile-fire brought the giant 747 down - in the hours after TWA Flight 800 was shot down a bidding war ensued for a video showing missile-fire bringing down TWA Flight 800. The bidding went above $50,000, at which time, the Fox News team, New York, was blocked from further bidding. The video ended up in the hands of NBC, where it was confiscated by the FBI.

The head of the Fox News team in the field on Long Island was then approached by an American military officer who said there was a major screw-up, the White House had ordered a 48 hour "stand-down" while it decided how to handle this crisis. Dominant media had a decision to make. Significant evidence of missile-fire was already in hand. Much more was easily available. There were witnesses who watching TWA Flight 800 as it headed east toward Paris. They then watched as a missile approached and brought the plane down. They didn't see some mysterious light way off in the distance. They were not confused. They knew what they had seen.

We now know the FBI and CIA knew they witnessed missile-fire, according to documents recently unearthed through the Freedom of Information Act.

The New York Times would have had this vital information if it merely conducted an honest investigation. It did not. Instead, it allowed the FBI to feed it an approved storyline, complete with selected facts – a bomb brought the 747 down. A political decision was then made at the top of the Clinton administration. It was an election year. A criminal act might provoke the sleeping masses.

The lapdog New York Times might lose its role as the dominant media "investigative" team. The Beast could lose control of the crisis. Truth could conceivably prevail if the shills at the New York Times ceased running interference for the National Security State.

But it was not to be. Federal propagandists told the New York Times a criminal act did not bring down TWA Flight 800. All that explosive residue was from a dog training exercise. The New York Times did not interview the St. Louis Airport Police Officer who conducted the training a month before TWA Flight 800 crashed. He would have given the New York Times information proving beyond any doubt that the dog training exercise did not take place on the 747 that would later become TWA Flight 800.

If the New York Times had interviewed the pilots who were onboard the 747 at St. Louis during the entire time the dog training exercise took place, it would have quickly become apparent that the dog training took place on a 747 parked at the adjacent St. Louis Airport gate. Mere competence would have exposed the cover-up.

At that point courage would have been required. The New York Times had neither. It was the Beast's official lapdog.

In all probability, 9-11 would never have happened if the New York Times had merely done the job the Founding Fathers assigned. In the aftermath of TWA 800, with a fully informed citizenry, America's masses would have demanded real protection based on real facts, not federal propaganda.

We can reasonably infer that today's constitutional crisis, the Supreme Court's removal of the First Amendment's Freedom of the Press would not have occurred. The Supreme's are political creatures; dare we suggest political whores? Would they dare destroy this most vital portion of the First Amendment if they knew they were attacking journalism's junkyard dog?

The Supreme's knew they were destroying a National Security State lapdog that did not need or deserve special protection under the First Amendment.

Unfortunately, non dominant media journalists who do sally forth to battle the dreaded Beast now do so without any pretense of a constitutional amendment protecting them. And now the ultimate irony – New York Times reporter Judith Miller now gets to go to prison because of the failure of the New York Times to protect and defend the First Amendment's Freedom of the Press.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: cialeak; freepress; judithmiller; leftistmedia; mediabias; newyorktimes; scotus; twa800
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-140 next last
This is right on point.
1 posted on 07/05/2005 5:57:37 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

This guy's a felon who's been flogging a lie to bereaved family members for almost ten years now. Now he reinvents himself as a martyr to press freedom. Oh, please...

For one thing, he was never a member of the press.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F


2 posted on 07/05/2005 6:00:12 PM PDT by Criminal Number 18F (Support and avenge our fallen operators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

It's a party- Huslters for everyone.


3 posted on 07/05/2005 6:01:56 PM PDT by Porterville (Don't make me go Bushi on your a$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

WOW!


4 posted on 07/05/2005 6:02:02 PM PDT by ken21 (it takes a village to brainwash your child + to steal your property! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
In the aftermath of TWA 800, with a fully informed citizenry, America's masses would have demanded real protection based on real facts, not federal propaganda.

Baloney. There a very strong possibility that the real cover-up of TWA 800 was that the incident didn't involve terrorism at all -- it was an accidental shoot-down of TWA 800 by a U.S. or NATO military vessel conducting exercises off the south shore of Long Island that night.

5 posted on 07/05/2005 6:02:25 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F

I agree that he is suspect, but the government's story about TWA 800 has never seemed true to me.


6 posted on 07/05/2005 6:02:27 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Great find! This is a keeper.


8 posted on 07/05/2005 6:02:52 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

You could be correct, but more evidence points to terrorism. That is what I think happened.


9 posted on 07/05/2005 6:04:09 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
'According to three media sources - one deep inside NBC on July 17, 1996, when missile-fire brought the giant 747 down - in the hours after TWA Flight 800 was shot down a bidding war ensued for a video showing missile-fire bringing down TWA Flight 800. The bidding went above $50,000, at which time, the Fox News team, New York, was blocked from further bidding. The video ended up in the hands of NBC, where it was confiscated by the FBI.

The head of the Fox News team in the field on Long Island was then approached by an American military officer who said there was a major screw-up, the White House had ordered a 48 hour "stand-down" while it decided how to handle this crisis. Dominant media had a decision to make. Significant evidence of missile-fire was already in hand. Much more was easily available. There were witnesses who watching TWA Flight 800 as it headed east toward Paris. They then watched as a missile approached and brought the plane down. They didn't see some mysterious light way off in the distance. They were not confused. They knew what they had seen.

We now know the FBI and CIA knew they witnessed missile-fire, according to documents recently unearthed through the Freedom of Information Act.

The New York Times would have had this vital information if it merely conducted an honest investigation. It did not. Instead, it allowed the FBI to feed it an approved storyline, complete with selected facts – a bomb brought the 747 down. A political decision was then made at the top of the Clinton administration. It was an election year. A criminal act might provoke the sleeping masses.

The lapdog New York Times might lose its role as the dominant media "investigative" team. The Beast could lose control of the crisis. Truth could conceivably prevail if the shills at the New York Times ceased running interference for the National Security State. '

snip

In all probability, 9-11 would never have happened if the New York Times had merely done the job the Founding Fathers assigned. In the aftermath of TWA 800, with a fully informed citizenry, America's masses would have demanded real protection based on real facts, not federal propaganda.

10 posted on 07/05/2005 6:05:17 PM PDT by bitt ('We will all soon reap what the ignorant are now sowing.' Victor Davis Hanson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

i agree.

interesting, it's a taboo subject.


11 posted on 07/05/2005 6:05:35 PM PDT by ken21 (it takes a village to brainwash your child + to steal your property! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; wagglebee
Really, who can possibly know? You both seem to agree with me that whichever optional explanation is true (or neither), the government is lying. That's just its nature and a premise that has to be accepted.

I think our debating it--which has been, and still would be, interesting--obfuscates the point of the post: America as we knew it in, say, the 1950's, is close to moribund. Another tragic USSC decision.

12 posted on 07/05/2005 6:08:45 PM PDT by jammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Baloney. There a very strong possibility that the real cover-up of TWA 800 was that the incident didn't involve terrorism at all -- it was an accidental shoot-down of TWA 800 by a U.S. or NATO military vessel conducting exercises off the south shore of Long Island that night.

Highly unlikely. While I've never been all that happy about the center fuel tank explanation... the keeping of a secret ~requires~ that there are only a few people that know that secret. A naval vessel has hundreds of people onboard, and then perhaps hundreds more ashore in the exercise that would all know what happened. Opsec in the Navy is pretty good... but its not that good. Somebody would squawk.

13 posted on 07/05/2005 6:09:13 PM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

bookmark


14 posted on 07/05/2005 6:09:58 PM PDT by federal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Actually it's the other way around -- the strongest evidence indicates that IF TWA 800 had been brought down by a missile, then it really couldn't have been terrorism at all.

There are two basic factors that strongly indicate that it was highly unlikely that TWA 800 was brought down by a missile fired by terrorists:

1. If it were terrorists, then they picked a terrible location from which to attempt something like this. TWA 800 was flying at an altitude of something like 13,000 feet at the time it was "hit," which means it would have been at or near the limit of almost any conventional surface-to-air missile. If a terrorist wanted to shoot down a passenger jet flying out of Kennedy Airport that night, he would have positioned himself much further to the west -- where outbound aircraft from JFK weren't flying so high.

2. Related to #1, Flight 800 was flying several thousand feet lower than usual that night -- to make way for a northbound United Airways flight to Providence, Rhode Island that was running behind schedule. This was a turn of events that a terrorist could not possibly have foreseen -- if he had positioned himself at that location, he would have been firing under "normal" circumstances at a target that was several thousand feet higher than an altitude already at or beyond the edge of his missile's range.

15 posted on 07/05/2005 6:13:08 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
The left was screeching for an investigation, screeching for the Justice Department to recuse itself and they got their wish.

A special prosecutor!

Evidently they wanted to simply allow Joe Wilson to lay blame without proof and they would stand idly by.

16 posted on 07/05/2005 6:16:20 PM PDT by OldFriend (AMERICAN WARS SET MEN FREE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

so why were the two journalists tossed in jail for stealing into the fbi's hangar where the debris was being reassembled?


17 posted on 07/05/2005 6:16:49 PM PDT by ken21 (it takes a village to brainwash your child + to steal your property! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

You are the one spewing baloney.


18 posted on 07/05/2005 6:17:04 PM PDT by OldFriend (AMERICAN WARS SET MEN FREE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
You raise a valid point, but your basic premise that an accidental shoot-down would be difficult to keep secret doesn't just apply to an accidental shoot-down -- it also applies to any number of other explanations involving terrorism. The number of crew members on a naval vessel who would have been aware of what happened would be dwarfed by the number of U.S. government officials who were involved in the investigation.

And yet we all know that their "investigation" was a pile of bullsh!t -- which obviously requires complicity on the part of many people. I don't know anybody who believes that nonsense about an "exploding center fuel tank."

19 posted on 07/05/2005 6:17:54 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ken21
What does that have to do with the facts of the case? I am certain that the U.S. government has covered up the real cause of the TWA Flight 800 crash -- and they would go to whatever lengths necessary to keep the real cause from being made public regardless of what that cause was.
20 posted on 07/05/2005 6:20:12 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred

No terrorist organization ever took credit for it, which is the reason they commit these acts.... for publicity. It was most likely a government SNAFU.


21 posted on 07/05/2005 6:20:57 PM PDT by kylaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
Well, OK -- if you insist.

But I certainly don't believe that the facts of the case point to what the author of this article suggests.

22 posted on 07/05/2005 6:21:13 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Ramius; Alberta's Child
I was watching ABC's This Week when Stephanopolis et al were discussing the incident and I believe terrorism in general. George, who was IIRC Clinton's press guy at the time, clearly said "We were in the White House situation room when TWA800 was shot down..."

George Will looked as if he was going to fall out of his chair. Subject was changed quickly and to my knowledge no one ever called Steph on his statement again.

I don't generally go in for conspiracy threories, and I also doubt that if the Navy had been involved everyone could have successfully kept quiet, unless the nature of the exercise was such that only a few people in command and control were in a position to know what happened with the missile (I don't have anywhere near the knowledge of how these things are done to speculate). Still, Steph's statement should have at least triggered an embarassed "uh...I mean blew up" or something to the effect. That it was quickly passed over and "forgotten" has always stuck me as very suspicious. That, and my understanding that simply hanging out in the sit room is not standard behaviour.

Somehow it just smells very strange, and I would never put anything past Clinton and his team. I suppose we'll never really know for sure unless someone does talk, maybe a deathbed confession or whatever.

23 posted on 07/05/2005 6:21:28 PM PDT by mitchbert (Facts Are Stubborn Things .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; All

I'd like to see this alleged tape that was taken from NBC by the FBI. Can anyone confirm such a tape exists?


24 posted on 07/05/2005 6:26:13 PM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The number of crew members on a naval vessel who would have been aware of what happened would be dwarfed by the number of U.S. government officials who were involved in the investigation.

I don't agree. The investigation could have been diverted by a mere handful of people, IMO.

Part of the story that is never really questioned very hard are the a.) altitude of the plane and b.) the type of missile that a terrorist might have used.

Everybody seems to just accept that the missiles available to terrorists couldn't reasonably reach the 13,000 feet of the plane. Maybe there's something wrong that *that* part of the story.

25 posted on 07/05/2005 6:27:27 PM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mitchbert

that's an interesting stephanopolis story.

hillary was the one in charge of damage control.

i remember hearing on the radio live interviews with people who observed 800.

one was a military helicopter pilot who was in the air. he said it was a missile rising from the surface of the ocean to the plane. i told a college instructor this and he said, "you can't trust the u.s. military".

another was a woman who was entertaining on her patio on the beach. she had her camera in hand, saw the same thing, and shot a series of photos. she offered them to the fbi and they weren't interested.


26 posted on 07/05/2005 6:28:12 PM PDT by ken21 (it takes a village to brainwash your child + to steal your property! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F
Let's fisk this lying ex-male-stewardess a little: July 17, 1996, when missile-fire brought the giant 747

He can say it as many times as he likes but that's not what happened.

TWA Flight 800 was shot down

See above

a video showing missile-fire bringing down TWA Flight 800.

There's no such video because there was no missile fire.

The bidding went above $50,000, at which time, the Fox News team, New York, was blocked from further bidding. The video ended up in the hands of NBC, where it was confiscated by the FBI.

Sanders doesn't cite a single named source for any of this. Based on his past performance, he's probably making it up (or similar cranks are resonating with him). As far as video confiscated by the FBI, I don't know if that happened, but if it did, bear in mind that the FBI was investigating whether a crime had been committed. Which is the FBI's job, as much as criminals like Sanders may not like it.

The head of the Fox News team in the field on Long Island

Conveniently nameless

.. was then approached by an American military officer who said there was a major screw-up, the White House had ordered a 48 hour "stand-down" while it decided how to handle this crisis.

Here Sanders, a former male stewardess, slanders the military, by imputing some kind of criminal behaviour to a (once again nameless) military officer. He doesn't even identify what service this alleged, phantom officer is from... an officer is commissioned into a branch of a service and would never ID him or herself as a generic "military" officer.

Significant evidence of missile-fire was already in hand.

No, there wasn't. There was never (and is still) nothing more than speculation supporting the supposition of a missile strike. The physical evidence absolutely, positively proves that the aircraft was not struck by a missile or missile fragment. On the other hand, there is a mountain of physical evidence for a fuel-air explosion.

Much more was easily available. There were witnesses who watching TWA Flight 800 as it headed east toward Paris. They then watched as a missile approached and brought the plane down All 700-odd (!) witness reports are part of the complete docket and I have read them all. About 150 saw a "streak of light." There is no consensus on which way the streak was going.

They didn't see some mysterious light way off in the distance. They were not confused. They knew what they had seen.

First, Sanders here is asserting that all the witnesses saw the same thing (ask any cop how often this happens). Next, he's asserting that people know what a missile looks like.

We now know the FBI and CIA knew they witnessed missile-fire, according to documents recently unearthed through the Freedom of Information Act.

We know no such thing. Sanders has made these assertions right along. In his book, he claims that the White House had a meeting in the SItuation Room which began BEFORE the plane went down, and he implies that Clinton had it shot down.

Clinton was not my favorite president, but he didn't do this, and once again Sanders slanders the military by suggesting that they'd (1) carry out such an order and (2) keep it secret. Didn't happen.

A political decision was then made at the top of the Clinton administration. It was an election year. A criminal act might provoke the sleeping masses.

OK., now he is suggesting that someone else shot the plane down and the Administration covered it up. This is simply loopy.

Truth could conceivably prevail if the shills at the New York Times ceased running interference for the National Security State.

Is it just me, or is that a little paranoid?

Federal propagandists

Ah, which Department is that, Jailbird Jim?

...told the New York Times a criminal act did not bring down TWA Flight 800.

Ah, he means the hundreds of FBI agents and dozens of NTSB investigators and such facilities as the scientists of the Explosion Dynamics Laboratory at Cal Tech. Yep, they're all gummint shills, and the only true torchbearer of truth is a simple ex-stewardess from New Jersey, James Sanders. Excuse me, flight attendant. And felon.

All that explosive residue was from a dog training exercise.

What explosive residue -- the stuff that was on the piece of seat that James D. arranged to have stolen from the NTSB has the same composition as... wait for it... bottom sand.

The New York Times did not interview the St. Louis Airport Police Officer

Here, Jailbird Jim is standing up and knocking down a strawman. The report of a dog training exercise was a media report, not any part of the actual investigation.

I could go on and on... about the only thing that's true in this pathetic loser's writing is his bitterness and rage. He's destroyed his life, and the lives of people close to him, and cast doubt and fear into the hearts of people who were already bereaved, and he makes a good living at it, but you can see the hate is eating away at him.

And hate what? His collossal conspiracy now includes the NTSB, FAA, FBI, CIA (which was not even involved in the whole thing except to lend a computer graphics lab), Boeing, TWA (and American, TWA's successor), the NYT, Fox News, the military, and two of the most different administrations the country's ever produced, BJ Bill's and Cowboy George's. Think about a conspiracy that big (which I guess I am part of because I disagree, to put it mildly, with this loser). For crying out loud, when did Washington ever keep anything secret? Mark Felt's identity as Deep Throat must have been one of the longest-running ever, and nobody died when Nixon fell (except three million Cambodians). And that was a conspiracy between four people - Felt, Woodward, Bernstein, and Bradlee.

Jailbird Jim posits a conspiracy of four thousand people. Cue Napoleon XVI, they're coming to take him away.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

27 posted on 07/05/2005 6:30:40 PM PDT by Criminal Number 18F (Support and avenge our fallen operators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

>"What does that have to do with the facts of the case?"

these two journalists attempted to take fabric samples from the seats.

these samples were to be chemically analyzed to determine whether the residue from a missile was present.


28 posted on 07/05/2005 6:31:08 PM PDT by ken21 (it takes a village to brainwash your child + to steal your property! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mitchbert

Do you think an entire Navy crew of a couple hundred Sailors would participate in a conspiracy ot protect Clinton? C'mon!!!! I personally know at least ten Chiefs that refused retirement ceremonies because they didn't want the certificates signed by the man!


29 posted on 07/05/2005 6:35:29 PM PDT by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Do I believe that TWA 800 was brought down by a missile? Yes, I do. Can I prove it? No I can't. Do I believe that it was brought down by a missile fired by a US Navy vessel? No way! Think about this... Remember what happened the last time a US naval vessal accidentally shot down a civilian air liner? Weeks and weeks of publicity. I can't believe that the government could possibly shutdown a public enquery over something like this.

Mark

30 posted on 07/05/2005 6:40:09 PM PDT by MarkL (It was a shocking cock-up. The mice were furious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

They don't have to reveal a source except for criminal proceedings. This investigation is a criminal proceeding.

And .. it was the media who INSISTED on an investigation. Now they're whining because they've been caught in their own net.


31 posted on 07/05/2005 6:40:57 PM PDT by The Final Harvest (President Bush: "America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I wonder what the moonbats at DU were saying about this(downing of flight 800) when it happened.


32 posted on 07/05/2005 6:41:18 PM PDT by satchmodog9 (Murder and weather are our only news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Clinton was running for re election and the summer olypics in Atlanta was more important so the coverup--NO TROUBLE HERE IN AMERICA-NOT HERE,NOT NOW UNDER BILL!


33 posted on 07/05/2005 6:43:30 PM PDT by rang1995 (They will love us when we win)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I was in the military, and I have a little knowledge of how it operates. Let's speculate that this was a US Navy ship that shot the airliner down. Maybe an Aegis class cruiser, with a crew of 24 officers and 340 enlisted. Now, you have to get ALL these guys to to forget they fired a missle off the coast of Long Island or wherever they were supposed to be. Even the dimmest bulb in the most remote compartment is going to put two and two together when they hear the news that an airliner was shot down WHILE THEY WERE SHOOTING LIVE MISSLES OFF THE COAST OF THE USA RIGHT NEAR THAT AREA!

But, you say, the government could go in and make them all swear secrecy or they are going to go to jail for life. Maybe. But I doubt it.

I don't buy it. There aren't enough black helicopters involved here.


34 posted on 07/05/2005 6:43:40 PM PDT by rlmorel ("Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does." Whittaker Chambers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F

I hear you. I don't like any of the fact sets, frankly. While none of the various missile theories really add up, I still am left with a quandry. This means it was caused by a spark in low-voltage wiring in the fuel tank.

How many 747's have been re-wired to remove this threat from the fuel tanks?


35 posted on 07/05/2005 6:44:02 PM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MarkL

you're right.

the iranian civilian plane, for example.




if the u.s. navy shot 800 down, the nyt and wawa post would have been all over it.

in addition, many of the people on the plane were french nationals and they'd want compensation.

we paid iran big bucks.


36 posted on 07/05/2005 6:44:08 PM PDT by ken21 (it takes a village to brainwash your child + to steal your property! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ramius

the guy who was an authority on fuel tank explosions died several years ago.


37 posted on 07/05/2005 6:45:21 PM PDT by ken21 (it takes a village to brainwash your child + to steal your property! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
Maybe there's something wrong that *that* part of the story.

Exactly. We really don't even KNOW if the 13,000 ft. figure is accurate.
So what do we know?
A lot of people were killed in a "crash".
Witnesses saw a missile.
Planes, trains, and automobiles log many miles every day with electrical circuits in their fuel tanks and don't blow up.
Sailors talk.
If the Clintonistas were in cover up mode for a terrorist attack, they would need to "muddy the water". Peter Salinger?

38 posted on 07/05/2005 6:48:47 PM PDT by labette (If only common sense would be more common..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

.

I say again,
...why did TWA Flight 800 just have to go down the very evening before HILLARY-hired White House Security Chief CRAIG LIVINGSTONE's highly publicized TV appearance before a U.S. Senate Investigating Committee..? A Committee that was trying to find out if HILLARY hired him in order to get her FBI Files on Republicans in Congress for blackmail purposes..?

I wonder which event you saw wall to wall TV Coverage on your TV's the next morning..?

It couldn't have been CRAIG LIVINGSTONE because Congress quickly cancelled all its work that morning out of respect for the now suddenly dead passengers of TWA Flight 800.

CRAIG LIVINGSTONE's pleading of the 5th against self-incrimination in FBI Filegate came 3 weeks later away from TV Cameras.

"It's the TV, Stupid, no matter what" =

The CLINTONS' real lifetime Motto

...still.

.


39 posted on 07/05/2005 6:51:13 PM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE ("ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer/Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.lzxray.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Here is the alt.disasters.aviation newsgroup FAQ. It includes a section on TWA800 that provides backup for some of my statements in previous posts:

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~philmil/ADA_FAQ/ADA_FAQ.htm

Here is some technical information on the CalTech EDL studies that established how the event occurred without a doubt.

http://www.ntsb.gov/speeches/ve981021.htm

http://www.galcit.caltech.edu/EDL/projects/JetA/background.html

the Misconceptions page is specially good:

http://www.galcit.caltech.edu/EDL/projects/JetA/misconceptions.html

You also need to read the entire docket on the NTSB website, especially the structures report where they address a possibility of a meteorite by demonstrating that (1) the structural breakup began with the fuel tank explosion, and (2) there is no path from outside the skin of the airplane into the tank. No meteorite, no missile, no shell, no fragment. When the people writing the report wrote about a missile, they just said, "see the meteorite bit." It never occurred to them that there would be people with no scientific training writing books, who wouldn't even read the accident report docket. (It takes about a week, and it's clear from Sanders's writing that he hasn't taken the week, or maybe he has too little education to follow the report).

Someone may say, what about a bomb? Even Jailbird Jim knows it can't be a bomb. Basically, high explosives leave a distinctive signature when they do their work. It was no problem seeing where HE had worked on Pan AM 103, and that plane was nearly as fragmented (and more burned) than TWA 800. There's no such signature on the TWA 800 wreckage.

Sanders and his crowd have asserted that the wreckage was disposed of. Actually GWU has it and uses it to train grad students in accident investigation.

http://www.gwu.edu/~aviation/safetyandsecurity/safetyandsecurity.html

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F


40 posted on 07/05/2005 6:52:32 PM PDT by Criminal Number 18F (Support and avenge our fallen operators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

"The head of the Fox News team in the field on Long Island was then approached by an American military officer who said there was a major screw-up..."


"The military officer, gold braid shining, approached the Fox Executive in the lower levels of the parking lot. "You have to give me that tape." he said. "It is for the good of the country. Besides, we know of various places you frequent that you might not like made public..." he added. Menacingly, the unidentified officer said "Hand it over now!" The sweating executive whined "But this is the only copy! Nobody else even has a copy of this tape! There aren't even any pictures out there!"

"We know that. Anyway, nobody is going to listen to the average citizen about what they did or didn't see." he said. Grinning, he added "You can do man on the street interviews with whomever you want, and we will do the same thing Clinton did to those women who accused him of harrassment! It won't go anywhere, so just give us the tape...we know you didn't even make any copies..."


41 posted on 07/05/2005 6:53:28 PM PDT by rlmorel ("Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does." Whittaker Chambers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mitchbert
"We were in the white house situation room when twa800 was shot down"

Wow, great post. Probably backed up by video tape as well. Betcha that tape is mighty hard to come by after this thread.

In the 50's and 60's before journalists became "Rock stars" confidences were held all the time. Even today many confidences are still held by journalists at all levels. Those of us who have held secrets small and large are disgusted and angry that the mighty few have besmirched reputations for the rest.
42 posted on 07/05/2005 6:53:43 PM PDT by rodguy911 (Time to get rid of the UN and the ACLU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ALOHA RONNIE
It's an interesting theory. My first reaction is that nobody would kill hundreds of innocent people simply to divert attention from themselves. But on further consideration, this is the Klintoons we're talking about. BJ and Hitlery viewed the American people the same way a medieval king viewed his subjects, we are all expendable in their eyes.

A year and a half later when the movie "Wag the Dog" came out, all of the talking heads were saying the idea that a president would start a war just to cover up a sex scandal was ridiculous. Then a few weeks later Lewinsky broke and BJ started bombing people.

43 posted on 07/05/2005 6:57:05 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I've lived by the Smith Point bridge for the last three years now---St. George Drive, to be exact. The people here in Shirley are unshakeable in their view that it was indeed a missile. Almost everybody knows someone who saw Flight 800 being struck.


44 posted on 07/05/2005 6:57:24 PM PDT by soupcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

There are other nations that have naval forces capable of firing a missle. They can keep a secret.


45 posted on 07/05/2005 6:57:52 PM PDT by aviator (Armored Pest Control)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
the Supreme Court's removal of the First Amendment's Freedom of the Press

Does Freedom of the Press mean they never ever have to reveal sources, even in a criminal trial? I don't think so.

Freedom of the Press means they can print what they want about the Government. That's it.

46 posted on 07/05/2005 7:00:02 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soupcon

When the cockpit panel was recovered from the water, it was noted that the center tank fuel pump switches were off. I still fail to understand how a center tank pump can start an explosion when there is no electricity to the pump.


47 posted on 07/05/2005 7:01:52 PM PDT by aviator (Armored Pest Control)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Ramius
How many 747's have been re-wired to remove this threat from the fuel tanks?

All of them! Every last one. As well as many other Boeings. Plus an entire wiring material that had been used for 30+ years is now banned.

At the cost of many millions.

At one time, when TWA 800 conspiracy stuff was very hot, I was tracking the number of AD's (Airworthiness Directives, like a recall, except the owner of the plane pays the cost) that came out of this investigation and it was something like 47.

If those ADs were for nothing, the airlines would not stand for it -- they are the ones left holding the bag.

There have also been operational changes. For instance, no one realized that the air conditioning units, which use the CWFT as a heat sink, would heat the fuel at altitude to the point where there was an inflammable mixture in the ullage of the CWFT (this was confirmed by flight test in an instrumented sister aircraft). SO now they manage the fuel in the tank so that there can never be a flammable mixture in there.

This also gave FAA impetus to research better means of fuel tank inerting. The military does it with nitrogen, which is costly and inefficient. The FAA has found some better ways, which will make everyone safer. There have been several other cases of fuel tank explosions in Boeing aircraft; this is not as unique a case as it looks (only in the casualty numbers).

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

48 posted on 07/05/2005 7:02:40 PM PDT by Criminal Number 18F (Support and avenge our fallen operators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Criminal Number 18F

Thanks... your replies are well written and you sound like you've got the research to back it up. I'll pursue some of your links.


49 posted on 07/05/2005 7:06:44 PM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
According to three media sources - one deep inside NBC on July 17, 1996, when missile-fire brought the giant 747 down - in the hours after TWA Flight 800 was shot down a bidding war ensued for a video showing missile-fire bringing down TWA Flight 800. The bidding went above $50,000, at which time, the Fox News team, New York, was blocked from further bidding. The video ended up in the hands of NBC, where it was confiscated by the FBI.

I had always heard that a videotape was available, but then the matter was dropped and I never heard the video mentioned again. Until now.

Slick Willy really did a good job covering up the acts of terrorism that would have certainly pushed the country into a war.

50 posted on 07/05/2005 7:08:45 PM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-140 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson