My neighbor, a ret’d NYPD Loo was an FAA investigator in 96. He told me over a few Jacks that it was clealry a malfunction. But my friend’s brother was actually flying his single Beechcraft out of Gabreski that night and saw the contrails jutting up toward the 747. He followed them till impact. In his opinion there was no doubt. He had not seen contrails spiraling downward fom the blast as investigators told him. he’d seen something climbing up and impacting the 747. 17 years later he still knows what he saw. How to explain my neighbor? His opinion was based on seeing the reconstructed plane out in at the then Grumman facility in Calverton. Which pieces went into that reconstruction were from 800 and which were replacement parts only a few know. I often remark on these threads that that evening about 8ish Bernie Shaw was reporting on the matter on CNN and he brought up Wolf Blitzer who was then WH correspondent, reporting from the WH. Blitzer said Clinton would speak to the nation at 10PM. Why would POTUS speak about an air accident? The POTUS speech never happened. The Olympics were to begin in 3 weeks in Atlanta and Clinton was running for reelection. No one in the administration wanted to defend allowing a US airliner to be destroyed 14,000 feet over the Hamptons by terrorist or terrorists unknown. Hence the coverup and the willing continuation of that coverup by successive administrations.One hand washes the other.
The "Terrorists" were not unknown. They were all too well known, and THAT was the problem.
...or a joint NATO EXERCISE that was firing LIVE MISSILES.
Whatever the cause, the coverup was deemed necessary in order to protect the wealth of those in power. It's always about the money.