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

To: VectoRama
"Anonymous"? Reed knows who the guy is, and is withholding the name due to the person fearing retaliation. Reed is not the type to make this up.

Reed is careful not to state that the missle (or whatever the witness saw) came from a sub, but he is clearly stating that, if his witness is to be believed, the authorities have lied to us about the location of USN subs. This is a big advance in the process of untangling the coverup.
35 posted on 01/31/2002 7:05:15 PM PST by yazd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: yazd
Exactly. It's a virtual certainty that a missile, or possibly two missiles, brought down the plane. But no one has brought forward any evidence to say who fired the missile. It could have been the naval exercise, it could have been terrorists in a small boat. This statement only says that people on the subs saw the missile--as did many others, including a number of pilots who were Vietnam veterans and know what ordinance explosions look like.

Clinton covered things up and lied more or less instinctively, so it could easily have been terrorists who were responsible, and he didn't want that to get out because he might have to do something about it.

As for losing his pension, a number of retiring generals were threatened with just that penalty by clinton. There are ways of doing it. Anyone who has been in the service knows that the mysterious military bureaucracy can do anything it wants, and no one ever knows who was responsible.

40 posted on 01/31/2002 7:26:54 PM PST by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

To: yazd
Nice post. You are exactly right.
55 posted on 01/31/2002 10:50:14 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

To: yazd
I don't recall anyone saying there were no subs in the area. I can be wrong, but I think I have seen MANY references to the number of surface vessels (and, by imlication, subs) in the area. There has never been a question of that.

Here is the issue: the ONLY weapon that could have brought down that plane was a Standard (or missile of similar range), and NOT a "terrorist hand-held stinger."

When you get into these scenarios, however, you have a MULTITUDE of problems, especially the radar data, for which so far no one has been able to produce that shows ONE MISSILE (let alone TWO, as is required by the Sanders/Standard scenario). Surely ONE of those vessels, or ONE of the MANY FAA radard in that are would have ONE radar tape that SOMEONE would smuggle out to the public.

Like the JFK "missing bullet" from the "shooters in front," it is the one piece of evidence that would clearly make the unimpeachable case for a Navy "shootdown"---yet it is the piece of evidence that the conspiracy people cannot produce, despite the fact that it should be relatively easy to do so.

133 posted on 02/19/2002 9:41:37 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

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