TWA 800: What the CIA Did to Mike Wire, Witness 571

American Thinker ^ | June 9, 2016 | Mike Wire

[Kaslin]

TWA 800 was destroyed twenty years ago this July off the coast of Long Island. Mike Wire was one of the 258 FBI witnesses who reported an apparent missile strike. The New York Times, which owned the story, interviewed not a single one of them. In the absence of real information, the CIA and FBI collaborated to discredit the eyewitnesses and advance an exploding fuel tank theory. Wire’s case is just one shocking example out of many. To learn more, see Jack Cashill’s introductory article in this series or his book, TWA 800: The Crash, The Cover-Up, The Conspiracy (Regnery: July 5).

Recently the CIA released documents pertaining to the tragic destruction of TWA 800. During review of those documents, I have learned that the CIA had designated me as Witness #1 to the heartbreaking events of that day. For the FBI, I was only Witness #571. How the CIA came to decide upon me is at the heart of this miscarriage of justice.

On July 17, 1996, I was working to get the new Beach Lane Bridge in Westhampton ready to open. The bridge crosses the narrow inland waterway and connects the mainland with a small strip of beach beyond.

As a millwright tradesman, I had been working all day in the mechanical room of the bridge. A little before 8:30 p.m. that night, I surfaced to get some air. I was talking to one of the many men working with me when I saw what looked like a cheap firework rising from beyond the houses along the beach. This wasn’t out of the ordinary for a summer weekday so close to the 4th of July.

[longfellow]

Also a NY Detective told me that a fax came in to the police station alerting them to a stolen boat were the missile may have been launched off of.

Another Detective who didn’t believe it was shot down later on met an FBI diver that told him they found explosive chemical from a missile and the missile launching device. These bastards knew it was a terrorist attack.

BJ also knew of the plan to attack the world trade center in 96. Read Dereliction of Duty, unless you’re on blood pressure pills.

[NotQuiteCricket]

Bfl

[Lower Deck]

Apparently they were aiming for air Israel but they had some problems on the runway so they let the air france take off instead.

Any terrorist organization who base their plans on a plane leaving JFK on time is either filled with idiots of with people who have never flown out of New York.

[surrey]

Or, had big deposits in their bank accounts.

[LS]

But this doesn’t solve the problem of a missile that can reach the airliner. No, a small boat can’t hold a Standard Missile launcher. It would tear a boat apart. That’s pure James Bond stuff.

So a boat does not equal a missile.

[LS]

1) yes.
2) depends on the exercise.
3) yes. So now you have to account for two missiles. A drone and the missile shot to take it out. Radar shows none. Navy claims no missiles were fired. No one saw TWO trails. So, what? The Navy fired a drone that it was going to shoot down, thought better of it, but in the mean time the drone just happened to fly through an airliner? All the while the Navy is doing live fire releases in civilian air space? Come on.

[LS]

For Pete’s sake use some sense. This isn’t a shoulder-fired RPG. These are massive installations that require a stable battery with incredible knowledge and electronics, costing (the whole thing) tens of millions of dollars . . .

to take out a civilian airliner that no one ever claimed credit for, for which there is no reason to shoot down that particular airliner? Please. Let’s get some rationality here.

I don’t know a lot of the possibilities, but we can pretty well state that no terrorist ever got a standard missile battery, then tried to conceal it by making it look like a “pass through” missile, then HOPED the Navy might have an exercise going on that it MIGHT be able to blame it on . . . but not take credit.

[LS]

So if the radar caught a boat, it surely would have caught a missile, right?

[going hot]

Couple hundred eye witnesses who saw something come up from the horizon were not loaded or stoned.

The pilots trailing that radioed that the plane was getting shot at were not loaded or stoned.

The other aircraft whose pilots saw the object rise up to meet the target were not loaded.

My friend and I were intently watching the cnn feed as they hauled out parts from the ocean with the crane.. They lifted up one section that was about 6-8 feet in a rectangular shape, and my friend sprang out of his seat, ran to the screen and exclaimed " Look there, the missle punched there!" It was a hole about 6-10 inches, in the lower center of the suspended piece with the water draining from it. That piece never was placed back on the mock up. There is a section of fuselage missing under the wing, I believe on the right, which is the likely section that was "lost".

Regards you not seeing anything on the radar, unless you were there monitoring the original screen as it was happening, scrubbing it would prevent you from ever seeing it.

Weather this was an accidental shoot down or a terrorist shoot down, it was a shoot down, and the entire law enforcement and investigation changed gears and direction after the weekend.

It would have ended Clinton's bid for a second term, and that was not going to happen while he could command a coverup and material tampering.

[ronnie raygun]

The evil that permeates from the clintons the obamas the criminals that hide the truth continue to rule the airwaves and get elected to a country that is slowly being murdered by these people. When do we get serious

[Lower Deck]

Radar data for the next 20 minutes showed the mystery boat heading on a beeline out to sea, on a south-southwest course, even as other boats rushed to the crash to try to help out.

Radar data from where?

[al baby]

I recall and this maybe an early internet rumor but Clinton gave TWA a 747 to replace the one that got blowed up

[BatGuano]

I remember the day. My wife and I were in the Paris airport enroute to Dulles. We had flown into Paris from Lyon. A passenger on that flight asked if we had heard about an American airplane had “crashed into the sea in New York?”
I replied that I had not heard. As we were going from one terminal to another, we saw photographers taking pictures of people in the terminal. Didn't think anything about it until we were on line checking in for our next flight.

THOSE PHOTOGRAPHERS WERE TAKING PICTURES OF PEOPLE WAITING FOE THE ARRIVAL OF FRIENDS AND LOVED ONES WHO WERE DEAD VICTIMS OF TWA 800!

How crass and unfeeling the media is worldwide.

[Political Junkie Too]

Radar data from where?>

Islip.

-PJ

[Talisker]

Its been 20 years. Impossible to believe everyone on a ship would keep quiet for that long. Most are probably long out of the military and pretty much untouchable.

heartwood: I don’t think everyone on a ship with dozens to hundreds of crew would keep quiet, for twenty years.

Pensions. Audits. Families.

Its not hard for the gov to do.

The only real necessity is the desire to do it for that long. The Clintons were in office then. Hillary is running now. Connect the dots.

[Political Junkie Too]

But your own quote says "We keep coming back, though, to a very troubling point for the conspiracy theorists, namely there is no shoulder fired missile that had the range to reach the airliner, unless (and even this is a stretch) directly under it at sea at the time it was fired." This boat was very nearly under it, just like you suggested, and fled the scene afterwards.

Why couldn't a Stinger be launched from a MANPADS from this boat that was close enough?

-PJ

[VTenigma]

I wached it too, no doubt in my mind it was a missile.

[VTenigma]

watched

[VTenigma]

We’re going to need a bigger boat, right?

[McGruff]

I never believed the guberments explanation. Too many witnesses saying the same thing as this guy.