Skip to comments.Cashill: FBI suppressed video of TWA (800) explosion / Are feds hiding crash imagery?
Posted on 09/20/2007 7:33:48 PM PDT by cgk
FBI suppressed video of TWA explosion
Recovered debris from TWA 800
More than six years after retired United Airline captain Ray Lahr launched his Freedom of Information Act petition into the fate of TWA Flight 800, the FBI has shown him likely by accident one seriously smoking gun.
The Boeing 747 blew up off the coast of Long Island on July 17, 1996. One of the FBI documents received recently by Lahr and his attorney details a communication that took place six days after the crash:
"The FBI guy who looked at this must not have read it, or not have realized what it would reveal, Otherwise he would have redacted most of it as before."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Most diver’s in the Navy are able to id different types of fragments + that they [the divers] had tv cameras on the helmets for the top side “brass” to see what was going on. When in doubt bury it in deep waters....
There were many more, reported in the first hours after the explosion. I was glued to the TV and heard the many eyewitness reports early on. And also all the people complaining on TV that their film and cameras were taken by the FBI.
Because the “incident” affected so many people in my town, I became a TWA 800 news junkie and read every thing I could find about it. Unfortunately, I wasn’t online yet at that time.
As happens in many such “incidents”, the first reports ...the ones that contradicted the Clinton party line...were censored and never shown again.
If Cardinal O’Connor refused to be seen in public with Clinton, that begs the question of why. Could it be more than Clinton’s adultery and promiscuity? Could it be more than Clinton’s “pro-choice” position on abortion? Could it be that the cardinal had some familiarity with the details of the Vincent Foster case and the rest of the Clinton Body Count and realize that Clinton’s “compassion” for the TWA 800 victims was nothing more than a charade?
Cashill is a serious historian with a Ph.D. degree, who is not out to get laughs, merely to inform. WND is just as good as its individual writers, and Cashill is tops.
Please read Cashill's books on TWA 800 and "Ron Brown's Body" to prove to yourself he is a respectable professional.
I never said he was out for laughs. I do think he is out for money though.
Serious historian? He strings events together and speculates as to what it means
Heck I do that, but I don't make it my livelihood :0)
THE LINDA KABOT PHOTO
The photo taken by Kabot depicts a bearing of north/northeast. TWA Flight 800 was south/southwest almost directly behind her.
Photograph analyzed by CIA National Imagery and Mapping Administration (NIMA) advised that
1. THERE IS OBJECT IN PHOTO
2. OBJECT IS NOT A MISSILE
3. OBJECT APPEARS TO BE AN AIRCRAFT
Not possible to ID aircraft because:
Not possible to determine distance of object from camera.
Exact time of photo unknown. (time frame only is known)
Insufficient detail in photo to determine type of aircraft.
4. OBJECT IS NOT A DRONE
No drone exercises conducted near Long Island July 17, 1996
Why shouldn't he be out for money? Isn't writing non-fiction an honorable profession? If this were a just world, guys like Cashill would be earning far more for exposing the truth about the Clinton years than those left-wing media shills in the MSM who have consistently defended the criminal enterprises of the Clintonistas because their megabucks employers would fire them or worse if they told it like it is.
Can't happen. You blow the front off that plane, and it loses the power control to the fuel pumps, and as much fuel as those engines need to run theres no way on Gods Green Earth they will keep pushing the plane up.
BTW, I have it on good authority that at least one person who survived the OC bombing was killed aboard TWA 800. Probably coincidence but maybe not.
Especially since the published ceiling for the Stinger is 9500 ft... The SA-7 is 2300 meters...
The other consideration I forgot to mention is that why would terrorists be there in the first place? It is the wrong place. The descriptions I've read of flight 800 state that it was unusually low. It had been prevented from a normal ascent due to an inbound flight. So normally, at that range out from the airport the aircraft would be even higher.
Now, putting yourself in the position of a terrorist... Why would you position yourself where aircraft would normally be even higher, just about guaranteed to be out of range? You don't plan for luck. Luck usually runs against you, and there are generally enough unknowns that in planning operations you control everything you possibly can. So terrorists would've stationed themselves closer in, where nominal aircraft ascent profiles would have had them in range.
As for where a heat seeker generally hits... What they "see" is a large blob of heat - the exhaust from the engines at a higher temp than the surrounding air.(*) As they close, the exhaust ducts and aXX-end of the engine resolve to even hotter than the air flow. So the heat seekers fly towards the exhaust plume, then correct into the back of the engine. Depending on the system they either contact detonate (dangerous to rely on, may not actually hit), or proximity detonate (extra hardware/software though), or simply detect the rapid rate of change of the target's relative position at closest point of approach, and detonate. That's one reason most SAMs carry fragmentation warheads - they only have to get close, then trash the aircraft's systems.
(*) Unless you're a newer Sidewinder like the AIM-9X. They are so-called "all aspect" missiles. The word is they can detect the temperature differential of the leading edge of a wing. At high speed air friction heats the leading edges... So they can be fired from the front aspect of the target.
Alright already I guess I should have been more explicite in saying anyone political...Of course every life is important.
How? What determines which is which? Color? Shape?Missiles go boom, and when they go boom they tend to fragment into a lot of little tiny pieces. The same kind of pieces you get when an airplane crashes. So you tell me how you determine the fragments of a Stinger from the fragments of a 747?
Not really trying to get into a pissing contest, just defending the military from those who would attack it and try and discredit it and bring it down. I cannot understand how someone can believe the military is stupid enough to shoot down a U.S. civilian airliner, evil enough to cover it up, and yet honorable enough in the war in Iraq. It's the same military in both situations, and if you believe they shot down and covered up TWA 800 then I assume you believe that they're out there murdering civilians and committing atrocities in Iraq.
And a DDG is a guided missile equipped destroyer. An FFG is a guided missile equipped frigate. The same kind of ships you think shot down the airliner.