Posted on 11/16/2007 10:04:18 PM PST by Sioux-san
On the Sunday morning of July 3, 1988, at the tail end of the Iran-Iraq War, an Aegis cruiser, the USS Vincennes, fired two Standard Missiles at a commercial Iranian Airbus, IR655.
The first missile struck the tail and right wing and broke the aircraft in half. All 290 people aboard were killed. Misunderstanding America, the Iranians claimed that our Navy had intentionally destroyed the plane.
The Navy did no such thing.
(Excerpt) Read more at cashill.com ...
These theories are all fine and dandy but they don’t conform to military reality whatsoever. We aren’t talking Stinger missiles. It would have to be of the level of a “Standard” missile that is a serious, heavy-duty ship-based weapons system. You don’t just throw one on a motorboat and launch. No terrorist group has ever been known to have ANY of these, let alone in America.
Any terrorist who would base his plan on an aircraft leaving JFK on time either had never flown into or out of New York or was exceedingly stupid.
International arms dealer takes foreign visitors out on his launch for party. Someone takes the manpads launcher out and fires it. TWA800 was flying lower than normal and.....
Stingers are very expensive, not the kind of thing you would shoot off just to liven up a party.
“and a shoulder-fired Stinger was way, way out of range.”
and a shoulder-fired Stinger was just near the limit of being in range.
“Any terrorist who would base his plan on an aircraft leaving JFK on time either had never flown into or out of New York or was exceedingly stupid.”
We are talking about people who marry camels. Who put bombs on their children. Exceedingly stupid seems an ‘apt’ description.
“Stingers are very expensive, not the kind of thing you would shoot off just to liven up a party.”
NO DEMO. NO SALE.
Saying the military did is insane. So long as you wander down that course then you're fooling yourself.
Wow - if Clinton and his gang could get all that done during his administration (presumably during the first few years), cleaning out the FBI and CIA and Justice Dept. as well as all the attorneys that do the dirty work, Bush needed to do the same. Bush acted like a loser from the get-go. He was under siege by the DEms from day 1 - “You didn’t really win the Presidency - the SCOTUS gave it to you - so you have to share power with us.” It was sickening to watch it all and if it weren’t for 9-11, Bush would have been a one-term Prez accomplishing very little except for tax relief that he and his fellow Pubs couldn’t even make permanent when they had the power. It’s one thing to go out there and fire everyone on Day 1 and expose the Clintons for the criminals they both are. YOu’re right - he’d have been neutralized one way or the other very quickly. but, Bush was totally within his rights to do exactly what Clinton did. The State Dept. and CIA are totally out of control and have been for a long time. Long before BJC got there. Goss got chased out and Ms. Rice has found out that she has to be their cheerleader to advance an anti-freedom anti-Israel pro-Islam stability-at-all-costs agenda. Mr. Bush has done nothing to rein her in, so I am assumimg he has no problem with selling out Israel and leaving our borders wide open. Tough to defend the indefensible.
President Bush has been doing this since the day he started.
Investigations and prosecutions have been ongoing.
The Head of the FBI, replaced, twice.
Management at all levels, in various government agencies, have been retired, or fired, due to their involvement in corruption.
As of the beginning of this year, 70% of the FBI had been replaced.
During all this ‘time’, President Bush had to FIGHT against every DEMOCRATIC POLITICIAN and some REPUBLICANS, and every MAJOR NEWS MEDIA SOURCE in the US and on the PLANET.
Clinton had everyone’s ‘NOD’ and the MSM’s wrote pretty “THANK YOU” cards in the form of TV NEWS, when he was putting PEDOPHILE COCAINE DEALERS into government offices.
Bottom line, President Bush was following the laws, and therefore could not ‘disinfect’ the government as quickly, and thoroughly, as Billy-boy (Managed and directed by Hiar Klinkton) infected it.
Did. Not. Happen.
didn’t say it did, don’t think it did, strictly threw that out to show that to many people would have been involved that would not have kept quiet.
Yes Non-Sequitur, we realize you know what every military member was doing on that evening and where every bit of ordinance was. We get it.
And the Congressional investigations proved the fuel tank scenario beyond all doubt! And I would absolutely never question Mythbusters.
I've seen several "recreations" that were supposed to simulate what happened on TWA800, but none actually recreated the conditions that would have been present at 17,000' agl. If you heat kerosene to flash point at sea level pressure and add a spark, you will indeed get a very big bang. If you do the same thing at a pressure altitude of 17,000', you won't. There just isn't enough O2 for explosive combustion at that altitude unless you first compress the kerosene. Simple chemistry.
Good question.
The multiple, overlapping theories and factual errors makes those on our side look too much like those believing the WTC was brought down by implosion or some other conspiracy.
After all these years, conservatives have not coalesced around a single theory and still debate the facts.
Either we all get on board a single theory or let it drop.
It does not help us.
If you’re on a boat in the middle of the Atlantic, yeah.
Funny how people will cling to any explanation as long as it involves something “mysterious.”
2) The FIM-92B can attack aircraft at a range of up to 15,700 feet (4800 m) and at altitudes between 600 and 12,500 , meaning that the altitude alone ("about 16,000 feet") according to the tower transmissions put it out of range, not to mention the fact that you have to also INCLUDE the distance from shore(eyewitnesses put it at "15 to 20 km slant range distance" from shore), or minimum of 49,000 ft. from shore.
So even if a boat with two guys just waiting was right under the flight path (which meant FAA inside help, to know exactly where it was going) and even if they knew exactly WHEN it would go over, they would STILL be outside of range.
What I get is that you form conspiracy theories with no basis in fact, fueled by your own ignorance on the military and how it operates. If you want the slander the military then go right ahead. As a former member of that organization I will continue to defend it and show just how stupid arguments that the Navy shot that plane down are.
The explanatioins for a missile are beyond silly. No Stinger could hit it, and if it did, it would have hit an engine, not a midsection; way out of range; and the “residue” was ONLY consistent with what I call a “pass-through” drone missile-—except no target drone COULD target anything like a plane (remember, it is the target) nor would it veer wildly out of its controlled path without being aborted; nor is there any evidence of a missile test NEEDING a drone; nor is there any radar evidence of a long drone path or a SECOND acquisition missile. In short, it’s just nonsense.
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.