Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The ongoing dissent re: TWA Fl800
7/10/02 | John E. Fiorentino

Posted on 07/10/2002 7:35:52 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino

Secret FBI report refutes sworn testimony of William Tobin

A recently declassified FBI report appears to refute the sworn testimony of the FBI's former chief metallurgist assigned to the TWA800 crash case.

As disclosed in the recently declassified document (excerpts printed below) it appears William Tobin's testimony before the Senate during the Grassley hearings had little basis in fact.

Tobin testified that by September of 1996, approximately 4-6 weeks after his arrival on the case, there was a general consensus that there was "no bomb or missile damage" evident on the TWA wreckage. At the time frame indicated in Tobin's testimony, approximately one half of TWA800 was still at the bottom of the ocean.

The FBI's James Kallstrom, dismissed Tobin from the probe. Kallstrom believed Tobin's "conclusions" were hasty and unprofessional.

As evidenced by the once secret FBI report, it wasn't until November of 1996 that the FBI considered alternate investigative methods. This was two months after Tobin had already arrived at his conclusions. The report also states that even in November 1996, salvage efforts were still ongoing.

The document indicates that investigators had "little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash."

FBI, TWA Flight 800 Brookhaven National Laboratory Examinations. Declassified FBI Report, 1997. (excerpts)

"It became apparent by the end of November 1996, about four months into the FBI's criminal investigation, that no aircraft debris recovered to that time had clear indicia of a high explosive event, although evidence recovery (i.e., ocean trawling for aircraft debris) and subsequent examination by bomb technicians for such indicia was continuing. In the face of no "classic" explosive artifacts little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash of Trans World Airlines (TWA) Flight 800, FBI management decided that "... any investigative or scientific avenue that was reasonable and which could assist in providing a factual cause of the incident should and would be pursued."

The report goes on to say, that the initial metallurgical findings were reviewed, stating: A "cursory metallurgical peer review was conducted......" The report further states however, "No analysis or microscopic examinations were conducted." This would seem to indicate a review of the methodology used, and not a review of actual findings, as no further tests were performed.

Reproduced below, are excerpts from William Tobin's sworn testimony at the Grassley hearings.

Excerpts of FBI Metallurgist William Tobin’s testimony during the Grassley hearing.

GRASSLEY: Within 30 days of arriving at Calverton, what was your professional assessment of as to whether the cause of the crash was a bomb?

TOBIN: It progressed from an inclination of viewing the earmarks as possibly a bomb, but it changed rather quickly to confirmation within my mind that there was no indication of a bomb and unlikely to be that of a missile within the first 30 days.

GRASSLEY: At some point, did the bomb techs agree with yours and the NTSB's assessment that the cause of the crash was not a bomb?

TOBIN: Yes, Senator. I would estimate that probably four to six weeks -- after about four to six weeks, we were all unanimously or near unanimously on the same page. And all being the bomb techs, the National Transportation Safety Board and the metallurgy or the material science interests in the FBI laboratory. We were all unanimously -- we were united in our observations and conclusions that there was no bomb or missile damage evident on those aircraft parts.

GRASSLEY: The term four to six weeks brings you to what date on the calendar approximately? Just approximately.

TOBIN: My guess would be mid September, early to mid September.

It would appear that the FBI report and Tobin's testimony are at odds. This is just another glaring example of the inept and inconclusive investigation into one of the worst air disasters in history.

Copyright 2002, John E. Fiorentino -- All rights reserved. Distribution to wire services and recognized news media is allowed. No other use, distribution, or reproduction can be made without the express consent of the author.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 800; aviation; boeing; fbi; flight; investigation; news; twa; twa800list
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

1 posted on 07/10/2002 7:35:52 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: JohnFiorentino
One hundred fifty witnesses see a missile go up and destroy TWA 800 and the government is still stuck on saying it was an explosion in the fuel tank.

If 150 witnesses all say they saw the defendent in a murder case walk over and shoot the victim, it would be a short trial.

The Federal government has become a giant conspiracy, nothing more or less.

3 posted on 07/10/2002 7:53:29 AM PDT by NoLongerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLongerLurker
Come on. Obviously all of those witnesses were drunk or on dope. Didn't you see the CIA video that clearly showed how 800 was able to violate the laws of physics and continue to climb several thousand feet after the nose of the plane was blown-off by the exploding center wing tank? Who you gonna believe, your government, or hundreds of hallucinating eye-witnesses?
4 posted on 07/10/2002 8:01:38 AM PDT by MistrX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino; snopercod; JeanS; Squantos; harpseal
This case is not all that difficult.

The initial event was not the explosion of the center fuel tank; another impact affected the airframe prior to that explosion.

Missiles do not require "warheads" to alter airworthiness.

There are bombs which do not leave chemical particulates to be traced among shards of metal; nor do they have fuzes.

The federal government lied about the presence of U.S. military operations and ships in the area.

There are many kinds of missiles other than "shoulder-fired."

There are many, many locations from which a missile could have been fired.

Not a good idea to discuss more ... which would reveal more.

If the federal government says what really happened, then some secrets more valuable, 'tis their thinking, will be compromised; and they would prefer to not do that.

The exclamation that "so many people could not keep a secret(!)," is sometimes true and sometimes false.

5 posted on 07/10/2002 8:02:02 AM PDT by First_Salute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
TWA800_list:
To find all articles tagged or indexed using TWA800_list, click below:
  click here >>> TWA800_list <<< click here  
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)


6 posted on 07/10/2002 8:03:39 AM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *TWA800_list
Index Bump
7 posted on 07/10/2002 9:40:32 AM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NoLongerLurker
That would be significant if it were true, but it is not. If the "proof" of a missile is so clear, why do you feel the need to embellish the facts?
8 posted on 07/10/2002 10:00:15 AM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: First_Salute
If the federal government says what really happened, then some secrets more valuable, 'tis their thinking, will be compromised; and they would prefer to not do that.

In this case, as well as the Murrah Building, I think the reason was Clinton's unwillingness to confront Arab terrorists, and risk alienating them, for his on personal political purposes. Therefore, they didn't exist.

Whatever happened to the confident and determined FBI agent in charge who we saw on tv for the first two or three days assurring us that the case was about to be solved and the perps brought to justice? He disappeared like an apparition.

9 posted on 07/10/2002 10:03:49 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
In July 1996 TWA800 was shot down. Plain and simple. The question is who? shot it down. Kalstrum, F&BI, CIA, FAA and the gubmint go to hell.
10 posted on 07/10/2002 10:24:50 AM PDT by sandydipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
Any of you Waco/OKC/TWA 800 junkies know what the total expenditure is on the investigations, thus far? Oh, wait a minute. I forgot that you DON'T CARE!!!
11 posted on 07/10/2002 10:33:11 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Too many witnesses saw a missile streak heading UP towards that jetliner, to discount them all as "drunks" like FBI did would be a cover-up job!!
12 posted on 07/10/2002 10:35:19 AM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
Sorry fella.

There were simply too many witnesses to what happened, including military pilots who know what missiles and ordinance explosions look like.

I remember the Vietnam vet pilot of the ANG C-130 saying on TV the night of the accident that he had seen a missile go up and hit TWA 800. That ONE observation alone is enough for me. No embellishment. Pure fact.

Everything to the contrary is US Grade "A" DISINFORMATION.

13 posted on 07/10/2002 11:23:05 AM PDT by NoLongerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Any of you Waco/OKC/TWA 800 junkies know what the total expenditure is on the investigations, thus far? Oh, wait a minute. I forgot that you DON'T CARE!!!

Now excuse me for stating the obvious here but such an investigation of an attack on a US flag air carrier over domestic waters is a potential act of war which is one of the primary purposes of the federal government. I submit that an honest airing of the established facts would lead to identification of what missle was used and who fired it, The net result would be an even angrier American populace something that is dangerous to the Washington appartchiks.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

14 posted on 07/10/2002 11:50:35 AM PDT by harpseal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: harpseal
This is yet another Clinton scandal that has been swept under the rug! The truth will never be found no matter how many investigations are done, or how many millions are spent! In all three cases the critical evidence has been destroyed, and any witnesses that might have talked are dead!! You Waco/OKC/TWA 800 Junkies are wasting your time, and my tax dollars!!!
15 posted on 07/10/2002 1:25:46 PM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: timestax
"Too many witnesses saw a missile streak heading UP towards that jetliner, to discount them all as "drunks" like FBI did would be a cover-up job!!"

Agreed. They covered it up, and Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public bought it! You're flogging a dead horse!!

16 posted on 07/10/2002 1:29:04 PM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NoLongerLurker
Well, at least you are no longer claiming 150 witnesses saw "a missile go up and destroy TWA 800." Now if you can just produce one iota of proof that an ANG C-130 pilot said he saw a missile go up and hit TWA 800, I'll really be impressed. And since that is the ONE observation that has convinced you, you must have proof.
17 posted on 07/10/2002 1:43:19 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
You Waco/OKC/TWA 800 Junkies are wasting your time, and my tax dollars!!!

So let's just hide our heads in the sand and just pretend that it will all get better, is that your answer?

Center fuel tank my a**. The fact is that 100's of people in a civilian airplane were shot out of the sky while ascending through peaceful, well charted civilian airspace and nothing has been done about it by now and, it looks like, nothing ever will be done about it.

This is just another example of the government's choice to abdicate its role as protector of its citizens in favor of a role of protector to the well-connected few who are involved when stuff goes horribly wrong.

18 posted on 07/10/2002 1:43:56 PM PDT by ponyespresso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
The proof that I can give you is that I remeber that the ANG pilot's name from the c-130 was a Major Stratemeier or something very similar. Obviously I cannot show you the TV clip. It was less than a minute in length and I didn't record it. It was NEVER repeated, by the way.
19 posted on 07/10/2002 1:57:20 PM PDT by NoLongerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NoLongerLurker
Lurker No Longer:

There are certain people who continually demand PROOF of things who, no matter what evidence you present, will ALWAYS give you a reason why it will not suffice.

For example, you could show them a videotape of the actual event and they would tell you that it proves nothing because you cannot PROVE that it was not fabricated doctored etc etc. Similarly, you could show them laboratory spectrometer analysis of metal taken from the wreckage and they would argue that the results PROVE NOTHING because they could have been contaminated etc etc.

It is best to avoid the temptation to engage these posters in debate as they are likely paid to post these messages and will NEVER be satisfied.

20 posted on 07/10/2002 2:25:21 PM PDT by MickMan51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
"It would appear that the FBI report and Tobin's testimony are at odds. This is just another glaring example of the inept and inconclusive investigation into one of the worst air disasters in history."

In view of the fact that the FBI leadership DID belatedly agree with Tobin that there was NO physical evidence that Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb, why do you state in your title that it is an "ongoing dissent"?

FBI: No criminal evidence behind TWA 800 crash
November 18, 1997
NEW YORK (CNN) -- The FBI formally ended its 16-month investigation Tuesday into the crash of TWA flight 800, and agents said there was no evidence it was a criminal act. The probe now shifts to the National Transportation Safety Board, which plans to hold public hearings next month.

"No evidence has been found which would indicate that a criminal act was the cause of the tragedy of TWA flight 800," FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom told a news conference. "We do know one thing," Kallstrom said. "The law enforcement team has done everything humanly possible, has pursued every lead, has looked at every theory and has left no stone unturned." He said the cost of the FBI probe ranged from $14 million to $20 million.

The FBI's conclusion left mechanical failure -- not a bomb or missile -- as the most likely cause of the crash on July 17, 1996, when the Paris-bound Boeing 747 exploded in a fireball minutes after taking off from Kennedy International Airport, killing all 230 people on board.

It was the complaints of government experts about Kallstrom's unprofessional and "inept" conduct that led to the Grassley hearing.

ll May 1999 - FBI Probe of TWA Crash Criticized
Several federal officials told a Senate subcommittee yesterday that the FBI's role in the investigation of the crash of TWA Flight 800 was overbearing and at times inept. According to that testimony, the agency clung to the theory that a bomb or missile had downed the plane months after its own chief scientist on the case had reached the opposite conclusion.

The hearing before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on administrative oversight and the courts is the culmination of a two-year congressional review of the TWA investigation. Witnesses portrayed a probe riddled with sloppy investigative techniques and dominated by a powerful FBI agent-in-charge, who seemed determined to prove that the crash resulted from an act of terrorism.

"Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the subcommittee chairman and a frequent FBI critic, said the crash investigation was "a model of failure, not success." He described the bureau's leadership in the case as "a disaster," adding that the bureau hindered the investigation and "risked public safety" with its alleged attempt to suppress a report on the cause of the crash by another government agency. The Jan. 20, 1997, report by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms concluded that the plane crashed after a mechanical flaw ignited an explosion in its central fuel tank, a finding that became official and was endorsed by the FBI several months later. But Andrew Vita, ATF's assistant director of field operations, testified that when he sought to submit the report in March 1997 to the National Transportation Safety Board, he "met resistance" from the FBI."

Grassley has accused the FBI of suppressing important public safety information in an act that could have endangered airline travelers. That charge was vigorously denied yesterday by Lewis D. Schiliro, head of the FBI's New York office, who called it "ludicrous" and defended the TWA investigation as "professional, responsible and methodical." Schiliro produced an unsigned copy of a letter from his predecessor, James K. Kallstrom, apparently forwarding the report to the NTSB along with a complaint that it was "unsolicited and premature." But safety board officials have said they have found no record that they received the ATF report and Grassley said he remains convinced it was never sent. Kallstrom, who has retired from the FBI and is now a bank executive, was the dominant figure in the TWA investigation. He was also, according to yesterday's testimony, obsessed by the bomb or missile theory – a scenario that would have kept the case under FBI jurisdiction.

William A. Tobin, the FBI's former chief metallurgist, said that by September 1996, about six weeks after the crash, he and other scientists working on the case unanimously agreed that there was no evidence that the crash was caused by a bomb or missile. But Kall strom resisted this conclusion, Tobin said, once coming within six inches of Tobin's face as he "advised me in graphic terms that it was a bomb." "I ended up wearing several particles of his saliva," Tobin said.

The FBI's attitude was "not whether but when they would get evidence of a bomb," said Frank Zakar, the NTSB's former chief metallurgist. Asked about the FBI's treatment of ATF agents working on the case, Hank Hughes, a senior accident investigator for the safety board, replied: "Unkind is the best way I can put it." Hughes compiled a list of what he described as the FBI's missteps, which included mishandling of evidence and an unauthorized invitation by an agent on the case to a psychic to view the wreckage and render an opinion.

By the way, isn't it a fact that you do NOT support the "missile shootdown" notion?

Do you suspect that TWA Flight 800 may have been the victim of a suitcase bomb?

ALL the readers, particularly the "shootdown" tinfoil hats, would obviously like to know your answers to those questions.

FBI Chief Metallurgist Blows Whistle On Kallstrom's Wild Goose Chase
The "Missile Witnesses" Myth

21 posted on 07/10/2002 5:05:09 PM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLongerLurker
I'm not saying I doubt you saw what you describe, but it seems amazing to me that no trace of the video exists anywhere. With the infinite number of conspiracy sites dedicated to the whole TWA 800 issue, and the thousands of dollars made by folks like Reed Irvine publishing article after article about the incident, how is it that in the age of the VCR, there is no trace of all these sensational videos anywhere? Supposedly there is also video shown on CNN of a missile being launched at TWA 800. That too, has disappeared without a trace. What I can't figure out, is why news organizations who rely on sensational videos (how many times have you watched the punk in California get punched) would be willing to hide video of an incident that would put them at the top of the ratings race for decades.
22 posted on 07/10/2002 7:50:33 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MickMan51
Your post to lurker no longer was interesting. You are criticizing me for asking for proof, and ignore the fact that none has been given. I'm not going to apologize for not believing everything I read on the internet.

I would love to see a video of the actual event. Obviously, none exists. Amazingly, folks like you seem willing to believe such a video exists despite there being no evidence of it. And what exactly IS proven by a laboratory spectrometer analysis that draws no specific conclusions?

Your final assertion that people who dare to question poorly supported theories are paid to post those questions indicates you live in a world of paranoia worthy of medical study. Do you really think the government gives a damn about crackpot theories posted on FreeRepublic. 95% of the people who read FreeRepublic don't even give a damn about the crackpot theories posted here.

23 posted on 07/10/2002 8:06:17 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MickMan51
bttt
24 posted on 07/11/2002 7:51:17 AM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
Yeah, OK, sure, gotcha, the center fuel tank spontaneously exploded. Yeah, OK.

Hey, don't bogart that doobie, pass it over here

25 posted on 07/11/2002 8:58:12 AM PDT by MickMan51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MickMan51
If you are trying to persuade me otherwise, you're going to have to do a little better than that.
26 posted on 07/11/2002 9:54:00 AM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
William A. Tobin, the FBI's former chief metallurgist, said that by September 1996, about six weeks after the crash, he and other scientists working on the case unanimously agreed that there was no evidence that the crash was caused by a bomb or missile.

jf. response:......I know that is what Tobin testified Mr. Barr, we agree on that. In SEPTEMBER he had indeed, according to his sworn testimony arrived at his "conclusion." Unfortunately, the once secret FBI document re: the BNLabs report paints a very different picture. There is NO MENTION of a "conclusion" in SEPTEMBER. While Tobin may have arrived at his, it appears he didn't have anything approaching a "unanimous" agreement.

While he MAY have ended up wearing "particles of his saliva" (Kallstrom's)....he also got canned from the investigation, as he rightly should have been. Kallstrom thought his conclusions were premature, being as approx. 1/2 of the wreckage was still at the bottom of the Atlantic! I concur with that conclusion.

The OIG also stated that Tobin had exercised "poor judgment" in the LaFamilia case, (as just one example)...did they not?

As usual Barr, you FAIL to address the posting. You merely cut and paste Tobin's testimony (which by now, I believe I have memorized) ad nauseam. His testimony IS the point!

You answer no questions yourself, and yet you seem to be full of them. The only thing to be gleaned from your posts is that all who disagree with you are idiots! That my dear man is the sum and substance of your (dubious at best) contribution to the Fl800 investigation.
27 posted on 07/11/2002 10:41:17 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino; Tymesup; Swordmaker; acehai; All
The readers will note that your rant did not include your answers to the 3 simple questions you were asked.

1. In view of the fact that the FBI leadership DID belatedly agree with Tobin that there was NO physical evidence that Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb, why do you state in your title that it is an "ongoing dissent"?

But then you knew it is NOT and "ongoing dissent", didn't you, and that your real objective was to make another of your sleazy attacks on FBI whistleblower Tobin.

2. Isn't it a fact that you do NOT support the "missile shootdown" notion?

Here's just one example of what your paper trail discloses.

Yahoo TWA800 forum - April 12, 2002
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: Re: [twa800] Kabofovic revisited
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Most here are convinced a "missile" did the dirty deed. I'm not, not yet at least. The initial assessment was "bomb". I thought so to. I still do. [end quote]

Which, of course, also pertains to the 3rd question you dodged.

3. Do you suspect that TWA Flight 800 may have been the victim of a suitcase bomb?

Here's another tidbit from your paper trail on that subject.

Yahoo TWA800 forum
From: John Fiorentino - 28 May 2001
Subject: Seeking comments on this story
FBI questions crash victims' families about mysterious luggage tag
October 27, 1996 NEW YORK (CNN) -- Investigators probing the crash of TWA Flight 800 want to know more about a man named William Kabofovic, whose name was not on the passenger list but did turn up on a piece of luggage in the wreckage.

The FBI has been interviewing family members of the crash victims, asking if they recognize the name.

"I told them I never heard of him," said Richard Penzer, whose sister Judy died in the crash. Questioned by federal agents, Penzer said, "I assumed it had something to do with my sister. They never told me why they were interested in that person."

"They did not infer in any way that this man Kabofovic's bag was the reason the plane blew up. In fact, they suggested it may have been a bag borrowed by one of the TWA passengers," Aurelie Becker told CNN. Becker's daughter, Michelle, died in the crash. Becker said the FBI showed her a photograph of a badly mangled beige canvas bag with a leather shoulder strap and trim and asked whether she recognized it. "They didn't say where the blown up bag was located," said Mrs. Becker. "It was pretty well blown apart, but still recognizable as a bag." According to Mrs. Becker, FBI agents did not suggest that bomb had been in the bag, nor that the bag in the photograph was the one with Mr. Kabofovic's name on it. She said FBI agents asked a series of questions intended to rule out the possibility that a passenger might have been inadvertently part of a plot to destroy the plane. Among these were: did the passenger pack his or her own bags, did they carry a bag on board on behalf of someone else, did someone recently take out a life insurance policy in the name of the passenger, and did he or she have an ex-partner or spouse who would want to do them harm.

The FBI began interviewing family members after sending out a letter from FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom asking for assistance in the investigation.

[JF] Several people on the Flight 800 discussion forum know the background on my interest in this lead. Any comments are appreciated. John Fiorentino

You also conveniently omitted Tobin's testimony on that subject.

[excerpt],quote][emphasis added]TOBIN: I was ordered to, in a rather frenzied manner, to go conduct an exhaustive search in contact with my NTSB liaison, liaison capacity, to find a certain overhead bin that was characterized as in pristine condition.

But it was in a very emotional, very frenzied manner, so I inquired as to why I was looking for this particular pristine overhead bin on the port side of the aircraft, that was from the left-hand side of the aircraft. I was told that that was proof that NTSB was quote "squirreling away evidence" and stashing evidence, which again flies in the face of my interpretation of whose aircraft this was.

But, so I inquired as to why the pristine overhead bin was of such significance. I was told that that was demonstrative proof that they were squirreling away evidence. That the recovery had been captured on a video tape from the USS Grapple or the USS Grasp which-- one of the recovery ships. And on the videotape it showed this overhead bin being raised or set on the deck.

And I said, well I'm still missing some critical information, why is this important, why is this critical? To which I was advised that it had a suitcase, a badly charred and damaged suitcase inside the overhead bin. And my response at that point was, well I'm still missing some critical information. Why are we looking for this quote "pristine overhead bin"? Are you suggesting that there was a bomb in the suitcase that went off? Yes. Well that went off instantaneously brought down the 747 with no reporting on the FDR or CVR, flight data recorder or the cockpit voice recorder, and didn't put a scratch on the overhead bin. And I was told, yes, we want that overhead bin and I was continued -- told to go find that overhead bin. [end quote]

[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]GRASSLEY: This is my last question. Your observations or recommendations you might have of what went wrong with the system with regard to the flow of scientific information?>/font>

TOBIN: A major flaw that I do see in the system is that it's too easily ignored by the strategic decision makers. I think if you look at the Unabomb situation, the Richard Jewell Centennial Park Bombing, the TWA 800, the common thread is that the scientific flow of information is ignored when it doesn't support the prevailing theory.

GRASSLEY: You're a breath of fresh air, Mr. Tobin. You've been very helpful to us for not only appearing today but for our getting the necessary background that needs to be done to make this a valuable contribution to the process of constitutional oversight by the Congress.

I don't know how to thank you other then to say thank you. And obviously you set an example for a person who was trained to seek the truth, to work for an organization that is always supposed to seek the truth and let the truth determine guilt or innocence and I think you have lived up to that very well and in particularly you shine in this black hole of investigation that we had in regard of the TWA case. I thank you very much and I'll dismiss you at this point. [end quote]

Here's part of Tobin's bio.

On June 27, 1971, Mr. William A. Tobin was appointed a Special Agent for the FBI. Before joining the Bureau, Mr. Tobin served three years in the Marine Corps - two in active combat duty in the Republic of South Vietnam. While in the Marines he received the Bronze Star with Combat "V," two crosses of Gallantry and twenty additional military combat decorations. After joining the FBI he worked organized crime and police corruption in Chicago, and general crimes in Detroit. In September, 1974 Mr. Tobin was assigned as a forensic metallurgist in the FBI crime laboratory in Washington, D.C. In 1976 he was promoted to a Supervisory Special Agent and in 1986 became the civilian equivalent of the FBI's Chief Forensic Metallurgist.

In this position, Mr. Tobin was the leading expert, nationwide, in the law enforcement community on forensic metallurgy (i.e. the examination and analysis of material's deformation and damage).

Isn't this yours?

Author--Record Producer--Independent researcher & Paralegal Investigator. Author of forthcoming book on the assassination of President Kennedy.

Does James Kallstrom have ANY forensic metallugy experience?

Do you have ANY forensic metallurgy experience?

Do ANY of your "scientist friends" have ANY forensic metallurgy experience?

Yahoo TWA800 forum - 18 June 2001
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: The most likely scenario so far
From: John Fiorentino - 18 June 2001
Subject: The most likely scenario so far
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Just for s--ts and grins my son and I popped off a road flare and placed it close to the back of a discarded child car seat which had a foam backing to it. Left a reddish brown residue very similar to Sanders' swatch. Remember My scientist friend who thought the chem analysis resembled residue from a "flare?" [end quote]

By the way, doesn't your paper trail include your denial that you have ever reviewed The "Missile Witnesses" Myth in all the years it's been available on the internet? If not, perhaps you'd care to explain to the readers specifically step by step how you independently arrived at the conclusions you included in the following.

Yahoo TWA800 forum - 15 March 2002
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: Re: [twa800] A little sensitive, aren't we?
[excerpt][quote]
However, based on Meyer's statements, I don't believe he witnessed the IE. Fl. 800 didn't explode in a MF at 13000+, the MF was somewhere 7500-8500ft. Look at his timeline, Please explain, HOW he could have witnessed the IE? [end quote]

28 posted on 07/11/2002 5:22:15 PM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: NoLongerLurker
bump
29 posted on 07/11/2002 8:53:19 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
Barr, was Kallstrom Tobin's superior? (excerpts from the prepared statement of Lois D. Schiliro at the Grassley Hearings) "As I said earlier, we recognize the critical role of science in many of our investigations and we have a high degree of respect for the talents and insights provided by FBI scientists, who are among the finest forensic scientists in the world. They provide insight, direction and very often, the critical evidence necessary to bring a case to a logical and just conclusion. However, it is important for all of us involved in investigations to understand and respect our various roles. Ultimately, when there is disagreement on whether or how to proceed, the responsibility for the decision rests squarely on the shoulders of the investigators in charge of the case."
30 posted on 07/11/2002 10:06:14 PM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
Since the Kennedy assassination, I don't believe anything until the Government denies it.
31 posted on 07/12/2002 12:01:20 AM PDT by NoLongerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
You still haven't provided the readers with any evidence that Tobin's conduct was unprofessional, much less "inept". Instead, you imply that Tobin, who reacted to the disastrously unprofessional and inept conduct of James Kallstrom much the same way as Kathleen Crowley did when confronted with similarly unprofessional and inept conduct by other FBI officials prior to 9/11, should have kept his mouth shut.

10 May 1999
SENATOR GRASSLEY
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Today's hearing is the result of a 2-year review by the subcommittee into how Federal agencies handled the investigation of what caused the crash of TWA Flight 800. The subcommittee conducted dozens of interviews of professionals from various agencies who were either on the crash scene or were at high levels within the various headquarters of the various agencies.

A consensus emerged from the interviews, supported by documentary evidence, about the conduct of the investigation. The collective testimony from today's witnesses will leave a very clear picture of that conduct, and, of course, it is a troubling picture.

This investigation was run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. There is much doubt about whether the FBI had statutory authority as the lead agency. There will be more on that point later.

What the public knows about the crash and its cause is what they know through countless press conferences and leaks to the press. The public also has heard numerous conspiracy theories and myths or disinformation.

The purpose of this hearing is to provide a much more real picture of what happened and, hopefully, why it happened. The motivation for the subcommittee's efforts is to continue to help restore public confidence in Federal law enforcement. It is my intention to examine some very basic and systemic problems uncovered in this investigation.

The goal is to have a constructive dialogue with the FBI to ensure similar problems are not repeated in the future. No one will be fingered as a scapegoat. However, if the FBI says today that its problems are of the past and it is now fixed, I will not buy that, and I warn the public not to buy it, either. There is a whole lot more to be done before the root causes of the problem are fixed. It is a systemic cultural problem that transcends any simplistic fix.

I would like to give a word about today's witnesses, because it is not easy for them to be critical of questionable actions that they saw by FBI personnel. These witnesses will likely have to work with the FBI again, and the FBI is bigger and more powerful than their agencies. So there is an intimidation factor here.

But that is not why these witnesses are coming forward. They are coming forward because of what they saw and what they saw offended them, both from a law enforcement standpoint and from the standpoint of public safety. They are coming forward because they truly believe it will serve the public interest and will improve the way that we investigate future incidents. This is an honorable thing for these people to do. The subcommittee appreciates their testimony and I am confident that the public will, as well.

This is a story about how the world's preeminent law enforcement agency, at least in terms of image and expectation, sometimes acted like it did not even have a clue.

I believe that each and every FBI agent and employee who showed up on the scene of that tragic crash did the best job they could and had the best motives. The same goes for the employees of the other agencies and groups that worked so hard. Many volunteered to do that, and they sacrificed their time and their commitment to a greater and humanitarian good.

There was a basic problem, however. In my view, it was one of leadership. FBI leadership in the case of the TWA Flight 800 was a disaster.

The FBI says that its investigation in this case is a model for the future. The FBI believes that even now. I say that because of their testimony they submitted for this hearing. If the FBI still believes that after this hearing, then I think the American people should be very alarmed about whether or not the FBI gets the message, because this investigation, which by statute was supposed to be run by the NTSB but which was commandeered by the FBI, is a model of failure, not success. And anyone who doubts that is not confronting reality.

The testimony that we will hear today will describe three things. First, it will show how the FBI lacked the proper training to handle an investigation of this type and violated the most basic standards of forensic science in terms of collecting evidence, handling that evidence, and preserving the evidence.

It is the kind of thing that would make even rookie cops wince.

Second, we will try to understand the culture within the FBI that allows this sort of thing to happen. Why does the world's preeminent law enforcement agency make the kinds of mistakes that even rookies do not make?

And third, why is it that the FBI would try to prevent critical public safety information from getting to the proper authorities? [end quote]

32 posted on 07/12/2002 11:43:05 AM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
SECTION H12: TOBIN ALLEGATIONS

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/fbilab1/20sbtobi.htm
(excerpts)









I. Introduction





This section discusses certain issues that William Tobin, a metallurgist now working in the Materials Analysis Unit (MAU), has brought to the attention of the OIG. Tobin has identified cases in which he believes other examiners, primarily in the Explosives Unit (EU), have incorrectly conducted or reported metals-related examinations.

To investigate these matters, we interviewed Tobin and several others,......



II. The Reporting of Metals-Related Examinations



Tobin identified one general area and two specific cases in which he thought metals-related examinations had been incorrectly performed or reported: (1) in reports prepared by EU examiners regarding the gauge of wire; (2) in a report in the La Familia case indicating that holes had been drilled into metal pipes; and (3) a suggestion in the Mauchlin case that a handgun barrel was made from Swedish steel. We address each of these matters in turn.


II. The Reporting of Metals-Related Examinations



Tobin identified one general area and two specific cases in which he thought metals-related examinations had been incorrectly performed or reported: (1) in reports prepared by EU examiners regarding the gauge of wire; (2) in a report in the La Familia case indicating that holes had been drilled into metal pipes; and (3) a suggestion in the Mauchlin case that a handgun barrel was made from Swedish steel. We address each of these matters in turn.


A. Improper Wire Gauging





Tobin contends that EU examiners have themselves conducted certain examinations that would be better performed by qualified metallurgists..........


With respect to the wire gauging issue, we draw several conclusions. The measurement of wire gauge is, in our view, something that appropriately-trained EU examiners can perform themselves without involving a metallurgist.

B. The La Familia Case


In the La Familia case, Tobin, who worked on the case, thought that the EU and the Firearms and Toolmarks Unit (FTU) in 1996 reported the results of metals-related examinations in a misleading or incorrect manner.

We have several conclusions concerning the La Familia case. When Tobin saw what he thought were incorrect or misleading statements in the February 9, 1996, report, he was correct to raise the issue. He should, however, have talked with Mohnal before issuing his own February 13 dictation. As a general matter, we think that examiners should first discuss issues informally among themselves if there appears to be a difference of opinion in interpreting data or reporting conclusions. Had Tobin attempted such informal communication here, it might have avoided both much of the controversy and the need for Tobin to further revise his dictation. We find unpersuasive Tobin's explanation that he prepared his dictation as he did because he knew from past experience that Mohnal would ignore his concerns.

We also find that Tobin and Ennis did not take appropriate steps to resolve their differences concerning whether the evidence indicated that holes had been drilled in the pipe nipples.


IV. Conclusion



William Tobin displayed poor judgment by failing to discuss his concerns in the La Familia case with the principal examiner before Tobin issued his revised dictation. We also think that Tobin and FTU examiner Michael Ennis should have taken further steps, with involvement by their unit chiefs if necessary, to attempt to resolve the apparent differences in their conclusions about the holes found in the pipes. Because they did not reconcile their opinions on a scientific basis, Tobin and Ennis might have contradicted each other if they had testified about the results of their examinations.


Tobin testified that by September of 1996, approximately 4-6 weeks after his arrival on the case, there was a general consensus that there was "no bomb or missile damage" evident on the TWA wreckage. At the time frame indicated in Tobin's testimony, approximately one half of TWA800 was still at the bottom of the ocean.

FBI, TWA Flight 800 Brookhaven National Laboratory Examinations. Declassified FBI Report, 1997. (excerpts)

"It became apparent by the end of November 1996......."

NOT HIS DECISION TO MAKE

TOBIN: I was ordered to.......But it was in a very emotional, very frenzied manner, so I inquired as to why.....I was told.......which again flies in the face of my interpretation of whose aircraft this was.......But, so I inquired as to why........And I said, well I'm still missing some critical information, why.......And my response at that point was, well I'm still missing some critical information. Why.........And I was told, yes, we want that overhead bin and I was continued -- told to go find that overhead bin.

"Ultimately, when there is disagreement on whether or how to proceed, the responsibility for the decision rests squarely on the shoulders of the investigators in charge of the case." Louis Schiliro


You still haven't provided the readers with any evidence that Tobin's conduct was unprofessional, much less "inept". Instead, you imply that Tobin, who reacted to the disastrously unprofessional and inept conduct of James Kallstrom much the same way as Kathleen Crowley did when confronted with similarly unprofessional and inept conduct by other FBI officials prior to 9/11, should have kept his mouth shut.

Tobin was apparently UNABLE to "keep his mouth shut".....nor it seems, to follow orders.

33 posted on 07/12/2002 4:03:48 PM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
bump
34 posted on 07/12/2002 9:08:11 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
This country needs more whistleblowers like William Tobin and Colleen Crowley. Both are top notch professionals who put their country above their careers and told it like it was publicly when the FBI leadership turned its back on them.

The notion that they should have gone along to get along with unprofessional and inept FBI leadership is unacceptable to the American people and congress, certainly since 9/11.


35 posted on 07/12/2002 11:17:48 PM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
You're editorializing Barr.........I must say, very refreshing coming from you. I never mentioned Ms. Crowley.....you did.......I happen to admire and respect her actions......Unfortunately, William Tobin is about as far removed from Ms. Crowley, as China is from Kansas. As a matter of fact Mr. Barr, the shoddy and incompetent nature of the NTSB's investigation into Fl800 may have come back to haunt us. Under the guise of "airline safety" the NTSB in collusion with other federal agencies issued it's botch of a report.

I for one, have no problem with "whistleblowers." It is however, not the blowing of whistles that concerns me in the TWA800 case, but rather the crying of wolf! Mr. Tobin amply demonstrated during his tenure at the FBI his inability to cooperate with his peers, and unwillingness to abide by the direction of his superiors. Tobin's character is replicated throughout society in general. We are bereft with those who continually notice the splinters in the eyes of others, while being unwilling to pluck out the beam in their own.

Perhaps if we had heeded the signals prior to 911, there would be no need for disinformationalists like you. We more than likely wouldn't even know the name Colleen Crowley. And perhaps, wouldn't be viewing pictures like the one you posted. As beautiful as it is, the photo shows two beams of light where once two mighty buildings stood. The lights are there as a memorial to the thousands who lost their lives on 911.

There is also another memorial not far from there. Smaller, and less publicized. It sits on the beach on Long Island, as a witness to the 230 men, women and children who lost their lives nearly 6 years ago on Flight 800.

Since Flight 800's demise there have been no in flight spontaneous explosions in any CWT of a 747, as there were none before. What has become apparent, is that our country is under attack, and has been for some time. The question remains---did we heed the early warning signs of 911? The answer is obviously no.
36 posted on 07/13/2002 3:51:43 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
"Perhaps if we had heeded the signals prior to 911, there would be no need for disinformationalists like you. We more than likely wouldn't even know the name Colleen Crowley. And perhaps, wouldn't be viewing pictures like the one you posted. As beautiful as it is, the photo shows two beams of light where once two mighty buildings stood. The lights are there as a memorial to the thousands who lost their lives on 911." [emphasis added]

The "signals" that were not heeded was the evidence of the systemic problems in the FBI that both Tobin and Crowley, among other whistleblowers, brought to the attention of congress.

systemic - Of or relating to a system; common to a system

10 May 1999 - over two years before 9/11
SENATOR GRASSLEY: The purpose of this hearing is to provide a much more real picture of what happened and, hopefully, why it happened. The motivation for the subcommittee's efforts is to continue to help restore public confidence in Federal law enforcement. It is my intention to examine some very basic and systemic problems uncovered in this investigation.

The goal is to have a constructive dialogue with the FBI to ensure similar problems are not repeated in the future. No one will be fingered as a scapegoat. However, if the FBI says today that its problems are of the past and it is now fixed, I will not buy that, and I warn the public not to buy it, either. There is a whole lot more to be done before the root causes of the problem are fixed. It is a systemic cultural problem that transcends any simplistic fix.

WILLIAM TOBIN: . . . . my first observation is that the outcome or practice of science for such public safety issues of such magnitude should not be dependent on a single individuals agenda, biases, idiosyncrasies or the strength of their personality which it clearly was in this case.

My second observation or suggestion is that scientists are not on an equal footing inside the law enforcement community in the strategic decision making process. There are a number of examples of that but basically scientists are, I won't say viewed as second class citizens but basically what happens inside the forensic community is if we collaborate or validate the prevailing theory, we walk on water.

If the science does not validate the prevailing theory, then the science is just basically ignored. There are some other issues, I think the third would be that if there is some fine tuning, additional fine tuning, I would suggest that we revert back to the way that FBI and NTSB have worked these cases in the past. That the FBI's interests can be preserved by the presence of a material scientist who is experienced in materials deformation and damage working along side the NTSB, whether it's rail, maritime or aircraft disasters, represent the FBI's interest in determining whether there is or could be potential criminal activity involved in the cause.

And then allow that contingent to ratchet up whatever additional support or FBI involvement that there should be. So, that would be my, basically that the -- I think part of the problem that occurred here was that with the process and the system being so singularly dependent upon a single individual, strong personality individual, that what I was seeing there in the first four to six weeks is what psychologists have found or concluded to be basically what was called group think.

GRASSLEY: You're a breath of fresh air, Mr. Tobin. You've been very helpful to us for not only appearing today but for our getting the necessary background that needs to be done to make this a valuable contribution to the process of constitutional oversight by the Congress.

I don't know how to thank you other then to say thank you. And obviously you set an example for a person who was trained to seek the truth, to work for an organization that is always supposed to seek the truth and let the truth determine guilt or innocence and I think you have lived up to that very well and in particularly you shine in this black hole of investigation that we had in regard of the TWA case. I thank you very much and I'll dismiss you at this point.

Whistleblower Tobin is an American hero - except to the "shootdown" tinfoil hats and you, a book author with a "suitcase bomb" theory, because Tobin's testimony as a metallurgy expertthat there was NO physical evidence of a missile or bomb scuttles both of those theories.

ALL of the material damage experts who have examined the wreckage agree with Tobin.

37 posted on 07/13/2002 11:58:00 AM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
The document indicates that investigators had "little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash." (Declassified Brookhaven National Laboratories FBI report, 1997)

Mr. Barr says....."ALL of the material damage experts who have examined the wreckage agree with Tobin."

The report goes on to say, that the initial metallurgical findings were reviewed, stating: A "cursory metallurgical peer review was conducted......" The report further states however, "No analysis or microscopic examinations were conducted."

Would you care to name any other metallurgists who examined or re-examined the TWA800 wreckage and fully concur with William Tobin? Can you advise us when these examinations and re-examinations took place? Can you advise us where we might obtain copies of these examinations or re-examinations? Can you advise us where we might obtain copies of documents relating to William Tobin's analysis of the TWA800 wreckage? Can you advise us where we might find documents relating to Mr. Tobin's analysis of the recrystallization of aluminum on the rear spar of the CWT? Can you tell us where we might find documentation relating to Mr. Tobin's examination of the overhead bin from Fl800 as alluded to in your prior postings? Can you provide us with information relating to Mr. Tobin's prior aircrash examinations? Specifically where any prior aircraft were submerged in seawater for several weeks or longer prior to examination? Can you tell us where we might obtain additional information regarding the tail number of the airplane where the "dog-training" exercise was allegedly conducted, and upon which the traces of PETN and RDX discovered on the wreckage was said to have come? Can you provide us with information re: Mr. Tobin's expertise relating to forensic evidence which may be indicative of liquid bombs? Can you provide us with documents relating to Mr. Tobin's previous examinations of commercial airliners destroyed by missile engagements?

38 posted on 07/13/2002 1:13:59 PM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
Donaldson Brothers TWA800 forum
From: John Fiorentino - 14 January 2001
As the author of a forthcoming book on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and in my occupation as a Paralegal, having investigated many "conspiracy" theories, it would seem the first step would be to prove conclusively that TWA Flight 800 was IN FACT downed by a missile or missiles. [emphasis yours]

It's obviously long past time for you to practice what you preach and "prove conclusively" that Flight 800 was IN FACT the victim of a suitcase bomb. It should go without saying that if you could have done so by now, you would have.

Only one person has ever supported your daffy suitcase bomb theory.

Yahoo TWA800 forum
From: "reednfolink"
Date: Sat Jul 13, 2002 8:14 pm
Dear Asmodeus/Elmer, First of all, I really appreciate your efforts in getting me kicked off "Free Republic"! Didn't suprise me at all! It was predictable! I don't know whether "you" are a think tank, a propaganda front for the trial lawyers or just a brainwashed SUCKER! Only thing that matters to me is that you are a BACKSTABBING COWARD. I notice quite some time has elapsed since Mr. Fiorentino's post #38, asking you to provide some simple answers re: TWA 800. I asked you the same questions back in March of 2002. Funny, though, that all of my posts were removed by your moderator buddies- only your 100 liner pastes and Rokkes patronizing dribble remains.(for the most part) What other schemes or dirty tricks will Barr/Asmodeus employ to futher his agenda? BEWARE!
[emphasis his]

Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be any such member in the Yahoo TWA800 forum. But, of course, any member can post with any name they wish after signing in. You, of course, are a member there. Would you do such a deceitful thing to try to show that you do have some support for your suitcase bomb theory?

By clicking here the readers can see for themselves that you are adept at nice and tidy HTML coding - when you want to be. By clicking here the readers can see for themselves that you don't always want to be neat and tidy with your HTML coding. Interestingly, you included the following in the midst of your supposed review of an official report.

[quote]TOBIN: I was ordered to.......But it was in a very emotional, very frenzied manner, so I inquired as to why.....I was told.......which again flies in the face of my interpretation of whose aircraft this was.......But, so I inquired as to why........And I said, well I'm still missing some critical information, why.......And my response at that point was, well I'm still missing some critical information. Why.........And I was told, yes, we want that overhead bin and I was continued -- told to go find that overhead bin. [end quote]

You conveniently deleted Tobin's repeated references to the fact that the "overhead bin" was reportedly in pristine condition. That's the "critical information" he referred to. A suitcase bomb that detonates in an overhead bin could not leave that overhead bin in pristine condition.

Your paper trail includes abundant evidence that you ask lots of questions but do not answer questions you are asked. When coupled with the fact that you routinely deceitfully spin, distort and fabricate information and answers you receive, you obviously had no constructive purpose in the barrage of questions you included in your last posting here.

Simply put, you have demolished your own credibility as a supposedly "sincere seeker of the truth" - with everybody [except, of course, "reednfolink"]

39 posted on 07/13/2002 11:22:12 PM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
"It's obviously long past time for you to practice what you preach and "prove conclusively" that Flight 800 was IN FACT the victim of a suitcase bomb. It should go without saying that if you could have done so by now, you would have."

I am STILL waiting for NTSB to PROVE their CWT theory. Seems to me....or....."It should go without saying" that if they could they would have done so by now.

"Only one person has ever supported your daffy suitcase bomb theory."

If I had in fact a "daffy suitcase bomb theory".......

"Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be any such member in the Yahoo TWA800 forum. But, of course, any member can post with any name they wish after signing in. You, of course, are a member there. Would you do such a deceitful thing to try to show that you do have some support for your suitcase bomb theory?"

Well, I never heard of this guy either. The question might be Barr......WOULD YOU DO SUCH A DECEITFUL THING? However, he did send me a personal e-mail first, BEFORE posting on Yahoo, so I suppose we could track that IP address, right Barr?

"Your paper trail includes abundant evidence that you ask lots of questions but do not answer questions you are asked. When coupled with the fact that you routinely deceitfully spin, distort and fabricate information and answers you receive, you obviously had no constructive purpose in the barrage of questions you included in your last posting here."

You are the one who is fabricating things. Just how desperate are you Barr?

"Simply put, you have demolished your own credibility as a supposedly "sincere seeker of the truth" - with everybody [except, of course, "reednfolink"]"

What a rather "hasty" and "unprofessional" conclusion on your part. But then again, you support those kinds of "conclusions" don't you Barr?

Now, why don't you answer the "barrage" of questions I asked you?






40 posted on 07/14/2002 3:36:37 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
I have reported your abuse to Free Republic. Wherein you state:

"When coupled with the fact that you routinely deceitfully spin, distort and fabricate information and answers you receive,....."

Barr, you can call me all the names you want. You can do what you accuse me of.......but I refuse to accept from you or anyone, unfounded allegations attacking my veracity, intimating that I am lying, or that I "fabricate" information and answers.

Your statements are unfounded personal attacks, and as such should be removed.
41 posted on 07/14/2002 6:00:24 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
Fabricate - To concoct in order to deceive

EXAMPLE: Your title for this thread. There is no "ongoing" disssent between Tobin and the FBI leadership about whether or not Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb. The FBI leadership belatedly AGREED with Tobin years ago that there was no physcial evidence of a missile or bomb.

EXAMPLE: Your allegations that Tobin's expert metallurgist opinion on that issue was hasty, premature, unprofessional and inept even though NO other expert metallurgist has ever made any such allegations about Tobin.

EXAMPLE: Your doctored "quote" of Tobin in your reply #38 referred to in my reply #39.

EXAMPLE: Your allegations that I am a disinformationalist [see #36], common knowledge SHORTHAND in all the Flight 800 forums and related internet discussions for the past six years for a government agent engaged in the felonious criminal coverup of "the truth". I'm not and your concocted allegations that I am are the ULTIMATE in unfounded personal attacks.

42 posted on 07/14/2002 11:13:55 AM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
BTW Barr, you will notice I use my REAL NAME......Why don't YOU use YOURS?........How many posting screen names do you have?

The document indicates that investigators had "little forensic documentation or guidance on large-body aircraft missile engagements, and no supportable mechanical or operational explanation for the crash." (Declassified Brookhaven National Laboratories FBI report, 1997)

Mr. Barr says....."ALL of the material damage experts who have examined the wreckage agree with Tobin."

The report goes on to say, that the initial metallurgical findings were reviewed, stating: A "cursory metallurgical peer review was conducted......" The report further states however, "No analysis or microscopic examinations were conducted."

Would you care to name any other metallurgists who examined or re-examined the TWA800 wreckage and fully concur with William Tobin? Can you advise us when these examinations and re-examinations took place? Can you advise us where we might obtain copies of these examinations or re-examinations? Can you advise us where we might obtain copies of documents relating to William Tobin's analysis of the TWA800 wreckage? Can you advise us where we might find documents relating to Mr. Tobin's analysis of the recrystallization of aluminum on the rear spar of the CWT? Can you tell us where we might find documentation relating to Mr. Tobin's examination of the overhead bin from Fl800 as alluded to in your prior postings? Can you provide us with information relating to Mr. Tobin's prior aircrash examinations? Specifically where any prior aircraft were submerged in seawater for several weeks or longer prior to examination? Can you tell us where we might obtain additional information regarding the tail number of the airplane where the "dog-training" exercise was allegedly conducted, and upon which the traces of PETN and RDX discovered on the wreckage was said to have come? Can you provide us with information re: Mr. Tobin's expertise relating to forensic evidence which may be indicative of liquid bombs? Can you provide us with documents relating to Mr. Tobin's previous examinations of commercial airliners destroyed by missile engagements?



43 posted on 07/14/2002 11:44:11 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
Nobody has to disprove your daffy "suitcase bomb" notion. The burden of trying to prove it rests exclusively with you.

As to your questions, I'd suggest that you spend a lot more time doing research and a lot less time spewing out wildly reckless allegations, accusations and personal insults.

Truth is dependent on facts - not speculations, suspicions, allegations or accusations.

44 posted on 07/14/2002 1:57:52 PM PDT by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
Mr. Barr's deceitful methods.....

"Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be any such member in the Yahoo TWA800 forum. But, of course, any member can post with any name they wish after signing in. You, of course, are a member there. Would you do such a deceitful thing to try to show that you do have some support for your suitcase bomb theory?"

From the groups moderator:

John
Anybody can post
Jack

In a message dated 7/14/02 12:44:09 PM, jstonemusic@earthlink.net writes:

<< Jack:


HOW could they post if they weren't a member? >>


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
twa800-unsubscribe@egroups.com

"EXAMPLE: Your title for this thread. There is no "ongoing" disssent between Tobin and the FBI leadership about whether or not Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb. The FBI leadership belatedly AGREED with Tobin years ago that there was no physcial evidence of a missile or bomb."

The title reflects just what it says.........There is considerable dissent re: the official conclusions in the Fl800 investigation. I believe we seem to be engaged in some now...no?

"EXAMPLE: Your allegations that Tobin's expert metallurgist opinion on that issue was hasty, premature, unprofessional and inept even though NO other expert metallurgist has ever made any such allegations about Tobin."

I believe Mr. Kallstrom first made that determination. After which he dismissed Tobin from the case....no?

"EXAMPLE: Your doctored "quote" of Tobin in your reply #38 referred to in my reply #39."

There were NO quotes in the paragraph to which you are referring. My purpose was to show Tobin's inability to heed the orders of his superiors. His constant questioning of authority, and HIS statement "... again flies in the face of MY interpretation as to whose aircraft this was." I prefaced it with the subtitle, "Not his decision to make"

NOT HIS DECISION TO MAKE

TOBIN: I was ordered to.......But it was in a very emotional, very frenzied manner, so I inquired as to why.....I was told.......which again flies in the face of my interpretation of whose aircraft this was.......But, so I inquired as to why........And I said, well I'm still missing some critical information, why.......And my response at that point was, well I'm still missing some critical information. Why.........And I was told, yes, we want that overhead bin and I was continued -- told to go find that overhead bin.

YOU "quoted" my non-quote. The complete text was already reproduced in your prior post in any event.

"EXAMPLE: Your allegations that I am a disinformationalist [see #36], common knowledge SHORTHAND in all the Flight 800 forums and related internet discussions for the past six years for a government agent engaged in the felonious criminal coverup of "the truth". I'm not and your concocted allegations that I am are the ULTIMATE in unfounded personal attacks."

That's YOUR definition of "disinformationalist" Barr, NOT mine. Very narrow, and viewed with the tunnelvision which it seems is your trademark.










45 posted on 07/14/2002 1:58:36 PM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
"Nobody has to disprove your daffy "suitcase bomb" notion."

The ONLY person who mentioned my "daffy suitcase bomb notion" was YOU. I asked no questions relating to a suitcase bomb, nor did I make any statements to elicit comments about same.


"The burden of trying to prove it rests exclusively with you."


"As to your questions, I'd suggest that you spend a lot more time doing research and a lot less time spewing out wildly reckless allegations, accusations and personal insults."

Why Mr. Barr, that's what I was trying to do by asking you those questions.......a little "research."

"Truth is dependent on facts - not speculations, suspicions, allegations or accusations."

At last, we agree!
46 posted on 07/14/2002 2:09:18 PM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
Below you will find the results of my, and others investigation into your unfounded allegations.

Yahoo TWA800 forum
From: "reednfolink"
Date: Sat Jul 13, 2002 8:14 pm
Dear Asmodeus/Elmer, First of all, I really appreciate your efforts in getting me kicked off "Free Republic"! Didn't suprise me at all! It was predictable! I don't know whether "you" are a think tank, a propaganda front for the trial lawyers or just a brainwashed SUCKER! Only thing that matters to me is that you are a BACKSTABBING COWARD. I notice quite some time has elapsed since Mr. Fiorentino's post #38, asking you to provide some simple answers re: TWA 800. I asked you the same questions back in March of 2002. Funny, though, that all of my posts were removed by your moderator buddies- only your 100 liner pastes and Rokkes patronizing dribble remains.(for the most part) What other schemes or dirty tricks will Barr/Asmodeus employ to futher his agenda? BEWARE! [emphasis his]

Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be any such member in the Yahoo TWA800 forum. But, of course, any member can post with any name they wish after signing in. You, of course, are a member there. Would you do such a deceitful thing to try to show that you do have some support for your suitcase bomb theory?



Thanx to Jack Seaman, the e-mail nonsense has been solved.



Well, I had originally decided to rise above the shills on Free Republic, and ignore them. Lately, with the 6th anniversary of the downing approaching, I've been lurking more at both forums. While at freerepublic, I went to the archives to retrieve an article I had posted, and found that all MY posts had been removed! The ONLY person I had abused (in jest) was Elmer. I accused him of setting up a gas chamber to exterminate innocent Freepers who took the bait or wandered in- all in jest! So, when I post at another thread, the the suggestion, to a extremely militant Israeli sympathizer (Freeper) that he read Bill Baker's, "Theft of a Nation", Elmer, thinking I'm a threat of sorts, ridicules me openly in the forum. I know NOW that he is very sensitive and probably had me banned. I am so SICK of (along with most of the population) getting a daily scolding from Bnai Brith (sp). Today, I was scolded on how anti- semetic Henry Ford was (on PBS) and how he associated with right wing Christian Fundalmentalists.(sp) This is a steady drum beat I can do with out, I am not a Jew hater. It was just a "heat of the moment thing" please forgive, Regards STEVE

----- Original Message -----
From: John Fiorentino
To: jsreed@knox.net
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 12:14 PM
Subject: e-mail


Did you send me an e-mail msg last night and then post to the TWA800 Yahoo forum?
----- Original Message -----
From: John Fiorentino
To: twa800@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [twa800] Jack Seaman



I believe now, the readers can see through your modus operandi quite clearly.

"Truth is dependent on facts - not speculations, suspicions, allegations or accusations."

Yes, it is..........I suggest you follow your own advice!


47 posted on 07/14/2002 6:55:30 PM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: JohnFiorentino
BOEING RESPONDS TO FBI REPORT
7/10/02 | John E. Fiorentino

Posted on 07/10/2002 1:42 PM Eastern by JohnFiorentino



*It is worthy to note that these "spheres" were recovered from the corpses of some TWA800 victims at autopsy) ...Authors note*
(FBI report from Brookhaven National Labs, 1997) (excerpts)

This item, one of 20 similar pieces.........was approx. 5mm in diameter and charcoal colored. The item was polished and then subjected to an energy dispersive spectrometer (EDS) analysis to determine its chemical composition.

Small charcoal colored particles (1 of -20 similar pieces) measuring ~5mm in diameter. On polishing the sample was orange colored and transparent.

SEM analysis indicated the material was multi-phase having a base matrix containing Al and Ti. The sample showed significant charging under the electron beam indicating that it is a very poor conductor - i.e.., not metallic. Three other distinct areas could be observed, two were similar to the matrix but contained significant amounts of Zr, the other was mostly Al with Ca, Ba and Ce.




Below is a response from the Boeing Co. re: the "spheres" alluded to in the (FBI report from Brookhaven National Labs, 1997) and just recently declassified. (note one sentence in the below transmission was a little skewed, however, that is the way it was received)

Thanks for your inquiry John.

I am unaware of anything on a Boeing commercial airplane that would use those chemicals in a matrix (or other) form. We do not use Aluminium / Titanium matrix type metals since their differing thermal expansion rates will tend to tear a part fabricated from them apart when subjected to the rapid change in temperatures that jet aircraft encounter. We use a temperature differential of +180 degree F to -70 degrees F in 20 minutes as a design criteria. The +180 was a measured skin temperature of an airplane sitting in the sun in Saudi Arabia. Also, we try to limit the amount of Titanium we put into the airplanes because it costs so much. We use it where strength and fatigue requirements make Aluminium inappropriate.

Hope this helps.

Thanks,

(redacted) Associate Technical Fellow Service Engineering The Boeing Company

Copyright 2002, J.E. Fiorentino - All rights reserved.



48 posted on 07/14/2002 7:04:24 PM PDT by JohnFiorentino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: NoLongerLurker
For sure!
I think it was a terrorist attack and covered up for whatever reason, like John Doe 2, but then, what do I know? I mean if 150 witnesses can be wrong....!
49 posted on 07/14/2002 7:07:21 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: First_Salute
I once thought the operations in the area was the probable cause. However,since 911 and what we have learned about the covering up of John Doe 2 and possilby 3, I am more inclined to think it might have been a terrorist attack also.
What are your thoughts on that possibility?
50 posted on 07/14/2002 7:10:04 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson