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 ...
+1
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.And yet, regardless, the same jackasses who wound up 9/11 Truthers also carried water for jihad back at that time, claiming that US armed forces shot down the plane -- what a weird coincidence.
Ah, nice little Alinsky method there. Good for you.
Right there you loose. When you belittle the person you’re debating you’ve lost the argument because you can’t support your argument with facts. Nice chatting.
It's always a government conspiracy when people don't get the answers they want or expect. Nice chatting.
Is it aerodynamically possible for an aircraft to have its front 1/3 blown off, but continue to climb for another 3200 ft in the manner illustrated in the CIA animation? Why would the CIA deliberately misrepresent that?
I accepted it and had no reason to be skeptical
We used to call this STUPID.
Not sure what you mean. Initial inertia of the climb force would naturally propel the plane up esp. since it still had its wings. This film could just have been speculation on the CIA’s part - I’ve read some of the conspiracy authors blogs and they ask more questions than they answer. Again as I said, this disaster comes up every couple of years or so. Why hasn’t the media jumped on it? The plane was 25 years old at the time it went down in 1996 seventeen years ago. If it was such a government coverup and the MSM feeds on that stuff, why no “in-depth” reporting and investigation?
It still had wings, but its center of gravity just shifted backwards dramatically. You can have wings but not fly. It certainly wouldn't have proceeded in the straight-line flight that the ridiculous CIA animation showed - the purpose of which was to discredit the 100+ witness who saw something streaking towards the aircraft. The gov't knew that animation was total b.s. when they made it, so why did they do it?
To accept that you have to believe that the U.S. Navy is so incredibly stupid that they would see nothing wrong with shooting a missile into the most heavily travelled air corridor in the world. What possible reason would they have for doing that?
That streaking was caused by the fuel streaming from the tanks being ignited by the engines from the back of the stream towards the plane giving the impression that a missile was streaking to the plane. Missiles have a white tail not a reddish one as produced by jet fuel. The streak that was reported was red.
I don't recall all the DC-10s being grounded after any of their loses, and those have involved engines and cargo doors and who-the-heck-knows in the case of the Swissair crash. In 1991 a Lauda 767 broke up in mid-air when the reverse thruster on one engine deployed, and there wasn't a fleet-wide grounding. In all those cases there were FAA fixes and advisories, as there was after the TWA crash.
I was here when this was debated after the event. There were flame wars and many Freepers defending the government. Some Freepers were banded trying to tell the truth. It is like today when people on this site try and tell us Michael Hastings died at his own hand. The government has people that will cover up and kill.
FYI,the Audubon Society is requesting that if any “banded Freepers” are spotted, that they be informed as to location and time of spotting. Banded Freepers can be identified because the bands are marked “FUBO.”
Your information is incorrect. The late model Soviet MANPADS, as well as the Stinger, all had ceilings capable of reaching TWA 800.
BTW, the Stinger’s ceiling is 26,000 feet.
I’ve never heard this theory of yours before, but so far I’m not buying it. How could fuel leaking from the fuselage possibly be ignited by the exhaust from the engines (on the wings) when they couldn’t mix until some distance behind the plane? Especially when you consider that planes routinely and intentionally dump fuel into that same exhaust stream when they need to.
I’m also not buying the idea that a Navy missile, ours or somebody else’s, brought down TWA 800. There are simply too many people that would have to keep that secret. I think we’ve seen how really impossible it is for even small numbers of people to keep secrets.
However... The terrorist cover-up idea requires far fewer people to be in on it. Keeping it secret would be a remarkable accomplishment, but it’s down into the dozens of people instead of thousands. It’s unlikely but not impossible. It’s an interesting concept— deny the terrorists credit and take away their prize... but it requires the cover-up lasting over time, and it is only possible in a few cases.
Maybe it was a terrorist missile, of whatever type is necessary to work at that altitude and distance. A smallish vessel could easily carry a pretty big missile system. It might have been an onboard bomb as well, though that doesn’t explain the missile sightings any better than the FBI’s already ludicrous explanation. I guess it would be fascinating to someday find out that it was something like a terrorist missile. It will make a heck of a movie.
Well again witnesses saw a red streak not a white one from a rocket. Jet fuel burns red.
Yours is the first time I’ve heard of red streaks.
That is what witnesses reported. A red streak heading towards the plane.
Review of the Official TWA Flight 800 Witness ... Reported Origin of Streak: ... she observed a ‘red streak’ moving up from the ground toward the aircraft at an ...http://flight800.org/witness-review.htm
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.