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

Skip to comments.

N.Y. Times continues to avoid TWA 800 connection (Richard Clarke & Jamie Gorelick)
World Net Daily ^ | 8/18/05 | Jack Cashill

Posted on 08/19/2005 5:27:07 AM PDT by Libloather

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-139 next last

1 posted on 08/19/2005 5:27:09 AM PDT by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libloather

That's because it falls on Ol Zipper Klintoon's watch. Can't be having that can we?


2 posted on 08/19/2005 5:28:21 AM PDT by deadeyedawg (Crush our enemies, listen to their lamentations, and drive them before us!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Whoa! Good find. Thanks for posting!!!


3 posted on 08/19/2005 5:28:51 AM PDT by cweese (Hook 'em Horns!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Whoa! Good find. Thanks for posting!!!


4 posted on 08/19/2005 5:29:36 AM PDT by cweese (Hook 'em Horns!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bppkmark


5 posted on 08/19/2005 5:30:10 AM PDT by federal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

I'm surprised the NYT reports this at all. Must be some ulterior motive for doing so. Maybe they want to get it out now so that it won't embarrass Hillary later.


6 posted on 08/19/2005 5:30:40 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

"The tank was not half full, but virtually empty."

Why would a plane bound for Paris have an empty fuel tank?


7 posted on 08/19/2005 5:35:01 AM PDT by nuconvert (No More Axis of Evil by Christmas ! TLR) [there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

hmmm


8 posted on 08/19/2005 5:35:25 AM PDT by satchmodog9 (Murder and weather are our only news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Interesting theory.

Nobody has ever logically explained two problems with it, in my opinion.

Nobody, as far as I know, ever claimed credit for shooting down an American airliner. From a terrorist's viewpoint, what is the point of successfully pulling off the most spectacular terror attack in history (till then) if people generally think it was an accident?

There have been no other airliners taken down in similar fashion since. Why would they stop?


9 posted on 08/19/2005 5:36:16 AM PDT by Restorer (Liberalism: the auto-immune disease of societies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
This was the last day these officials were open with the media about the possibility of a missile. Once they changed the story, so did an oddly quiescent Times. The words "radar" and "eyewitness" would all but disappear from the Times' reporting after the first day. Nor, inexplicably, would the Times investigate the role of the military in the downing of TWA 800, not one paragraph, and not one word about satellites and what they might have captured.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The desk of Jack Cashill - World Net Daily

10 posted on 08/19/2005 5:38:08 AM PDT by WideGlide (That light at the end of the tunnel might be a muzzle flash.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

They only carry what they need. No use using fuel hauling undeeded fuel.


11 posted on 08/19/2005 5:41:54 AM PDT by PjhCPA (Armed with what?.....SPITBALLS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Great article! I'm surprised that the NYT would publish such an article since they are one of the "Klintoon Lapdogs". I still believe in my heart the Flight 800 was a terrorist hit. Living in the NY area, I was watching a local TV station when "breaking news" cut in. Numerous eye witnesses claimed that they saw a streak of light racing up towards the plane. IMHO sounds like a SAM to me & no one will ever change my mind.


12 posted on 08/19/2005 5:44:05 AM PDT by alice_in_bubbaland ("Consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Deep in the article, the Times reports that the State Department assessment was "written July 18, 1996." Nowhere in the article does the Times mentioned what happened the day before.
13 posted on 08/19/2005 5:44:55 AM PDT by Clovis_Skeptic (Islam is a religion of peace my as@)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

The New Yourk Slimes is another mouth piece for the Taliban just like Al Jazzera.


14 posted on 08/19/2005 5:45:34 AM PDT by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

"And the government, especially the FBI, would make the Times its unwitting messenger."

I believe that the NYT actually was not unwitting at that point. I believe someone in the Clinton WH went to the publisher of the Times and blackmailed him. Remember the 900 FBI files? Is it not likely that the Clintons had files on non-government folks? The involvement of Clarke and Gorelick in the TWA 800 investigation and their subsequent roles in the 9/11 Commission are beyond coincidental, IMHO. This is a massive coverup orchestrated intially out of the WH by the Clintons. It continues today, with the role of Sandy Berger, Gorelick, Clarke, and others. This, too, will have some relation to the 1995 terrorist attack in OKC, where I believe John DOe #2 was/is an Iraqi agent. The US executed McVeigh as fast as possible, because he knew the truth. McVeigh was merely the trigger - Iraq was the trigger-puller. The Clintons are up to their necks in this, and it needs to be investigated. However, any reporter who does so is advised to proceed carefully and watch his back.


15 posted on 08/19/2005 5:45:55 AM PDT by astounded (We don't need no stinkin' rules of engagement...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Clinton just couldn't have an act of terrorism declared such because he would have had to go to war. And that's the last thing the hater of the military wanted.

Even John Kerry and George Stephanapolous have accidentally, when speaking of TWA 800, said it was terrorism.

Same with the WTC bombing in 1993. We know an man with an Iraqi passport was involved and took refuge in Iraq afterwards.


16 posted on 08/19/2005 5:46:43 AM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

These airplanes are capable of such long range, that it is normal that the center tanks could be empty on a "short" flight to Paris.

If the center tanks were empty, the pump switches were off on the engineer's panel and no fuel pump wiring was in the tank, there is no source for any explosion.

Aviation jet fuel isn't nearly as flammable as auto gasoline. With the combination of little fuel in the tank and the 13,000 foot thinner air, it is difficult to get the fuel/air mixture to explode.


17 posted on 08/19/2005 5:46:59 AM PDT by aviator (Armored Pest Control)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
Nobody, as far as I know, ever claimed credit for shooting down an American airliner. From a terrorist's viewpoint, what is the point of successfully pulling off the most spectacular terror attack in history (till then) if people generally think it was an accident?

That is the question I was about to post.

18 posted on 08/19/2005 5:48:09 AM PDT by MileHi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
Why would a plane bound for Paris have an empty fuel tank?

Don't quote me on this but I seem to remember that this plane has 5 tanks and thus could have taken on even more fuel for longer hauls. For the Paris flight, it was not needed so was empty since planes don't like to a)carry unnecessary weight and b)don't like to land with more than 10% fuel capacity still in reserve.

19 posted on 08/19/2005 5:52:32 AM PDT by Asfarastheeastisfromthewest...
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MileHi

"Nobody, as far as I know, ever claimed credit for shooting down an American airliner. From a terrorist's viewpoint, what is the point of successfully pulling off the most spectacular terror attack in history (till then) if people generally think it was an accident? "

They didn't have to claim credit. That was the ugliness of the Bent Ones White House. Everything got swept under the rug. Clinton knew who did it and chose to do nothing about it because reelection was the most important thing to the Clintonistas.

It sickens me that "the one who shall go nameless" will get a pass by the MSM.


20 posted on 08/19/2005 5:52:49 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Liberal Talking Point - Bush = Hitler ... Republican Talking Point - Let the Liberals Talk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-139 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