Posted on 06/22/2006 7:35:47 AM PDT by drypowder
We had Directv (still do) and at the time were unable to get local stations. (Big loss, lol)
We got the news from the NYC main guys. East Coast.
A lot of the rules involving this have changed (become stupid) but we were prob looking at the same feed that night.
Now that I think about it, I am almost certain of it.
"Nation States" rarely, if ever, broadcast their involvement with terror strikes.
Saddam never claimed responsibility for any of his terror strikes or the ones he financed. He represented a "Nation State" - something we could go to war against. If the linkage was claimed, he could count on retaliation.
Only rootless terrorist organizations declare responsibility.
Thanks, that makes sense.
Then we probably saw the same thing. I remember that guys home video. He was taping something else and saw the arc and turned the camera on it. And no one at the parties or on the beach seemed drunk to me. Did they to you?
And as a Physics major I laffed my a$$ off at the discovery channel 'documentary'.
Jet Fuel is simply KEROSINE. Go to the corner gas station, buy a gallon, pour it into a bucket, and toss in a match and watch what DOESN'T happen (an explosion)- or better yet, Do what I do about 10 times per year- pour it over a pile of wood and ignite it to make a bonfire. Nice and safe.
That is why jet airplanes are not blowing up left and right.
Try the same thing with gasoline (very explosive) and you better hope your health insurance is up-to-date.
Leon Panetta Just Characterized TWA 800 as Terrorism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499976/posts
Martha MacCallum was just interviewing former Clinton Chief of Staff Leon Panetta about Louis Freeh's new book slamming the old administration on terror response. Panetta defended pitifully by saying they always had a "serious view" concerning this stuff "whether it be Oklahoma City or the Olympics bombing or the flight off New York City".
TWA 800 was not caused by a spontaneous fuel tank explosion. This is the fourth or fifth time a high-level Clinton staffer/senator has characterized TWA as a terrorist attack. We deserve to know what happened.
No one that I saw that night appeared drunk at all.
They were, for the most part, a bit 'freaked out'.
And very anxious to tell of what they saw.
If I seen that I would have been scared to death.
*Tearing the house apart for my copy of 'The Downing of Flight 800'*
Then did you see the early reports and the home movie
I saw the early reports but I did not see any home movie. Early reports are usually incorrect and misleading. I would love to see this movie.
If they are trying to cover something up, why would they give you info that would prove a coverup?
Then what to believe and not to believe?
That is also quite a few people in on the coverup.
If they were trying to cover something up couldn't they do a better job of it. I'm not saying all the facts are out because they probably aren't.
you missed the point- it was shown once on TV then dissappeared, never to be shown again.
Of course you would like to see this clip- so would everyone else.
Other freepers here have also seen it.
I thought that I remembered correctly. And I couldn't believe how many times the next day that it was pointed out that these witnesses were "partying". I also remember a smear about the guys on maneuvers or that they had changed their story. It was scary how fast the story changed.
I, too, remember that quite well. He was confident, almost cocky, that they were soon to capture the perps. Then later it was like he had been doused with cold water. He was very subdued in tone and appearance. It was almost as if he were a different person.
The Kennedy assasination, Oklahoma City, and Flight 800 have a lot in common.
Bingo.
I was up late watching the news. I honestly don't remember what time it was played. I went to bed around 3 or 4 am. It was on Fox 5.
That is also quite a few people in on the coverup.
Not really. People that worked for him knew they'd better be silent. And then there are those that agreed with him. The press has covered for Clinton since day 1. The eye witnesses were smeared so who needed to be silenced?
Well. There were a few.
TWA 800's 'Deep Throat' - (FBI, liberal media conspired in TWA 800 cover-up; Clinton wanted closure)
The same is true of the computer simulation of the Kennedy assasination which attempted to prove the magic bullet story. Only problem was that other documents and pictures of the Zepruder film show that John Connally was not it the position depicted in the simulation. The "proof" had obviously been doctored.
Read this Captain's testimony. It is interesting that he saw a bright light coming from inside or on TWA 800 for a while before the explosion. We was piloting a 737 in the area at the time.
Gee, well over 100 witnesses were 'partying'? In lots of different locations?
I must live in the wrong state, lol.
The Clinton Administration seemed to have a vested interest in making things 'look ok'.
No matter how it hurt the country.
I suppose that 9-11 put that sort of propaganda to a stop.
Too many people saw what happened that day.
Agree wholeheartedly - I also think there is a "shadow" govt which pulls the strings of the visible govt - I don't think the US president comes close to calling *all* the shots. I guess it sounds like grassy knoll, oliver stone stuff, but as you point out, if you just assume high school civics, 2 and 2 don't add up to 4.
Read the link in 93.
It's always been about that!
I'm rethinking.
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.