TWA Flight 800 - "CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS IS A LIE? I CAN'T"

Oh great, a government shill attack DOG

So, because I point out you can't spell or properly access a website, I'm a government shill? Man, you ARE paranoid.

No you IDIOT,

BWHAHAHAHAH!!!

Pot.

Kettle.

Black.

we were stupid enough to try and host it our self.

Aside from the obvious, who is "we"?

HINT: You are only one person, those voices inside your head don't count.

"YOU told me in an earlier post what a great source TV news media was?????"

I did?

Instead of "baying" out your ignorance , why don't you supply some actual rebuttal on the topic.

For someone who can't spell, you really need to be careful with those "ignorant" accusations.

And as far as rebuttal goes, Rokke is doing a fine job of making you look silly. I'm just here for the entertainment.

save to read later

"SINCE this study was instrumental in the throwing out of the ENTIRE witness data- base"

Who threw out the witness database? The following websites are current NTSB documents concerning their TWA 800 investigation.

http://www.ntsb.gov/events/TWA800/exhibits_web.htm
http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAR0003.pdf

Every single witness statement the FBI collected is there with pages and pages of analysis. It doesn't look to me like they threw out anything. As far as Donaldson's triangulation is concerned, I think he triangulated everything to a launch site about 1.5 miles off the coast of Long Island. If that's the triangulation you are talking about, then that launch site is out of range of any shoulder launched missile which is Donaldson's theory. Once again, his theories are as reliable as Irvine's witnesses.

No I'm not threatning you (re the porta john) and think the forum might not be that great of idea cause of the fights that would brake out.

Ummm, that is "break" out.

Not having a very good day, are WE?

"Apparently I've lit a fire of controversy here, because earlier you made light of the fact that nobody was here. "

lol. I've been trying to figure out what you've been refering to. I think it was this statement I made:
"Are you beginning to get the feeling that maybe the reason nobody is talking is because there is nothing to talk about?"
I made that statement in response to your post about whistle blowers. I wasn't talking about this thread. But frankly, I'm surprised anyone would pay any attention to this thread. Please note I've never accused you of being a dumb farmer. I've been around farmers enough to know dumb farmers last about as long as dumb pilots. I respond to your posts because you ask me to respond. Also, it's a Sunday afternoon, I've been watching a pretty good NASCAR race, my wife and kids are taking a nap and like I said before, I find the whole topic interesting. I think the OshKosh forum would be a great idea, if for no other reason than the fights that might break out. Hopefully someone other than the folks from AIM would show up. I checked out their website and they look like a bunch of old retired guys. It would be a battle of canes vs. walkers. At least no one would have to worry about losing any teeth (again).

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/644704/posts

My personal opinion is that there was at least one and probably two missiles fired at the airliner. Too many witnesses seeing a missile. Specific indications from the flight recorder that an explosion took place in proximity to the airliner.

However, I believe that the Navy fired the missile(s) by virtue of the "Dog that didn't bark" principle. No response by the military to dozens of incoming reports of a missile shooting down an airliner. Whether real or not, every military plane and ship in the area should have been out there almost immediately to find the boat from which the missile was fired. That it didn't happen indicates that the military almost immediately recogized that it was one of its own missiles.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/644704/posts?page=18#18

TWA 800 investigation update:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/644704/posts?page=18#18

bump

Since you must be an expert, could you enlighten the masses as to exactly how the military would respond to a missile shot from an unknown source against an airborne target. Would all the ships within a certain distance rush to the unknown point of origin to the missile shot? Would aircraft immediately flock to the airspace that random but lethal missiles where flying around in? There must be some procedures in place, because so many conspiracy nuts use "the dog didn't bark" as definitive proof that the Navy must have been involved. So what are they?

1. There is zero eyewitness support for any of the various missile(s) shootdown allegations. If you disagree, see if you can provide the readers with anything remotely resembling a meaningful rebuttal to this.

2. After nearly 6 years of effort, nobody has been able to publicly present one atom of physical evidence that the 747 was a missile(s) "shootdown" or a bomb victim nor has anybody been able to present anything remotely resembling a meaningful rebuttal to this.

The reference source documentation for #1 is also applicable to the Gas Burp Theory, the Meteor Theory, John Barry Smith’s presentation of his Cargo Door Theory and the Center Wing Tank Theory. In short, there is zero eyewitness support for any of these theories either
____________________

Message 7231 Yahoo TWA800 Forum
From: George A Donaldson
Date: Fri Mar 15, 2002 2:39 pm
Subject: Re: [twa800] A little sensitive, aren't we?
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Ace, I totally understand your faith in Fritz Meyer's report. It is natural. But what would be the purpose of missile action after the IE? The IE broke up the airframe. Nothing was flyable after the IE. The debris contained falling aircraft structure and bodies of the victims. It seems rather morbid for someone to be shooting at falling bodies such as at a skeet shoot.

To place the MF at a much higher altitude would prevent gravity from being a constant 32.2 feet per second per second. Some claim that the MF was at the IE altitude but anything falling from that altitude would take a nominal 30 seconds to free fall to the ocean. Most witness reports were that is was around 10 seconds which agrees with an altitude reported by Faret and Wendell. With the MF that low, what were Meyer's missiles or ordnance shooting at? It would take anything falling from 13,700 feet a nominal 20 seconds to fall to the MF altitude. Fritz claimed the 'ordnance' occurred a few seconds before the MF. 15 seconds delay before the ordnance does not allow a few in my mind if a few seconds totalled five.

Physics controls what may have occurred, not someone's guess as to what happened. Fritz had wartime experiences which 'told' him that he had witnessed ordnance. The best witness is someone who has had no experience which acts as a bias to his observations. Fritz saw explosions. I don't contest that but what actually was exploding? Emergency breathing oxygen bottles exploding would look like ordnance. [end quote]
__________
Message 7252 Yahoo TWA800 Forum
From: Jack Reed
Date: Sat Mar 16, 2002 10:38 am
[quote][emphasis added]
Explosion fireballs, the luminous sphere in nuclear blasts, reach about 165 ft from 1-kt NE, scaling down to 16.5 ft for 1000 lb TNT. That is a 33 ft diameter, which is 1.4 minutes of arc at 15 miles range. And that is just below visual acuity, according to Tricker in "An Introduction to Meteorological Optics" which I cited in an earlier posting. The duration would be very short and most unlikely to be visible without intense concentration. Thus I believe it highly unlikely that anyone outside that doomed aircraft saw the IE.