Posted on 06/20/2016 11:33:04 AM PDT by Kaslin
When I see former FBI New York honcho Jim Kallstrom appear on Fox News, I see a tortured soul. As boldly honest as he has been on the subject of Islamic terrorism, this once honorable man has lived a lie for the last twenty years on the subject of TWA Flight 800. Others have lived the lie as well, but none so personally.
It was Kallstrom who spoke to the press, Kallstrom who testified at congressional hearings, Kallstrom who consoled the families of the 230 dead with the assurance he would leave “no stone unturned” in his pursuit of the truth.
When Kallstrom arrived on the scene in Long Island the day after the crash in July 1996, the truth was indeed what he was seeking. By July 30, 1996 -- less than two weeks after the 747 blew up -- FBI agents had interviewed 144 “excellent” witnesses to a missile strike. As revealed in a recently unearthed CIA memo, the evidence was “overwhelming” and the witness testimony “too consistent” for the cause of the plane’s destruction to be anything other than a missile.
1996 being an election year, however a missile strike on an American airliner involved far too much political risk for the Clinton White House. Working through the CIA, its operatives took effective control of the investigation. For reasons only he knows, Kallstrom knuckled under.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Actually we do. We have the radar traces of the nose section from within last transponder return and its appearance as a separate passive radar return on the next sweep. From that it can be calculated that the initiating event that resulted in the nose being separated occurred about 2 seconds after the last transponder return based on the distance of the nose from the rest of the aircraft.
“that a plane can fly even when it’s unbalanced with a rearward shift to the center of gravity.”
No, it cannot. Where did you get that idea? Swordmaker even gave you the answer to that issue.
We practice stalls,
Then IF you ever encounter one,
You instinctively react to recover from one.
Simple actions lost on pilots who only fly by computer.
Interesting. For the archive:
http://www.wnd.com/2008/08/71612/
Summary: USS Knox was positioned off of Wallops Island and shot a missile, which destroyed TWA800. The USS Normandy was 180 miles away using its computing power for intercept point and monitoring the test. It was an accident that has been covered up.
“when it’s unbalanced with a rearward shift to the center of gravity. The accident report said the Bagram 747 could have flown without crashing in spite of the rearward cargo shift if the hydraulics hadn’t been damaged.
“
You’re comparing the loss of the entire nose section of Flight 800 to a 3% shift in CG of Bagram?? Ridiculous comparison.
The Bagra 747 could have flown if two or three of the vehicles had shifted AND the pilot had control of the pitch surfaces in the tail and had full control of operating engines. Where was the pilot of TWA-800??? Oh, he was hurtling toward the Atlantic Ocean, somewhere below his airplane without any control at all. . .
The Bagram flight lost its horz stab when the load shifted and damaged the turn screw. So, the crew were doomed.
A CG move of 3% aft is not the same as losing the entire nose section. Are you really that stupid as to not see the massive difference??
Where are you getting 3%?
I was not replying to you I was replying to moonman about the Bagram 747 that went down do to cargo shift. You I’m in total agreement with.
You are aware that Wallops Island is approximately 210 miles south-south west of where TWA 800 exploded? And that the RIM-Sea Sparrow missiles that she carried have a maximum range of about 10 miles? Your math doesn't work.
RIM-7 Sea Sparrow
where did I say it was a Sea Sparrow?
That's the kind of missile the Knox carried. What kind of missile were you thinking it was?
I know you do. . . but you have to have a flyable plane to do that, not one that has the tail surfaces incapable of any movement as in the case of the Bagram 747. And you have to have a living, capable pilot present and powered on engines as in the case of TWA-800.
I thought that might be the case. Thanks for clearing it up.
I have trouble believing it and the 1960s' slide rule engineering that went into making something like that even possible is quite astonishing to me.
Thanks for posting!
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.
