Skip to comments.Why Congress Must Reopen the TWA 800 Investigation
Posted on 07/07/2014 4:22:18 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
On July 2, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) announced that it would not reopen the investigation into the destruction of TWA 800. This was the Boeing 747 that was blown out of the sky ten miles south of the Long Island coast on July 17, 1996, killing all 230 people on board.
The TWA 800 Project, a team of former aviation investigators and scientists, had petitioned the NTSB to examine evidence that pointed toward a missile strike on the airline. Not surprisingly, the NTSB, which had invested four years of resources to prove some other theory, any other theory, chose to stick to its original findings that flammable fuel/air vapors somehow caused the explosion.
Books have been written on this subject I co-authored one of them with James Sanders, First Strike so readers can access the body of evidence for a missile strike on their own. An excellent point of entry is the documentary produced last year by the TWA 800 Project, simply called TWA Flight 800 and now available via streaming on Netflix.
One of the six whistleblowers profiled in that documentary deserves special attention. His name is Hank Hughes. At the time of the explosion, he was a senior accident investigator for the NTSB and was a member of the Go-Team that headed immediately to the crash site.
Hughes was responsible for determining whether or not any proposed scenario for the cause of the crash was consistent with the damage to the airplane interior. So disturbed was Hughes by what he calls an egregiously conducted investigation that he attached a detailed affidavit to the TWA 800 Projects petition to re-open the investigation. What follows is a summary of that affidavit.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Gorelick's book "Destruction of Evidence"
On Aug. 22, 1996, just before the Democratic National Convention,
Ms. Gorelick oversaw a critical Justice Department meeting with the FBI.
Immediately after this meeting, as it happened,
all serious inquiry into the fate of TWA 800 came to an end.
From the article:
During the course of my 42-year career as an investigator, Hughes concludes, the investigation of TWA Flight 800 was the only case in which I witnessed deception, lies and corruption on the parts of investigators and their management. The extraordinary measures to which the NTSB, FBI and CIA went to falsify and distort witness statements or accounts of what occurred, to alter and hide physical evidence and to mount a false public relations campaign to misinform the public, was unconscionable.
There is so much they are hiding.
We’d go into shock if we knew how many times our government has contrived to totally deceive us and hide the truth - not only about things like TWA 800 and Okla City, but thousands of other things - most that we never hear of.
Of course, it’s for our own good.
And to prevent total panic and rebellion among the populace......
Is there a mustache in Mexico? Clinton corrupts everything he touches. Ditto the Democrat Party.
We have to investigate the possibility that the terrorists got their hands on the 9K33 Osa (Russian for wasp) SAM system, better known by the NATO code name SA-8 Gecko. It is possible that the terrorists jury-rigged the hardware--including the tracking and guidance radar and a single launcher in a "launch box"--so it fits in a small boat? Because the 9M33 missile used in the 9K33 SAM system is effective up to 12,000 meters (39,000 feet) altitude, such a setup could easily bring down TWA Flight 800 flying at 13,500 feet.
Due to the size of the warhead on the 9M33 missile (16 kilograms or 35.25 pounds), if such a missile impacted TWA Flight 800, the tremendous force of the explosion could explain why the fuselage was ripped in two almost immediately.
I think the worst case scenario is that the US Navy shot down the plane. I really doubt that terrorist brought down this plane.
The Oklahoma City Bombing and TWA 800 were terrorist strikes against the US - and Clinton didn’t want to get involved in a war again with the Middle East, even though they were at war with us, and decided to bury it or blame it on something else...
Clinton is a coward and non-patriot to the US - and so is his alcoholic wife!
...and we wonder why terrorist strikes increased and culminated on 9/11...all thanks to “drop my pants Bill” Clinton...
From 2000-2008, no Clinton in the WH, and no Obama.
So why no investigation then?
I’m not arguing against this piece. I think it is correct. TWA 800 should be re-investigated.
What I’m saying is, if there was a cover-up, why was there no un-cover-up during 2000-2008?
There are only 3 possible answers:
1. There was no cover-up and this is all conspiracy-theory fantasy.
2. Bush was as stupid as the liberals say he was.
3. Bush was as evil as some conservatives contend he was.
I know I’m going to get flamed for this, but seriously, if there are big questions about what the government did in 1996 under Clinton, then those questions only get bigger if left completely unanswered or even unasked under Bush.
I live near the catastrophe. 100s of my Long Island neighbors witnessed it. Kennedy presidential press secretary Pierre Salinger had first hand knowledge from French secret services that the plane was shot down. Whether by terrorist or by a government accidental missile firing, a projectile brought it down.
This is a Klinton Koverup. And Jim Kallstom be damned
There were dozens of reliable witnesses to what appears to be a missile rising up towards TWA 800.
One other factor for me in this was the single-minded focus of the government investigation and prosecution of the first attack on the the World Trade Center. That is that very early on, it was determined to treat it as a “crime” rather than the act of Islamic war that it was.
For me, TWA 800 shared that similarity. It has all the hallmarks of “conclusion first”, and an investigation that was only allowed to support that conclusion. That conclusion was driven not be justice or attention to national defense or to finding truth, but by the need to protect the “optics” of the Clinton presidency.
Seeing the willingness of the federal investigative and enforcement apparatus to comply with such intrusion into fact-finding is just yet one more proof how corrupted they and their running dog lackies in the media are. Compare the treatment of the few TWA 800 whistleblowers by the media with the media’s treatment of Edward Snowden. Makes me sick.
I think Bush was just a little bit busy from 2000-2008 with a little thing called 9-11 and a couple of wars.
The day this happened F.B.I. agent in charge Kalstrom stated on national T.V. while being interviewed said, “If the public knew what really happened here”.
Caught himself then changed the subject.
Next day he was spouting the party line of lies and bull shit.
The F.B.I. lies, big gubmint LIES.
Are the missing Libyan SAMs similar?
If yes, that would explain why the NTSB would like to draw as little attention as possible to the issue.
This cover-up is the the same modus operandi as Benghazi.
As soon as you saw the CIA involved in the investigation you knew something highly unusual was going on. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of the CIA having such open involvement in an airline mishap.
Also, not one member of the Clinton Administration was prosecuted for the crimes they committed while a member of the Clinton Administration. That was when I accepted the fact that the republicans and Democrats were cut from the same bolt of cloth and were in cahoots.
If your theory is correct, then these incidents would be occurring with such boring regularity — all over the world, mind you — that the airline industry would cease to exist.
The problem is that the incident doesn’t make any sense from a logistical standpoint. If you’re a terrorist and you’re looking to shoot down a flight out of JFK Airport in New York City, that’s hardly the place you’d want to do it. For one thing, it’s much easier to do it from a location further west — much closer to the airport. Secondly, shooting down a passenger jet thousands of feet in the air is too easy to cover up and dismiss as an “accident.”
Same M.O. as Benghazi — just before a presidential election. In this case, there would be be no airline terrorism on Bubba’s watch...
Recent events in the Cochran election should answer your questions. The GOP has been as evil and corrupted as the dems for a long time.
“it was most likely an errant missile fired by a U.S. naval vessel (or a naval vessel of another NATO country, which would offer a stronger explanation about the need to cover it up) conducting exercises off the south shore of Long Island that night.
Seeing how long ago it was, many sailors would have retired or left by now. It seems like someone would have either leaked info or come forward.
That’s kind of what like Al Gore said, that the US can only do one thing at a time.
The fact is, as president, Bush presided over a large number of people, many of whom at the time to look into this, had they been so directed to do so.
They were not. Why not? I think it’s a valid question.
Samtheman raises an interesting point. The Bush administration had 8 months before 9-11 happened, and did nothing. And since 9-11 was a terrorist act, flight 800 should have been a top priority
I think Bush simply chose to look the other way and accept the Clinton administration finding
The first question to ask is: Do you believe the official government explanation? If not, then the second question is: What really happened?
I wonder if they were actually after that particular flight. I read once that it was not TWA 800 that was supposed to be flying at that particular moment, but an El Al flight to Israel. Because of the usual airport delays, it lost its place in the line-up and the TWA flight left at the time the El Al flight was supposed to leave. The El Al flight left behind it.
I don’t know how accurate this is, but I guess it would be easy enough to check.
In that case, it would have been Muslim terrorists attacking an Israeli plane in a way that they couldn’t do in or near Israel, which has much tighter security both in and around its airports than we do.
I believe there is virtually zero chance it was the navy, anyone’s navy. What are the chances of hundreds of men on the ship keeping quiet about something like that? Zip. I also know the navy was forbidden from locking guidance radar on civilian aircraft. They could track then, sure. But no missile guidance, period. Without it, no intercept.
or 4} Bush did not want to open that can of worms since it would have pointed to the navy and naval operations which he was CiC of and in need of for his WoT post 911.
Bush and Clinton worked for the same people.
Bump for later. Will post a more detailed response, but just one thing to consider: It’s not as if the U.S. Navy has never accidentally shot down a civilian aircraft, right?
I highly recommend the James Sanders book “The Downing of Flight 800”. The cover up of what happened to this plane is a classic Clinton political operation, and it is quite similar to Benghazi.
Sanders provides plenty of evidence that this was an accidental shooting during the testing of a new missile defense system. In addition to Bill Clinton’s re-election there was a great deal of military-industrial complex money at stake.
The lack of action from W. Bush’s administration speaks for itself.
What’s most disturbing about Sanders book is how easily the government was able to disseminate ridiculous theories about static electricity and exploding gas-tanks with the help of a compliant media.
Have you heard the term "not on my watch"?
That's the response from the Senator conducting the Senate trial, I believe, used when he was questioned about the removal of the President from office after the House impeachment of Bill Clinton.
Nobody wanted to be part of that.
In today's political reality, almost nobody wants to be associated with the impeachment of America's first black president.
Does anyone here really think with the current admin. that if this case were reopened by Congress it would get a fair and thorough investigation?
Concur. The same thing goes with a coverup by the FBI. I had a friend who was in the New York field office at the time and was pulled to work that case. He doesn’t believe in a coverup because the vast number of agents involved and that agents are predisposed to find criminal intent. The old adage of if you have a hammer everything looks like a nail is a good metaphor for this situation. FBI agents’ careers can be entirely based upon being involved in one big case. This would have been it.
It was a cover-up by comrade klinton and we can't even get Boehner out of the bars long enough to face the current problems, so there's no chance they'll bring up something this old. Besides The Weeper doesn't want to join the others on Bubba's "kill list".
When you situate a Navy missile test range along a Commercial flight corridor, bad things happen.
They didn’t want to deal with the specter of an accidental Military shoot down.
Everything indicates the OKC bombing was in fact domestic terrorist.
All evidence indicates the Clinton adm. knew about the bombing probably up to a year in advance, began making preparations for the bombing, and put out false info to try and make it appear as if the “right wing extremist” had teamed up with a foreign govt, Iraq, to wage war against the US.
If Clinton had been successful in tying the “right wing extremist” to a foreign govt to wage war against the US, Clinton would have had the wet dream of the left, absolute power.
Clinton failed in his attempt.
The attempted car bombing in NYC in 2010, which the Obama adm. began making preparations for in 2009 and then tried to pin on the TEA Party, was a repeat of this strategy.
Had the Obama adm. been successful in pinning that attempted bombing on the TEA Party, Obama would have had pretty much absolute power.
Obama failed in his attempt.
One common denominator in the preparation phase of the two bombings is Hillary Clinton.
Another common denominator to the 2 bombings, both follow the Weather Underground playbook.
Or maybe because it's a 20 year old case?
My uncle was a mechanic for TWA, at the time, working at Kennedy. He has pretty much confirmed everything in this article....massive coverup.
And I think the Navy knows that. That's why the nearest Navy missile test range at the time was near Puerto Rico.
I have it on good authority that the Navy was in fact test firing in that area at that time.
If you're a terrorist looking to down a flight then why are you using a missile to begin with? What if you miss? In the pre-911 days it would have been easier to smuggle a bomb on board in the luggage that could have been set to take the plane down at any time. And your chances of success are much higher than shooting off a missile.
I think new presidents get briefed on what is REALLY happening ... (like ‘the football’ and stuff like that) and they find themselves with a threat .. “If you EVER say a word ... “
Good authority from whom? Pierre Salinger? In order to accept that one would have to presume that the Navy was so God awfully stupid as to shoot missiles into one of the most heavily trafficked air corridor in the entire world. What possible reason would they have had to do that?