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

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

You have no proof of any missile hitting the plane.

I dislike the Clintons just as much as you do, but you don’t do anybody any favors by sounding like a conspiracy wacko.

If you believe a missile hit plane, back it up with scientific proof.


17 posted on 08/05/2007 12:55:25 PM PDT by Perdogg (Cheney for President 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Perdogg
(Who are you gonna believe, your lying eyes or my official report?)

A statistical study of a recently released FBI database of 736 witness interview summaries refutes the NTSB’s conclusion. Most significantly, eighty-six percent of the witnesses who described the motion and/or origin of the rising streak reject the NTSB’s explanation. These witnesses observed the streak emanate from the surface when Flight 800 was 2.6 miles (approximately 4 km) above it. Others reported seeing the streak moving along a different trajectory from that of Flight 800 and/or seeing the streak collide with Flight 800 (see “FIRO Witness Statistics” on page 8). The remaining fourteen percent offer no information concerning the streak’s origin.

Rather than openly address these observations, both the FBI and NTSB on various occasions suppressed the witness evidence:

1) The FBI withheld the accounts of 278 witnesses from the NTSB for more than one year after the crash. All witness accounts with descriptions of a “streak” colliding with an aircraft were concealed from the NTSB in this withheld data.[3, 4]

2) The FBI ostensibly lost the results of a study to determine the origin of an alleged surface-launched object seen before the crash. Those results are officially listed as “unable to locate” by the FBI.[5]

3) At the first public hearing on the crash, the FBI prevailed upon the NTSB to prohibit any discussion of the witness evidence.[6]

4) Official witness sketches that purport to show a surface-launched object cause the crash have never been discussed or addressed in any official report or public hearing on the crash.[4]

5) The witness evidence was withheld from the public until April 2000, almost four years after the crash.

6) At the final public hearing on the crash in August 2000, the NTSB dramatically under-reported the number of witness accounts that conflicted with their proposed crash scenario.[2]

from:
http://www.flight800.org/witness-review.htm

18 posted on 08/05/2007 1:00:10 PM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg

The proof is over 200 eyewitnesses who saw the “streak of light” rise up from the horizon and then the plane exploded. Give us a chance to prove it. Where is the body of the plane now, the wreckage? Give some unbiased experts access to it and let’s see what this part of the evidence shows. Who do you think controls access to that wreckage if it hasn’t been buried or dropped into the middle of the ocean by now? It isn’t the private sector.


19 posted on 08/05/2007 1:03:24 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg
There's a HELL of a lot more circumstantial evidence that a missile, or combination of missile and targeted-explosives laden small plane took out 800 than the abject fantasy of a center fuel tank explosion.

I've worked with tanks, confined spaces and UEL/LEL situations for 17 years now and the center tank theory is about the most ludicrous example of a government explanatory case I've ever heard.

The conspiracy whacko's are the side that keep fronting that impossible tank theory, not to mention the ones so unoriginal that they need to keep posting that dumbass "Sheesh, not this **** again" picture for the 5,000,000th time...

22 posted on 08/05/2007 1:16:39 PM PDT by Axenolith (The Market is a harsh mistress...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg
If you believe a missile hit plane, back it up with scientific proof.

While it is not "scientific proof" it certainly is compelling evidence that over 200 independent witnesses from all over the the Long Island Sound are gave eye witness accounts of seeing a red streak come up from the surface towards the plane and culminating in a fireball. Those accounts when plotted on a map triangulate to a specific launch point which further bolsters their credibility. The NTSB supressed this evidence.

The suppresed eyewitness evidence certainly has more credence than the ridiculous, un-replicatable, center fuel tank theory.

41 posted on 08/05/2007 2:19:45 PM PDT by Wil H (So just what IS the Globe's optimum temperature?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg

No proof?

How about like a thousand people?

How about the laws of physics?

How about the Governments impossible scenorio explanation?

Conspiracy theory? No, alternate theory based upon fact versus fanciful theory based upon suspect computer modeling.


42 posted on 08/05/2007 2:21:37 PM PDT by StructuredChaos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg

No proof?

How about like a thousand people?

How about the laws of physics?

How about the Governments impossible scenorio explanation?

Conspiracy theory? No, alternate theory based upon fact versus fanciful theory based upon suspect computer modeling.


43 posted on 08/05/2007 2:21:55 PM PDT by StructuredChaos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg; Freedom'sWorthIt

Here we go! Somebody has to break out the “WACKO” label!

As predictable as champagne on New Years!

Hey, let’s not stop there! They must be racist, anti-semite nazi child molesters also


52 posted on 08/05/2007 3:11:48 PM PDT by djf (Bush's legacy: Way more worried about Iraqs borders than our own!!! A once great nation... sad...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg
If you believe a missile hit plane, back it up with scientific proof.

Do you mean like the Sanders who got persecuted and prosecuted by the government for doing so or do you mean like the 154 independent eye witnesses who saw it happen and whose testimony corroborates each other through triangulation?

Just wondering?

The New York Post, in its story of September 22, 1996, reported,

Law-enforcement sources said the hardest evidence gathered so far overwhelmingly suggests a surface-to-air missile...

The FBI interviewed 154 "credible" witnesses -- including scientists, schoolteachers, Army personnel and business executives -- who described seeing a missile heading through the sky just before TWA 800 exploded.

"Some of these people are extremely, extremely credible," a top federal official said.

FBI technicians mapped the various paths -- points in the sky where the witnesses said they saw the rising "flare-like" object -- and determined that the "triangulated" convergence point was virtually where the jumbo jet initially exploded.

The New York Times, on July 19th, 1996, reported,

" [ Witnesses reported ] a "streak of light" hitting the plane just before it blew up."

And perhaps most tellingly, from the Associated Press, on September 23, 1996,

"...a source...said on condition of anonymity.... ``There's metal bent in, metal bent out. Metal you can't tell. I see a hole going in and a hole going out..."

Or should we go with the fuel tank explosion theory that they tried to recreate at test site near Bristol, England but were unable to successfully do so until they forced the parameters to such ridiculous extremes that it bore no resemblance to the actual accident scenario?

120 posted on 09/15/2007 1:46:33 PM PDT by Wil H (Islam translates to "submission", not "peace" - you can figure out the rest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

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