Why Congress Must Reopen the TWA 800 Investigation

The American Thinker ^ | 7-7-14 | Jack Cashill

[diogenes ghost]

"I am a retired airline mechanic...I can say with 100% confidence the 'center fuel tank explosion' is ...pure bullshit."

As I am a retired ATCS with direct experience in airborne fuel tank explosions, with the requisite bodies, I can assure you that YOU are full of BS.

[Soul of the South]

“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.”

George H.W. Bush and wife Barbara pal around with the Clintons. Despite all of the nasty things Barack Obama said about his son George W., the senior Bush goes out of his way to show respect to Obama:

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Bush-greets-Obama-at-Houston-airport-5389200.php

Jeb Bush, George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama had a meeting at the White House in 2012 that wasn’t on Obama’s calendar and wasn’t publicized until after the fact.

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/01/obama-hosts-george-hw-and-jeb-bush-at-white-house-112638.html

The elites stick together.

[sport]

May I amend my response # 20 to you to read “Are in cahoots”?

[M Kehoe]

Bttt.

5.56mm

[G Larry]

Source: Active Duty Navy - verbal

Was supposed to have been an inert round.
Propulsion w no HE.

I’m a former 463 from the days of SAC, and insisted there was no way those live nukes could have made it from N. Dakota to Barksdale, unnoticed....but they did.

Much has changed from the days of Military discipline.

[wrench]

ATSC? What FAA certs does that cover?

Please name just ONE transport cat aircraft that exploded after take off due to the APU running on a tarmac in summer temps.

Hint: the answer is NONE, otherwise there wouls be NO airline departures in summer months in daylight hours.

Nice disinfo attempt.....

[Sicvee]

I could never figure out why Boeing would roll over for the fuel tank explosion theory, since then they would be liable. Of course billions in defense contracts would be at stake. Who paid the liability judgements? Boeing or a quid pro quo from the Treasury?

[Lower Deck]

Source: Active Duty Navy - verbal

Yes, well I heard a lot of fantastic stories when I was in the military as well.

Was supposed to have been an inert round.
Propulsion w no HE.

Oh and that makes it all better? Fire an inert missile into an civilian air traffic and what could possibly go wrong? </sarcasm>

You are still saying that the U.S. Navy used civilian air traffic for target practice. What possible reason could they have had for that?

[G Larry]

“You are still saying....”

Oh, really?

Where did I say that?

TWA 800 was NOT “targetted”, it was an accident.

And, this was NOT a “fantastic story”.

[JimRed]

...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. But there was not a single God fearing, Christian sailor aboard or in a staff position directing the operation who would have exposed the lies?

[JimRed]

...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.

But there was not a single God fearing, Christian sailor aboard or in a staff position directing the operation who would have exposed the lies?

Repaired.

[morphing libertarian]

Senator Sheets Byrd BEFORE the senate hearing on removal of the president. “These may rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors, but I’ll not vote to remove.”

[Lower Deck]

TWA 800 was NOT “targetted”, it was an accident.

Firing missiles anywhere near civilian air traffic is not an accident, it's criminal stupidity. Something the U.S. military is not known for, at least not to that extent. What possible reason could they have for doing so?

And, this was NOT a “fantastic story”.

Depends on your point of view I guess.

[Lower Deck]

There was a pretty thorough analysis of TWA Flight 800 done on FreeRepublic a while back. The strongest case was made to support the theory that IF the aircraft was brought down by a missile, 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.

Missiles do not go off by accident, and the U.S. military is not in the habit of conducting live fire exercises anywhere near civilian air or sea traffic. And when they do conduct those kinds of exercises the file notices to airmen far in advance warning that the exercises are occuring and where.

[I cannot think of a name]

A late reply but I got tied up.

The entire anti missile system as well as previous trials is explained in “The Downing of TWA Flight 800.” It is also mentioned, although not in as much detail, in “TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America” by Cashill and Sanders. The former book is more readable, but I really like the second one better because it has an 18 page note listing and virtually everything in the book is sourced back to an origin.

There are actually two aspects to this story: What happened, and the cover up. What happened can still be debated, but the documented evidence of the cover-up that took place is completely damming.

[Lower Deck]

The entire anti missile system as well as previous trials is explained in “The Downing of TWA Flight 800.” It is also mentioned, although not in as much detail, in “TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America” by Cashill and Sanders. The former book is more readable, but I really like the second one better because it has an 18 page note listing and virtually everything in the book is sourced back to an origin.

I'm not interested in tracking down either book and spending the time reading it. How about a quick synopsis of the missile system in question?

There are actually two aspects to this story: What happened, and the cover up. What happened can still be debated, but the documented evidence of the cover-up that took place is completely damming.

I get their version of what happened - the military missile system shot it down. As for coverup, there are probably hundreds of versions of that.

[I cannot think of a name]

“I get their version of what happened - the military missile system shot it down.”

When I get home tonight I’ll did out the book and recap it for you. And NO their version of this is NOT that a military missile shot it down. Their version is that the military missile shot down a terrorist fired missile, but the intercept occurred too close to the plane and fragments blew it up. And intercepts taking place too late and fragments hitting the target, while improved, is still a problem with every missile defense system today.

And this was all kept secret because a military weapon knocked out the terrorist weapon just a little late? NO. It was kept secret because the Clintoon administration had ample warning and failed to take any action. There should have been nothing for the military to shoot at in the first place.

[Alberta's Child]

This thread, and my thoughts on the subject, were starting to look vaguely familiar, so I did some research and found another thread from more than ten years ago that has a lot of information. My Post #33 at the link below contains everything I'd post here today in response to a lot of these comments:

Click Here

[Alberta's Child]

The story as I understand it is that the missile test involved an advanced missile that was designed to track down its target using the target aircraft's radio transmissions, not its heat signature. This would explain why it's actually necessary to test the effectiveness of the weapon close to a major metropolitan area where there is a lot of background "radio noise" that would have to be overcome in order for the weapon to work effectively.

[Lower Deck]

When I get home tonight I’ll did out the book and recap it for you. And NO their version of this is NOT that a military missile shot it down. Their version is that the military missile shot down a terrorist fired missile, but the intercept occurred too close to the plane and fragments blew it up. And intercepts taking place too late and fragments hitting the target, while improved, is still a problem with every missile defense system today.

Thanks.