TWA Flight 800 - Witness Fred Meyer reportedly says "I suspect that Bill Donaldson was murdered."

Circular logic "a logical error, caused by first making some assumption that can't be proven true, then, on the basis of that assumption, deriving some result that is then used to "prove" that the first assumption is true.

You and all the rest of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats made the same "logical error" at the outset of the investigation, the ASSUMPTIONS that the streak of light seen by many witnesses was the ascending fiery exhaust of a missile in flight and that the Massive Fireball was the Initiating Event when "the missile" intercepted the airliner. Therefore, it became your duty as Patriots to prove you were right. Therefore, those who disagreed with your interpretation of the witness reports are government agent disinformationalists engaged in the felonious criminal coverup of a heinous crime, the missile shootdown of TWA Flight 800.

In short, you've brainwashed yourselves.

And in your clumsy efforts to pound square pegs into round holes to try to prove you're right, you've run off ALL members of congress, past and present, the press [with the exception of the green men from Mars branch] and the public has walked away.

Your efforts to try to explain the wacky "coverup" allegations are grotesque.

"In my view, it does not take thousands to cover up this... it takes only a few, properly placed. It is my viewpoint that it was a terrorist act. The cover-up may be the result of the US Navy's FAILURE to intercept and capture the occupants of the two missile firing boats or it may be because the administration did not want a failure on its record in the upcoming elections. Unlike you, I keep an open mind on this." [emphasis yours]

To support your allegation that at least some of the witnesses should have testified before the NTSB, you came up with the following.

"In a trial, best evidence is primary evidence. A witness deposition is not permited or admissable unless the deposed is NOT AVAILABLE and even if admitted, the jurors are told to give it less weight than actual testimony. A police officer's report of what a witness said is inadmissable as hearsay. In this case were the witnesses unavailable??? Were they dead? No? Then the NTSB did not have to "rely" on the flawed reports from the FBI."

"I suggest that there are witnesses with more probitive value than others. I would believe it would be prudent to call those with the most detailed and complete accounts. I do not need to name them. There is a world of difference between NO EYEWITNESSES and even ONE."

SOMEBODY would have to name them.

WHO would you and the rest of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats have trusted to make the selections? The NTSB? The FBI? The civil litigants' lawyers? Asmodeus? Ian Goddard? Bill Donaldson? Reed Irvine? James Sanders? Acehai? Swordmaker?

SOMEBODY would have had to gather up the documentation on ALL of their prior interviews to see if their contentions about what they actually saw changed over time as the result of input from other sources aka tainting.

WHO would you and the rest of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats have trusted to do that? The NTSB? The FBI? The civil litigants' lawyers? Asmodeus? Ian Goddard? Bill Donaldson? Reed Irvine? James Sanders? Acehai? Swordmaker?

SOMEBODY would have had to question them.

WHO would you and the rest of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats have trusted to do that? The NTSB? The FBI? The civil litigants' lawyers? Asmodeus? Ian Goddard? Bill Donaldson? Reed Irvine? James Sanders? Acehai? Swordmaker?

You say - "I would believe it would be prudent to call those with the most detailed and complete accounts."

For instance?

You say: "In his [Asmodeus'] world, the trial court is composed of experts, the judge and lawyers, who from their absolute unassailable expertise, decide what the jury will hear. The now perfectly untainted testimony and evidence (Just the facts, Ma'am!) is presented before a jury who will make an unbiased and totally objective evaluation of what happened, with no application of their life experiences, education, and knowledge from other sources, just like little machines." [emphasis yours]

In the real world the Trial Court is presided over by an expert, the Judge, and he alone decides what the jury will be allowed to hear and see and what the jury will not be allowed to hear and see after listening to the arguments and reviewing the case law presented by other experts [and in his own law library], the litigants' lawyers. Other experts, higher court Judges, may thereafter be asked to decide if the decisions of the Trial Court Judge were correct.

Juries are not supposed to let "their life experiences, education, and knowledge from other sources" influence their decision - but in the real world they often do. In that event, however, it may be grounds for a new trial.

You say: "The Ian Goddard excerpt is a Non Sequitur and means nothing. He has not changed his view that TWA-800 was shot down. He is questioning his conclusion that it was the US Navy's "friendly fire" that was responsible."

Goddard appears to have succumbed again to his Circular Logic. Is he now contending that his EMP Missile Theory, intended to explain both the CWT explosion and the lack of "missile" damage to the 747, was carried out by Ahab In A Dinghy? His animated EMP Theory graphic is included with some of the other mythical "shootdown" graphics HERE.

". . . You. . . make the assumption . . . that the Massive Fireball was the Initiating Event when "the missile" intercepted the airliner..."

My, my, oh my, how you like to put words in people's mouths.

STRAWMAN ARGUMENT - an illegitimate debating technique in which one party restates the position of the opponents attributing provably false assumptions to opponents that they are NOT arguing so one can knock down the false assumption.

My one erroneous assumption was that you are an honest debater and can read.

You obviously CAN'T read and by posting a false statement of my position, you are not honest!

WHO told you that I assumed the "massive fireball" was the initiating event??? To assume that would be to ignore the evidence, the statements of the witnesses, and the science.

Anyone who reads the eyewitness testemony of those who saw the entire event and looked at the reports would find that the initiating event was one or two white flash, high explosive, high velocity ordnance like detonations... followed some seconds later (not an insignificant amount of time), by the ORANGE, deflagration of the fuel/air mix of the "massive fireball". Why don't you look at the handdrawn diagram Mike Wire made to show what he saw??? The "Massive Fireball" IS shown much lower in the sky than the intercept point of the ascending contrail and TWA-800.

"In the real world the Trial Court is presided over by an expert, the Judge..."

That's a good one. I can show you Superior Court judges whose only claim to expertise is the fact they were college mates of the Governor of a state... and Federal Court judges whose expertise is more political than judicial. Many judges are judges soley because they cannot make it in private practice and are willing to work for the $110,000 a judge makes! You were aware that judges are often reversed for ERRORS, aren't you?

"Juries are not supposed to let "their life experiences, education, and knowledge from other sources" influence their decision - but in the real world they often do. In that event, however, it may be grounds for a new trial."

Only in your world. I have served on four criminal juries and have been the foreman of our County's Criminal Grand Jury for a year. In EACH of those trial instances both the judge and the contending counsels TOLD the jury to apply their knowledge, experiences and common sense in weighing and evaluating the testimony and evidence. Your ideal jury would be made up of 26 year olds who had just come out of a 20 year coma!

The rest of your response is just more obfuscation and demands that I take on the role of prosecutor or investigator, and then denigrating me when I cannot take on those roles.

Circular logic "a logical error, caused by first making some assumption that can't be proven true, then, on the basis of that assumption, deriving some result that is then used to "prove" that the first assumption is true.

You and all the rest of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats made the same "logical error" at the outset of the investigation, the ASSUMPTIONS [1] that the streak of light seen by many witnesses was the ascending fiery exhaust of a missile in flight and [2] that the Massive Fireball was the Initiating Event when "the missile" intercepted the airliner. Therefore, it became your duty as Patriots to prove you were right. Therefore, those who disagreed with your interpretation of the witness reports are government agent disinformationalists engaged in the felonious criminal coverup of a heinous crime, the missile shootdown of TWA Flight 800.

"WHO told you that I assumed the "massive fireball" was the initiating event??? To assume that would be to ignore the evidence, the statements of the witnesses, and the science. Anyone who reads the eyewitness testemony of those who saw the entire event and looked at the reports would find that the initiating event was one or two white flash, high explosive, high velocity ordnance like detonations... followed some seconds later (not an insignificant amount of time), by the ORANGE, deflagration of the fuel/air mix of the 'massive fireball'." [emphasis added - caps your]

More textbook examples of your Circular Logic. NONE of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats have ever been able to prove that the streak of light ascended, much less that it was missile exhaust or that it preceded the Initiating Event or that it was "a missile" or that there were ANY "ordnance" explosions.

What is it you don't understand about "at the outset of the investigation"?

WHEN did the first actual "witness reports" become publicly available? What are the dates of "the most detailed witness reports" you've indicated would determine your selection of the witnesses you refuse to identify but contend should have testified at the NTSB Hearing in Baltimore?

"Using our knowledge of how shoulder launch missiles perform, let's examine what a hypothetical missile attack would've looked like. The rocket motor of the missile would be visible and it would look like a light ascending rapidly for about 8 seconds. Then the motor would burn out and the light would disappear for as much as 7 seconds. After this, a second streak of light, the airplane in crippled flight would become visible. It would be different from the first streak moving slower, then it would develop into a fireball. We carefully reviewed the witness accounts to determine if anyone described a scenario like this, one that began with two sequential streaks of light and concluded with a fireball. We could not find anyone who was describing this scenario. [emphasis added] SOURCE.

The credibility of you and all the rest of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats self destructed long ago and ALL the allegations of the tinfoil hats have been suspect unless or until proven otherwise since - including your own about jury duty and the Judges' instructions.

"The rest of your response is just more obfuscation and demands that I take on the role of prosecutor or investigator, and then denigrating me when I cannot take on those roles."

How would you describe - " . . . followed some seconds later (not an insignificant amount of time), by the ORANGE, deflagration of the fuel/air mix of the "massive fireball"? Clarifying? Obfuscation?

You didn't need to admit you have no experience as an investigator, It's been obvious.

"The credibility of you and all the rest of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats self destructed long ago and ALL the allegations of the tinfoil hats have been suspect unless or until proven otherwise since - including your own about jury duty and the Judges' instructions.

Asmodeus... if you believe that then WHY DO YOU BOTHER TO POST MILLIONS OF BYTES OF REPETITIOUS BILGE???

Shouting louder does not give your arguements more weight.

Take your meds.
____________________
Yahoo TWA 800 forum
From: Jack Reed
Date: Thu Jun 20, 2002 10:09 pm
Subject: Wextry! Wextry! More About TWA Flight 800 Airblast Loudness

Finally, I've gotten a recording of an airblast signature that I believe was close to what hit Long Island witnesses to the destruction of TWA Flight 800. Read all about it in the attached Word 97 file.
http://attach1.groups.yahoo.com/v1/0LISPUx9NktuI47jDzTzx4drrbyxQkYDt47GA8vi6lhfWWGrf6_yEWuy8gZtak8uywamsguUpZQqkvu8kuZBgV65T7PcdLZXeUjamuyrUGfwqmdQ/Sort%20of.doc

Sort of, But Not Very Loud Explosion Airblast Wave
Jack W. Reed, 6/20/200

Finally, at long last, I've just gotten a recording of an explosion airblast signature, very nearly what I needed to show what all those folks on Long Island were hit by from the explosion that ended TWA Flight 800, in 1996. This recent test, conducted by ARA, Inc., for DTRA on Kirtland AFB, NM, was a 1400-lb ANFO surface burst, fired at 1700 UTC 30 May 2002. Its hemispherical airblast strength was equivalent to 1167-lb TNT (5/6) surface burst, or a 2233-lb free air burst spherical wave. That is pretty close to the 1-ton TNT that I have contended was the initiating event (IE) that destroyed TWA Flight 800.

Recorded overpressure, 24.8 Pa or 121.8 dB, was reached in 32 ms. Assuming this was half the positive phase of a sine wave gives 128 ms wave length, or 7.8 Hz frequency for a single cycle, for acoustic comparisons. Two closer gage stations were also operated, with signatures as shown, at 7.44 km and 2.24 km, with unquestioned, much louder, impacts.

Two ear-witnesses, the gage operator and an observing geophysicist, slightly disagreed on the loudness of this airblast, "pretty loud" versus "sort of loud", but certainly not very loud. Other folks were outside in the neighborhood, sunning, gardening, etc., but none were seen to be affected by this blast. They were not even curious about the instrumentation set up. On the other hand, this neighborhood has never been reluctant to complain when louder blasts rattled their houses (cages?).

In conclusion, at least this loud and strong airblast was reported in FBI witness reports from the explosion at TWA Flight 800 off Long Island. Check out relevant excerpts from their testimonials at my web site http://www.nmia.com/~jwreed.

What really blew up there? Certainly not a 20-lb TNT equivalent explosion considered by the NTSB Final Report.

____________________

Testimony of FBI Chief Metallurgist William Tobin

Bob Donaldson's’ TWA 800 forum
DanPride - June 20 2002, 2:15 AM [excerpt]
Too many deaths to make fun of
"God I hate pompus SOB's that try to use ridicule to hide uncomfortable facts. How stupid do you think we are. I too believe Commander Donaldson was murdered. When I suggested as much he sent me an unsolicited envelope with three of his bumper stickers in it. I figured it was kinda like three stars for the thought."

Yahoo TWA 800 forum
From:John Fiorentino June 23, 2002 5:47 pm
Bob Donaldson's TWA 800 Forum
From: John Fiorentino June 23 2002, 7:19 PM

Stan

Do you know why your BS falls apart Stan? Simply because you don't see a REAL threat when confronted with one. Why hasn't anybody knocked on my door from this super secret underground government you hypothesize? This subject is like the plague to most sincere researchers. Why?. And I'll say it again, because of crap similar to that posted recently. I did notice after the sh*t hit the fan so to speak the yahoo800 forum came to a frickin screeching halt. I admired Bill Donaldson. Did I agree with everything he said, no. I do believe he should be allowed to rest in peace without being disturbed by the eternal drumbeat of fanatical mountebanks.

If you want to believe every hair brained notion put forth regarding Fl800, that's your business. I want to get at the truth. My earnest sympathies go out to Don Nibert. I admit openly that I haven't the foggiest notion what I would be saying or doing if I were in his shoes. But regardless of my sympathies, I find I don't agree with (or unfortunately believe) much of what he has to say. I think he may believe it, but that doesn't make it true.

I've had doors slammed in my face to as I've looked into this thing. It hasn't detered me, nor will it. I offered to honestly look into anything you presented. I just request you back it up with some FACTS.

Look at the botch job Reed Irvine performed on the last little "tidbit." Look at the f***** attitude displayed by FIRO when I merely pointed out that SSE IS NOT SSW! What was the response from Stalcup?. I'll change it, he never did. What did Bob say?. He treated me to a geography lesson on Long Island. I frickin live 40 miles away!!!

No, you tell me Stan. Just what is this REALLY all about? A search for truth - or a G** d***** ego contest? [expletives deleted - caps his]

Did anyone here see that C-SPAN press conference, held in a
tiny, narrow room with bad lighting? The pesented evidence was that TWA 800 had been attacked. I would like to see that video! Don't have the date or the name of the speakers.

Jack Reed:
[quote] Assuming that the explosion noise source location was that provided by radar for TWA Flight 800 initial break-up, acoustic arrivals times were calculated for each ear-witness report at their NTSB-provided geographic coordinates. It may also be assumed that specific events in the viewed demise of the aircraft were seen at nearly the same time by all these observers, various estimates of the relative time differences between these events and the sound arrivals should describe a constant time for each event time on the following graph. The large variations (± 10's of seconds) actually shown by the graph demonstrates the uncertainty of ear-witnesses in describing times to seconds on days after the disaster, when they were interviewed by the FBI teams. Also, when these witnesses observed these events, they had no idea of what was happening, and only made their connections after hearing and seeing TV and newspaper reports, which were also very confused in those early days. In some cases there is disagreement between witnesses at the "same" coordinates, which were provided only to 0.01° latitude & longitude, that is for blocks 3648 ft latitude, 2795 ft longitude, but representing only 2-3 seconds arrival time differences. Some said a visible event came before the sound, others placed it after the sound.

On the whole, however, it does appear that a large fireball formed, then split into two prongs and fell to the sea surface roughly 40-60 seconds after the explosion sound was originated. [end quote][emphasis added]

[No graphic shown for H,J,K]

[No additional graphics shown]

Judging from Lisa's story, she seems to have been on Fire Island in the Patchogue or Bellport vicinity,or perhaps even further west on Long Island? That snippet doesn't specify, and I am curious. Do you know?

From: Jack Reed
Date: June 25, 2002
[quote] Sound witness locations and times, by a timing system based on an assumed IE zero time and TWA-800's location, are shown at my website http://www.nmia.com/~jwreed They convince me that what almost everyone saw came long after the source of what they heard. [end quote][emphasis added]

See #49 for the presently available details.

Yahoo TWA 800 forum
From: Jack Reed
Date: Wed Jun 26, 2002 8:21 pm

George wrote in #16:
>I don't see a ton of anything other than the weight of an SM-2. Where did the TNT come from?
Please note that I did not say it was TNT, only that the airblast was equivalent to airblast from 1-ton TNT, or 2-ton nuclear, or 2400-lb ANFO, or 30 gallons propane, or some other weight of wheat dust in a grain silo.
>David McClaine didn't see it blow up. Fritz Meyer claims to have seen its babies blow up.
The glowing fireball from 1-ton TNT reaches only 20.7 ft in a fraction of a millisecond, after which one might see the left-over explosive fuel burn for a very short time. The explosions you see in movies and TV are near-surface bursts loaded with dirt and burning debris, or purposeful visual enhancements. After TWA-800 was broken up all kinds of flashes and flames could have resulted to satisfy Meyer, but it was much later when the massive fireball from wing tanks full of Jet-A came out for everyone to see.
>The 'bursts' were part of the flaming debris. And irrelevant to the source IE.
Straight Ahead, Jack W. Reed

Yahoo TWA 800 forum
From: "Richard Savage
Date: Thu Jun 27, 2002
Subject: The Commander
I had wanted to comment on the possibility of Donaldson being murdered while it was a hot topic but couldn't find the time at the time.

1. From the little I know of Fritz Meyer, I've gotta believe that he knows something that we don't. I have to believe that he has credible evidence supporting his suspicion, or he never would have raised it.

2. Clearly, those who would assassinate their enemies these days can be much more sophisticated than they could in the past, have some rather exotic methods for accomplishing their objectives and for the most part, want to make it look like natural causes. I hadn't heard about cancer in that regard, but who knows what they're capable of these days? George said something about radiating your victim… Also, can we be sure that the Commander really had cancer?

3. Not only does power corrupt, but corruption empowers. This seems to me a fact of life and, consequently, we should expect anyone at the top of our food chain to be rather sociopathic and capable of doing pretty much whatever it takes to maintain and extend his power. We shouldn't expect such a person to share our values or worry for long about wasting somebody.

4. There really is an "Establishment" that pretty much owns our governments and major media. They're not so much worried about keeping their corruption totally secret – they just need to make sure that the necessary knowledge never reaches critical mass. And by owning the major media, they've been able to do that quite effectively so far. The Internet might be cause for concern, but they’ve probably got that one figured out by now, also.

5. I don't know of any direct evidence that Donaldson was murdered, but if we've been paying attention to human beings and world events in general, it sure shouldn't surprise us to find out that he was.

____________________

Yahoo TWA 800 forum
From: George A Donaldson
Date: June 27, 2002 10:33 am
Subject: Re: [twa800] The Commander
[excerpts]
[quote] Rick, There would be no reason to murder the Commander. He was acting as a shill in the defense of the US Navy. At last count, the navy is part of the government. He lived in the shadows relative to debating any of us. Had he been open, I doubt that he would have explained the towed object behind the P3 or the presence of chaff. A theory about terrorists took the heat off of the navy. His cohorts were navy types as well when including the Admiral. Just so much bull sh*t. Smoke is smoke wherever its source may be. Sad that he died. Sad that anyone has to die. I had a sister-in-law die of a brain tumor and I'm sure that she wasn't murdered. At least not intentionally. She was loved by all around her. [end quote]

[quote] I am sure that the Commander got press time because he was blowing smoke and the government wanted to mask the crash as being a shoot down. [end quote]

____________________

Circular logic - "a logical error, caused by first making some assumption that can't be proven true, then, on the basis of that assumption, deriving some result that is then used to "prove" that the first assumption is true."

ALL of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats made the same "logical error" at the outset of the investigation, the ASSUMPTIONS [1] that the streak of light seen by many witnesses was the ascending fiery exhaust of a missile in flight and [2] that the Massive Fireball was the Initiating Event when "the missile" intercepted the airliner. Therefore, it became their duty as Patriots to prove they were right. Therefore, those who disagreed with their interpretation of the witness reports are government agent disinformationalists engaged in the felonious criminal coverup of a heinous crime, the missile shootdown of the 747. Therefore, in the minds of some of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats, those engaged in the felonious criminal coverup will even murder those who the government believes to be "getting too close to the truth", the missile shootdown of TWA Flight 800.

By IAN GODDARD
THE DISAPPEARED TWA 800 RESEARCHER
Excerpts from:
THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE (10/28/1997)
Man's Disappearance Remains a Mystery
By Mark Henry
PALM SPRINGS The disappearance of civic watchdog Jeremy Crocker while researching the crash of TWA Flight 800 last year has left his two sons baffled and searching for any sign that their father is still alive.

Crocker, a longtime Palm Springs resident whose father built the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway, was last seen Dec. 9 at the downtown Los Angeles library where he did much of his research on the crash.

His preoccupation with the airline crash included countless hours of research in libraries and on the Internet. He did not trust the government's probes of the crash and believed a projectile knocked the airliner from the skies. He created mathematical models and studied the aerodynamics of the crash and similarities to other air disasters worldwide.

Crocker's two grown sons believe their father's disapperance may be connected to the July 17, 1996 crash of TWA Flight 800 off the coast of Long Island.
SOURCE.