bump
“never occured before that in any airplane”
And if that was the 1st time ever, what are the odds it happens off Long Island?
Those who described seeing TWA-800 explode that day did so in the context of a surface to air missile bringing it down.
Not that I'm a conspiracy theorist (I'm not..) but I've never believed the Gubbermint's account of TWA-800.
Jack Cashill BUMP!
If Flight 447 was flying at approximately 50,000 feet there aren’t very many missiles of the normal kind that could have taken it out from what I understand.
There has to be other Eye Witnesses and those involved in the “Interviews” that wull come forward now for the Security and Future Health of Our Dear AMERICA to bring the Truth about the Destruction of TWA 800 to the Light of Day.
One thing We can be sure of is that Mr. Obama’s Administration will continue to hide the Truth because it wonte reflect well on the MUSLIM TERRORISTS who Obama denies even Exists! Dr. Cashill has done extensive Investigations on TWA 800 and deserves all the help and assistance possible in bringing out what really happened to TWA 800 for the Families Who Lost their Loved Ones, for AMERICA and for AMERICA’S Citizens, US! who deserve No Less Than the TRUTH! Also, LETS DEMAND that the documentary “PATH TO 9-11” be released by DISNEY/ABC and the CLINTOON CENSORS for the Judgment of the AMERICAN PUBLIC! As of yet, We do NOT LIVE in Venezuala, Cuba or KENYA wher We would expect to be denied OUR FREEDOMS.
The feds announced the cause of the crash before the investigation began. Thats my memory; they announced what the investigation would find the day they announced that the investigation was starting.
My reaction at the time was, what?
The government’s position from the beginning has always been, “who are you going to believe, us or your lying eyes?”
TWA 800- who speaks for the dead?
Published: 07-14-01
I really wish the US Government was competent enough to pull off a massive cover up like this. I really do. Sadly, the US Government isn’t near as competent, or coordinated enough, to make this a reality. People claim the US Government can fake 9/11, coverup TWA 800, hide UFOs, and all sorts of other garbage, but then can’t even have the foresight to plant WMD in Iraq. Way funny.
TWA Flight 800 is another one of those terrorist attacks, which the government does not (and did not) want anyone to know about.
Oklahoma City is another such incident...
We’ve been attacked a few more times by terrorists than the government wants to really let us know about...
From Wikipedia located here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800
Analysis of reported witness observations
Numerous witnesses in the vicinity of the accident reported a streak of light. As the NTSB noted, “There was intense public interest in these witness reports and much speculation that the reported streak of light was a missile that eventually struck TWA flight 800, causing the airplane to explode.”[8] The NTSB Witness Group concluded that the streak of light reported by witnesses might have been the accident airplane during some stage of its flight before the fireball developed, noting that most of the 258 streak of light accounts were generally consistent with the calculated flightpath of the accident airplane after the CWT explosion.[8]
However, 38 witnesses described a streak of light that ascended vertically, or nearly so, and these accounts “seem[ed] to be inconsistent with the accident airplane’s flightpath.”[8] In addition, 18 witnesses reported seeing a streak of light that originated at the surface, or the horizon, which was “not consistent with the airplane’s flightpath.”[8] With regard to these differing accounts, the NTSB noted that in previous investigations witness data was “often inconsistent with the known facts or other witnesses’ reports of the same events.”[8] The interviews conducted by the FBI focused on the possibility of a missile attack (some suggested interview questions given to FBI agents were “Where was the sun in relation to the missile launch point?” and “How long did the missile fly?”), and as a consequence there was possible interviewer/interviewee bias.[30] The NTSB concluded that given the large number of witnesses in this case, they “did not expect all of the documented witness observations to be consistent with one another”[8], and “did not view the apparent anomalous accounts as being persuasive evidence that some witnesses might have observed a missile.”[8]
The investigation determined that if witnesses had observed a missile attack they would have seen the following: (1) a light from the burning missile motor ascending very rapidly and steeply for about 8 seconds; (2) the light disappearing for up to 7 seconds; (3) upon the missile striking the aircraft and igniting the CWT another light, moving considerably slower and more laterally than the first, for about 30 seconds; (4) this light descending while simultaneously developing into a fireball falling toward the ocean.[8] None of the witness documents provided to the NTSB described such a scenario, and the investigation concluded that “the witness observations of a streak of light were not related to a missile and that the streak of light reported by most of these witnesses was the burning fuel from the accident airplane in crippled flight during some portion of the post-explosion, pre-impact breakup sequence.”[8]
Also see:
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w581BiSBzQA&feature=PlayList&p=9FB13C94EF3E8F7B&index=0&playnext=1
The day after the downing of this Jet off Long Island the F.B.I. lead investigator James Kalstrom or Halstram I think,
in a t.v. interview said that, “if it ever came out what really happened”, caught himself and shut the hell up.
Then the gubmnt made up this B.S. story of a “FUEL LEAK”.
Government lies and more lies.
Have some coffee, Mr. Cashill.
The Clinton and Obama Administrations are thematically indistinguishable at this point, and the amount of personnel overlap in national-security and policymaking organs is conspicuous and high-level.
If the Clinton Administration suppressed a successful terrorist missile attack in U.S. airspace for political reasons in 1996, that policy will continue today, for the same reasons. There will be no recensions and no recanting the old policies.
read later
Forensics don't lie. The forensics of the airplane showed
*no explosive material of the type associated with any known warhead, and certainly not on any "Stinger" type missile.
*This was explained away in "First Strike" as the (what I will call) "attack" missile didn't explode---it "passed through." This would be more unusual than electric static charge, more about which I will comment in a moment.
*Since Saunders had no explosive residue, he then focused on the infamous "red residue" that he claimed could be evidence of a "pass through" missile---i.e., one that didn't explode but simply passed through the airplane. Problem: this also would not cause the explosion. Saunders then hypothesized that such a missile wasn't the "attack" missile, but now changed his story to claim it was an off-course drone from a Navy exercise being chased by an "attack" missile. Ok, so now we have TWO missiles, neither of which showed up on ANY radar screen anywhere.
I have yet to find any military person who thinks a Stinger, given the range, altitude, and distance, could have reached TWA 800. It was at the very, very extreme end of a Stinger IF . . . IF . . . the shooter was perfectly situated underneath TWA 800. But then see problem #1: no explosive residue.
The so-called red residue of a pass through missile was explained by other chemical reactions, and for such a pass through missile to have been the culprit, it would have left massive, other consistent signatures everywhere---in hull entry, throughout every piece of recovered (compromised) material. No such evidence was ever found.
No radar has ever detected missile evidence; the Navy staunchly denied ever conducting tests, and no Navy person has ever once broken with that denial.
As to the static electricity, this was reproduced on the show "Mythbusters" a few years ago. They achieved a fuel tank explosion under similar (not exact) conditions that to them was stunning in the violence of the explosion. It literally blew their test article apart.
As a former race track firefighter, I can tell you that sealed fuel tanks, even partially filled ones, even heated ones, *DO NOT* explode from internal ignition. We used to demonstrate the fact during noob training by dropping a lit match down the gas tank filler tube of a wrecked passenger car. The fumes at the mouth of the tube flared, and then the match went out.
Once you understand the explosive limits and flammable limits of various fuels, you’ll KNOW the TWA 800 explanation is just absurd.
Just to make you think a bit ... *IF* TWA 800 was hit center mass by a missile, it was probably radar-guided, not IR, like a ‘Stinger’. THAT implies a level of sophistication not usually associated with your garden variety Achmed-the-jihadist level of terrorist. So, who was on that airplane that needed ‘dying’? So much so that serious SAM technology needed to make certain it worked. An IR-guided SAM might have only hit an outboard engine, or even missed all together, considering the altitude and the frontal aspect ratio of the shot. A 747 is a sturdy bird. I personally doubt a ‘Stinger’ or similar would have been able to cause what happened to TWA 800.
In May 1991 a Lauda Air 767 tore itself apart over Thailand. The cause was identified as a sudden deployment of the thrust reverser on the number 1 engine. That had never occurred before and it hasn't happened since. Airliners are carefully designed, manufactured, and maintained. But nothing is 100% guaranteed. On rare occasions failures happen. They seldom happen again because the cause is identified and corrective actions implemented.
ping for later
I thought the conclusion explored in the “Seconds from Disaster” flight 800 episode was accepted and confirmed by all involved. If there really are still questions about this disaster it would be fascinating to discover what was actually behind it.
I don’t believe it was a missile strike as the wreckage did not support this conclusion. I suppose it is possible that the evidence was tampered with or suppressed, though I can’t imagine why anyone would do that. What benefit would there be?
If there were shenanigans involved with the loss of this aircraft, they would almost have to be on the level of this analysis:
http://www.geocities.com/electrogravitics/bm-800.html
http://www.geocities.com/electrogravitics/bm-comp.html