Posted on 12/14/2001 5:05:27 PM PST by SubMareener
At the AIM Christmas party tonight, Reed Irvine told me that the NTSB has quietly destroyed all but a piece of the body and one engine from TWA Flight 800. There will probably be more details about this in the next issue of the AIM report. I'll post it when I get more details.
I agree. United States Attorney Valerie Caproni didn't.
"The FBI was not qualified to conduct this investigation, its agents haven't the background or the technical knowledge to know even what questions to ask. What has become increasingly obvious is that the 302 forms filed by the various agents supposedly recounting the interviews bear little relationship to what was actually said during the interviews!"
Coincidence?
It was the article that you posted, hence, it was "your" article; it was not the article posted by the thread author. It's too bad you got so bent out of shape for misunderstanding this.
He's been dumbed down by his advisors, none of whom are expert witness report analysts, etc. (Definition of expert omitted.)
This is a weak strawman argument - I don't claim that Irvine is an expert on any thing. Even a kid could point out that, if the FBI has a secret room where even other parties to the investigation and the NTSB itself are prohibited from entering, where evidence is taken to never be seen again, that saying "no shred of evidence was ever found" is highly suspect. What evidence was in that room? (This, even aside from the red residue that the government has lied about in a court of law.)
I've sifted through this evidence aeons ago. Nothing about the timeline presented in your source is incompatible with there being two missile hits. Aegis-type defensive batteries most generally launch several missiles at a looming threat. It astonishes me how consistently suspicious government stories that seem to be pushing the envelope of legality in their investigative practices, employ the same fundamental tactic: keep the reporters and critics busy with a related story that consumes all the public interest in the evidence & they can eventually easily deflate, while carefully avoiding looking at any alternative explanations, even if they make more sense of the evidence. A missile streak does not look like a stream of gas consuming itself in a direction backwards from its point of origin, and even if it did, the chances are vanishingly small that a gas stream would ignite initially anywhere else but where the explosion that caused it occured.
This take on the eyewitness evidence is ludicrously irrelevant. 100+ people saw a smoothly operating streak, with a cleanly expanding tail, emanating from a distance toward the plane, this wants explanation, and the evidence you just pointed to, as it was probably intended, doesn't explain it, it just ignores it, but with such an unnecessary dense prolixity of charts and graphs and hand-puppet pantomimes, that the readers interest flags before the reader realizes what a narrowly directed argument he is working through.
Sorry to see that you got messy pants about it. The article was linked by the thread author.
GovernmentSuch articles are the property of their authors and/or publishers. In this instance, the author was Reed Irvine and his publisher was Accuracy In Media. To assist the readers, I used that link to prepare and post a full text copy. It was accordingly not my article. Here are some additional cautions applicable to this subject:
Source: Reed Irvine, Accuracy In Media
Published: 12/14/01 Author: SubMareener
Posted on 12/14/01 6:05 PM Pacific by SubMareener
Important Legal Notice:
Free Republic has been enjoined from allowing users to post full text articles from the Los Angeles Times (LAT) and Washington Post (WP). Please do not post full text from these sources until and unless we can get this order overturned on appeal. Any full text articles from LAT or WP will be deleted in compliance with this court order.
You went on to my following comment about Reed Irvine:
"He's been dumbed down by his advisors, none of whom are expert witness report analysts, etc."
You then added: "This is a weak strawman argument - I don't claim that Irvine is an expert on any thing.".
This thread is about Reed Irvine and what he said in his article. Which included the following:
"Major Fritz Meyer was piloting an Air National Guard helicopter when he saw TWA Flight 800 struck by missiles."
That allegation by Reed Irvine in his article is in irreconcilable conflict with the facts. Meyer did not and could not have seen a "shootdown" of TWA 800 by even ONE missile, much less "missiles", at 13,800 feet at 8:31:12 only 3-4 seconds BEFORE he saw the Massive Fireball explode in the 747's falling wreckage at about 5500-7500 feet at approximately 8:31:47. Reference Source
That is NOT a straw man argument. It's a rebuttal of what Reed Irvine himself said after he was dumbed down by his advisors. If you disagree with it, state your case and cite your reference source URLs, hopefully without any further messy pants performances.
This is why your response to my post was a straw man argument - all I posted about was the two statements about "not one shred of physical evidence" and "the FBI had a secret room off-limits to anyone else." Your reply was not responsive to this argument, it was responsive to Reed's expertise or lack of it, or to what Meyer may or may not have seen, etc.
If you are unable to come up with a relevent response to my post, please, don't trouble yourself with responding at all. Your html skills may look impressive, but they do not make up for disingenuous rhetoric.
Show us.
The timeline and location of the major events of the disaster was approximately as follows:
8:31:11 Intact and climbing 747 approaches 13,800 feet.
8:31:12 Initiating Event at 13,800 feet followed immediately by the commencement of the decapitation process.
8:31:47 explosion of Massive Fireball at 5500-7500 feet. The eyewitnesses contend that the Massive Fireball explosion was immediately preceded by the fiery streak.
8:31:55-8:31:57 splashdown of the Massive Fireball flames.
very well
8:31:12 Initiating Event at 13,800 feet followed immediately by the commencement of the decapitation process.
Oh well! here comes another determination of "pilot error" or "airframe-design failure".
"The recycler says that he had to pledge to keep it secret to get the contract."
FALSE! You Sir are the most incompetent "analyst" I've even seen! Look at this....
Having followed the link to the official report of witness 649, I found it contained a letter from a real expert witness analyst from the Suffolk County Police Department (Douglas S. Matulewich, Deputy Inspector, Commanding Officer, Marine Bureau) who was employed to determine if TWA 800 witness accounts indicate that a missile was involved. Inspector Matulewich along with an agent from the Defense Intelligence Agency triangulated several witness accounts and concluded this,
Witness Expert: "I became involved in a joint effort to determine the possibility of a missile shooting down TWA flight 800. The objective was to determine if the observations of eye witnesses could be plotted on a chart to determine a location from which a missile was shot. ... The above Latitude and Longitude locations INDICATES THE CENTER OF AN AREA THAT IS STRONGLY RECOMMENDED TO BE SEARCHED AND AT A MINIMUM A ONE (1) nautical mile area should be searched for the remains of equipment that would launch a portable missile. The possibility exists that the equipment was discarded and now remains on the ocean floor." From official NTSB report.
All caps are in the original. You can read that on page 265 of 446 of the pdf file in the first link in this reply. There it is Asmodeus, an expert inspector who reviewed the witness accounts and concluded that they are enough like missile witness accounts to justify a massive search for residual missile parts. How could Asmodeus have overlooked this detail if he is the master analyst he implies and is sufficently versed in this case to render such strong opinion? It seems that Asmodeus capitalizes on what people don't know, either that or his tin-foil hat is getting too tight.
Now get this, the expert analyst Commander Donaldson found evidence of the FBI's search that was recommended based on the expert conclusion that the witness accounts support a missile strike. If the expert analysts and the FBI believed what Asmodeus believes they would never have recommended and conducted such a massive search of the ocean. It seems that Asmodeus' beliefs expose him as the real tin-foil hatter.
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.