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

To: DoughtyOne
I believe that was revealed when the Navy owned up to the training exercise.

That was hardly a secret. The Navy had to issue the NOTAMS with the airspace restrictions ahead of time. The fact that some subs were transiting the area was most likely kept secret because the Navy doesn't like to advertise the locations of their subs and there was no part subs could possibly played in the incident anyway. Any other assets were hundreds of miles away. But you'll still look at all that and find a deep, dark conspiracy on the part of the Navy anyway.

The Navy initially said they didn't have any vessels within something like 130 miles of TWA 800 that night. That's somewhat different than them having naval vessels within one mile of the TWA 800 flight path. And the fact that they had three to five vessels in the direct vicinity, means that the Navy was flat out lying for reasons unknown.

The closest surface ship was the Normandy, almost 200 miles away. The three subs that were in the general area are irrelevant since none of them had the capability of lauching a SAM anyway, either deliberately or by accident. And as I said above, the Navy doesn't like to advertise the location of their subs.

I have said that I rule nothing out. This is equated by you to be a very bad thing to say about the Navy, but the Navy lying isn't a problem for you at all. The Navy lying didn't make it look bad in your eyes. That speaks volumes to me.

Obviously you've never been in the military.

The Navy may be innocent as it can be here, but I didn't force it to lie. It destroyed it's own credibility on this matter, and there's nothing you or I can do about that.

I doubt that in your eyes the military had much credibility to begin with.

120 posted on 11/18/2007 5:18:40 PM PST by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
I believe that was revealed when the Navy owned up to the training exercise.

That was hardly a secret. The Navy had to issue the NOTAMS with the airspace restrictions ahead of time. The fact that some subs were transiting the area was most likely kept secret because the Navy doesn't like to advertise the locations of their subs and there was no part subs could possibly played in the incident anyway. Any other assets were hundreds of miles away. But you'll still look at all that and find a deep, dark conspiracy on the part of the Navy anyway.

I'd have to go back and read what was released about this night, but as I recall there were surface ships in the area as well.  As for a deep dark secret, evidendly so, since the Navy lied about it after the weeks and possibly months later.  I just don't remember the time frame precisely after all these years.

The Navy initially said they didn't have any vessels within something like 130 miles of TWA 800 that night. That's somewhat different than them having naval vessels within one mile of the TWA 800 flight path. And the fact that they had three to five vessels in the direct vicinity, means that the Navy was flat out lying for reasons unknown.


The closest surface ship was the Normandy, almost 200 miles away. The three subs that were in the general area are irrelevant since none of them had the capability of lauching a SAM anyway, either deliberately or by accident. And as I said above, the Navy doesn't like to advertise the location of their subs.

As I said before, I believe there were also surface ships on site.  I may be wrong about that, but I do believe there were.


I have said that I rule nothing out. This is equated by you to be a very bad thing to say about the Navy, but the Navy lying isn't a problem for you at all. The Navy lying didn't make it look bad in your eyes. That speaks volumes to me.

Obviously you've never been in the military.

LMAO, So having been in the Military would have made it a-okay that the Navy lied.

The Navy may be innocent as it can be here, but I didn't force it to lie. It destroyed it's own credibility on this matter, and there's nothing you or I can do about that.

I doubt that in your eyes the military had much credibility to begin with.

I've been here close to ten years and I've supported the military consistantly for that length of time.  We lost 260 some odd souls when TWA 800 went down, and I take the loss just as seriously as I take the need to be surportive of the military.

I'm sorry you don't.

122 posted on 11/18/2007 10:33:04 PM PST by DoughtyOne (California, where the death penalty is reserved for wholesome values. SB 777)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | 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