Posted on 07/19/2013 7:42:27 PM PDT by LSUfan
When the final official explanation of the cause of TWA 800′s destruction came out, like most Americans, I accepted it and had no reason to be skeptical, largely because I wasn’t paying particularly close attention.
The new documentary, simply titled TWA Flight 800, combined with another excellent documentary released in 2001 (see below), has made me think twice.
The reason this latest documentary is credible and so newsworthy is because members of the original investigation team have come forward to call for re-opening the investigation.
Recent FOIA requests have revealed a few confusing details that were previously unknown as well.
It is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that our Jihadist enemies, who we know were armed with Stinger missiles at the time, attacked us in July 1996, 5 years before 9/11. I’m not ready to declare that to be the case, but there are enough troublesome holes in the official explanation of the destruction of TWA 800 to warrant a more thorough, independent analysis.
Rather than use the FBI, CIA, NTSB and FAA to conduct the investigation, I believe that the investigation should be conducted under the auspices of NASA and the Department of Defense, with a blue ribbon panel of investigators from both the public and private sector. In other words, I believe TWA 800 warrants an independent commission similar to the 9/11 Commission in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks.
Here are a few questions and suspicious items that remain:
(Excerpt) Read more at terrortrendsbulletin.com ...
Had a coworker who’s FIL was an FAA investigator on TWA 800. Obviously the FIL couldn’t speak because of classifications, but his statement was = it wasn’t a wiring harness.
And then folks (like you?) come along and basically say, "That's crazy talk! Your government would never lie to you! If the official government report says this is what happened, then gosh darn it, this is what happened."
I don't consider myself especially conspiracy minded. But, again, my basic position is: "I don't trust my government."
So, no? 9/11 inside job, Boston bombing was fake, JFK, Chemtrails, Reptoids, it’s all gospel?
I agree the Navy story is full of wholes, as a former squidly I can tell you for sure there is absolutely no way they could have kept that quiet. But the centerline fuel tank story is equally bogus.
My bet is a Jihadi MANPAD.
Excellent points.
If I say "I don't trust the government" it is not equivalent to saying, "I believe absolutely everything anyone ever says about anything -- except when the government says it."
Big difference. I consider myself cautious and not gullible. If I have a suspicion about TWA 800, I may be wrong, and there may be nothing "there". But merely being cautious about such things does not require me to believe any cockamammy story.
I’ve read the NTSB reports and the engineering reports. As I said before, every so often this is brought up by people who need something in their lives. We could chat about the JFK assassination in Dallas and the third bullet. That’s a goodie.
TWA 800 was shot down by George Zimmerman because there were black people on board.
Did you ever bother reading the engineering report by Boeing? They did their level best to say “You’re completely full of sh!t” but in a very technical way so as not to raise too many eyebrows. The basic fact is that the low voltage fuel sensors in the tank (note, the pumps are OUTSIDE the tank) do not have enough energy in the circuit to create a spark even if a short occurred. That’s ON PURPOSE, because it was DESIGNED to make it impossible to cause a spark in the fuel tank. Anyone ever hear of ENGINEERING? All the talk about a spark due to static electricity or hobgoblins or George Bush/Zimmerman or anything else are a diversion for the stupid sheeple.
If there had been a real problem, Boeing would have been sued into oblivion.
Once upon a time I worked as a fueler for commercial jets. It takes a hell of a lot more than a spark to ignite a full tank of Kero.
any relation to _Jim?
Most likely a terrorist shoot-down. Read Jack Cashill’s book before you yawn with those who go on about “aliens.”
Every time I hear someone like you compare all “wacky conspiracy theories” and lump them together whilst belittling an inquisitive, open mind, I am reminded all the more of what useful, self-policing sheep our benevolent government overlords have groomed us to be.
This “accident” was also just prior to the Olympics in Atlanta. I’m thinking it wouldn’t have been good for business to have just had a 747 shot down off the coast. Demonizing someone who considers the possibility of a conspiracy is a weak argument. Why were witnesses not interviewed? Why did various agencies lie? Why did the CIA create a cartoon of something that anyone with a grain of knowledge of physics or aeronautics would know to be false? I’ve talked to a TWA employee who worked in the reconstruction hanger and all he would say was “we screwed up that day”, while denying the center tank explosion myth.
The problem with the witnessess statements is that they “saw” a missile, but none admitted seeing a much larger 747.
“The problem with the witnessess statements is that they “saw” a missile, but none admitted seeing a much larger 747.”
That’s false.
Plenty of witnesses report seeing the airliner.
One woman (in this documentary) explains how the missile went up, swerved toward TWA 800, then exploded “right next to” the aircraft without actually crashing into it (proximity detonation).
Watch the brand-new TWA 800 documentary (released yesterday) to hear the witnesses tell it:
http://www.epixhd.com/twa-flight-800/#play
They should just engineer planes to never crash.
Not at all true.
Funny thing,
Right as this happened The FBI special agent in charge James Kalstrom, I think, in an interview said, “if the public knew what really went down here”. Caught himself and shut the hell up.
Next day he was towing the party line about not knowing.
This gub mint if full of lies and crappola.
As I recall, at the time there was no SA manpad capable of reaching the altitude (9,000-10,000 ft) 800 was at when it exploded. But ... there was a photo published of a stationary missile launcher found by a NYC cop - but nothing more was said other than it appeared to be of Iranian manufacture.
The only missiles then existent able to reach 800 were all fixed stationary mil varieties which is why people were looking at the US Navy.
There was also the contrary explanation that experienced former mil pilots who saw the hit, actually saw burning pieces of the plane coming down and somehow mistook those for a missile going up ...
The description of a missile exploding near the plane would have meant that the type of missile had to be either radar or heat guided with a proximity fuse - this limits the available types of missiles to chose from.
And lets not omit that Iran declared war on the US in 79.
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.