Posted on 05/17/2008 3:49:16 PM PDT by Daniel T. Zanoza
For The Sake Of Us All
It cannot be refuted or denied, but it can be ignored. For whatever the reason, there have been times in American history where the U.S. government participated in the spreading of disinformation or lies. For example, until this day, many believe both Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt knew the Japanese were about to attack Pearl Harbor. Indeed, the conventional wisdom at the time was either Midway Island or Pearl Harbor, Hawaii would be targeted by the Japanese war machine.
It is important to remember most Americans believed ...
(Excerpt) Read more at rffm.typepad.com ...
Why let facts interfere with a perfectly good screed?
>>Quite a few hypotheticals in that piece ...
Agreed, but from those in the business:
1/ What the Gumm’nt says happened with TWA 800 didn’t.
2/ We will never know the truth about TWA 800.
3/ The Airbus (pumping the rudder in turbulence) scenario is quite plausible.
4/ The American public is usually satisfied with far less than the whole truth, is satisfied with “feel good” answers, and doesn’t often ask many questions. “Truth in itself is rarely sufficient to make men act.” Clauswitz, 1832
I almost stopped reading at this point, but out of sheer morbid curiosity kept going. I mean, really... Does he buy into this all-controlling cabal that can order the media around? The MSM, inept and deluded and liberal as it is, is pretty good at digging for facts, or even near-facts. That's actually one of my complaints against them - they too often (IMHO) go with "facts" of questionable nature. They are too eager to dig for what they think they know, and go with that. If someone said "Hey, don't dig into..." that would be a huge red flag. Someone would go after the story no matter what. The exclusivity of it would merely make it all the more attractive.
...there is another scenario which could have taken place on November 12th of 2001. Is it possible...
Well of course, there is always another scenario which could have taken place... Aliens may have beamed Elvis back into the cockpit of the aircraft. I'm pretty sure the King wasn't multi-engine turbine certified so that could've caused it... ;-/
...soon became common knowledge a U.S. missile cruiser was in the area of the Flight 800 tragedy. Was it possible an errant launch of an American missile took down Flight 800...
In a word, no. Simply no, it is not possible. If they had bothered to check the distance between the cruiser and the flight, they'd see it was well outside even the extreme engagement envelope for the SAMs on board the ship.
Why would the government cover-up these possible acts of terror? The answer is simple. Economics. If Airbus Flight 587 were in fact another victim of a terrorist attack, Americans' trust in the aviation industry would have been totally destroyed.
Of course, these are the same tinfoil-hat types that swear up and down President Bush was looking for excuses to invade Iraq and finish daddy's work. So of course his administration would cover-up a ready-made excuse to hit back sooner and harder... ;-/
What information are you lacking? That will narrow down the response.
1. How many times in the past has the FBI taken over the investigation of an airplane crash from the FAA and NTB? I can't think of one.
2. Once the FBI determined there was no crime involved how come they stayed with the investigation until the end? Why did they not just drop out and let the FAA/NTB finish the investigation like what is normally done?
3. I had one more good point but it has been two long since the crash and my memory is not what it used to be.
None of those items sheds any light on the truth of the hypothesis.
1. The airplane ran on the Tarmac for several hours prior to takeoff with the packs running.
2. Uscavenged center tank fuel was heated by the packs above its flashpoint.
3. A short in a wiring harness provided a spark to ignite the fuel.
4. Boom
Actually, FDR and his military advisers thought the Japanese focus would be on the American forces and assets in the Phillipines (which was an American territory), and that the assets farther east (Midway and Pearl) would not be struck because of logistics. Well, When Japan hit Pearl it also hit the Phillipines. Thus, FDR was half right and half wrong.
And people just happened to be shooting missiles up to the vicinity of the plane at the same time.
Hey Pilot! What kind of planes do you fly, and for whom?
ML/NJ
No evidence of an impact on the airframe; no physical remains of a missle. Just some people saying they saw lights streaks in the sky.
747-400 UAL
Well, then you've obviously got more hours than little ol' me! (SEL-IFR)
I don't suppose you spent much time talking about this with too many of the TWA folks. I hear at least some of the have quite a few misgivings about this. I haven't talked to any of them myself but I have talked face to face with the Eastwind PIC who was opposite direction at 15,000 (or something like that), PVD to TTN. In fact I spoke with him on three separate occasions, once for over an hour. He told me all the FBI folks, who questioned him the day after, were interested in was that he didn't see a missile. He also told me he didn't see a missile. This was after the CIA made its cartoon, but before the NTSB got to him a year or two later. We talked about why he might not have seen a missile (high speed of the missile and poor cockpit visibility downward) and I guess enough of what we talked about made an impression on him because if you look at his NTSB interview transcript, you will see that he points this out.
Now you and he and I all know that he was the single best situated person (along with his co-pilot, who wasn't looking out when TWA 800 exploded) to know whether TWA 800 gained altitude when it was stricken. (McClaine was staring at TWA 800 from its liftoff from JFK because TWA 800 was the reason ATC was denying him direct-TTN.) McClaine was emphatic when I asked him about TWA 800 gaining altitude. "Noooooo way," he said drawing out the O's.
But the CIA wasn't interested in talking to him. They just made their little cartoon. Do you know any other "accidents" where the FBI and the CIA, or either, got involved? There's a reason the government creates disinformation. (That's what the CIA cartoon was.) And it isn't pretty.
As for your "no evidence of impact," there is actually evidence of impact though, of course, the same government that made the cartoon essentially controls the evidence. If you look at analysis of maps of the debris field, I believe you will see some evidence. As for the missile itself, Sanders says he has evidence. I actually don't think that much of Sanders but he does say what he says. Again, the government controls all the recovered evidence.
And you don't just have some people who say they saw a streak, or streaks, of light in the sky, you also have the ATC radar images brought forth by Salinger, and at least one photograph that just happens to have a white streak where a white streak should be. My understanding is that the government confiscated the original(s). Doesn't any of this bother you? And really it wasn't just "some" people, it was several hundred disparate people largely telling a consistent story.
I could go on, of course.
ML/NJ
My wife’s uncle was a TWA 747 guy based out of JFK and had his misgivings about the investigation. I believe that both the FBI and CIA were involved in the Egypt Air Crash. I was also in the Navy, and I find all the conspiracy theories that involve the USN to be nonsense. There is just no way that the USN could fire that type of missle in that situation and have everyone keep quiet.
Besides all that, the conclusions that the investigation came up with were quite realistic. The conclusion in this case are much firmer than the conclusions in the 737 U.S. Air Crash in Pittsburg or the United 737 crash in Colorado Springs. The FAA made several changes to operating procedures as a result of this investigation: changes that involve the center wing tank and the resetting of circuit breakers.
I just don’t buy the conspiracy theories out there.
McClaine was Navy too. He said the same thing to me. I asked him if he knew anything about the USS Liberty. Turns out that one of his good friends was on that ship. He changed his mind. You will too, if you think about it.
Regarding FBI/CIA involvement in the Egypt Air crash, here's what the NY Times reported:
F.B.I. MAY BE ASKED TO TAKE OVER CASE OF EGYPTAIR CRASH By MATTHEW L. WALD AND DAVID JOHNSTONSo two weeks after the NTSB was "considering" asking the FBI and CIA to get involved. I don't think the NTSB initiated anything with TWA800. The FBI was clearly involved the day after TWA 800 went down because that's when they talked to McClaine.
Published: November 16, 1999Government officials said this evening that the National Transportation Safety Board was considering asking the F.B.I. to take over the case of EgyptAir Flight 990 because of suspicions raised by a review of the plane's cockpit voice recorder.
The officials said they were focusing on a cryptic utterance, possibly a prayer. They said there were questions about exactly what was said and what it meant, but they were concerned that the statement might be the last words of a pilot determined to destroy himself and the airplane.
The plane crashed in the Atlantic, near Nantucket Island, two weeks ago, killing all 217 people on board.
[Emphasis added; the rest here]
Actually, I don't think the FBI and/or the CIA ever officially became involved in the Egypt Air crash because of objections made by the Egyptian government. And there never really was an investigation of that crash either because the truth would have been quite inconvenient. (My guess, knowing that there were several Orthodox Jews on that flight, is that Pilot Batouty was sitting near some of them when something they did or said set off his Islamic Instinct. He got up, went to the cockpit, pulled rank to get control of the plane, and then dove the plane into the ocean to kill the Jews for the glory of Allah.)
Regarding the TWA 800 conclusions, they were silly. Numerous attempts to ignite Jet-A fuel and/or fumes under even remotely similar conditions with sparks or open flames have all failed so far as I am aware. I don't believe any 747s were ever grounded as a result of the supposedly dangerous CFTs. (Contrast with the DC10 Engine mount problem.)
BTW, there is other evidence of a missile I forgot. The original NTSB report contained data from the FDR which ended with one or two strange looking lines of data. E.g. the reported altitude of TWA800 dropped from 13,100 to something like 10,500 on that last line. What folks like myself pointed out was that this was consistent with increased pressure outside the aircraft probably from an explosion close to it. Other data at the end were also consistent with an explosion outside the aircraft. So what did the NTSB do? They deleted the data from the report saying that it was left over from a previous flight. (I have the original data someplace if you are interested.) This is just so absurd when you consider that the entire purpose of an FDR is to record data accurately at just such a moment. There are timestamps and checksums included so that one knows the data are accurate reflections of what the sensors were reporting and consistent with other collected data. And really, what prior flight data would have had that 747 flying with an AoA of -97 degrees (or whatever it said). You must know the government explanation of this is all BS, but none of it seems to trouble you. I think it should.
ML/NJ
ML/NJ
There's no way that the air data computer could tell the difference between an explosion inside or outside the airframe. Pneumatic lines connect the static ports to the air data computer so as long as the explosion was exterior to that system the data is consistent with a fuel tank explosion.
McClaine was Navy too. He said the same thing to me. I asked him if he knew anything about the USS Liberty. Turns out that one of his good friends was on that ship. He changed his mind. You will too, if you think about it.
I'm not sure what the U.S.S. Liberty has to do with this. I've heard that several submarines and the Theodore Roosevelt may have been in the area. The military can't even fly a nuclear weapon accidently from North Dakota to Louisiana with everyone in the world knowing. They didn't fire a missle that night and cover it up. They couldn't have kept it quiet if they wanted to .
Numerous attempts to ignite Jet-A fuel and/or fumes under even remotely similar conditions with sparks or open flames have all failed so far as I am aware.
This is simply false. Jet fuel, heated above a certain temp, becomes explosive. TWA 800 spent 2 hours on the tarmac with its packs running. Tests determined that with the same amount of fuel as TWA 800 had, the airconditioning packs could heat the fuel to above that explosive temp.
As far as Egypt Air, once the NTSB figured out the airplane was in good shape, the FBI took over the investigation of the accident.
There's no way that the air data computer could tell the difference between an explosion inside or outside the airframe.
The final two lines of data reported included:
These data are consistent with an explosion outside and below the aircraft behind the intake for the ram air pitot tube. Below because the AoA shifts to 106 degrees, and behind the tube that senses the pressure that is converted to IAS because of the drop to 100 kts IAS. No explosion inside the air plane could have produced these readings. (That's why the NTSB came up with the fiction that they were old data left over from a previous flight, at 100 kts, ha, ha, and deleted them.)
Alt IAS AoA 13772 298 3 10127 100 106
I'm not sure what the U.S.S. Liberty has to do with this.
The Liberty has to do with people on board Naval ships being able to keep secrets. McClaine understood. From the USS Liberty Memorial page:
On June 8, 1967, US Navy intelligence ship USS Liberty was suddenly and brutally attacked on the high seas in international waters by the air and naval forces of Israel. The Israeli forces attacked with full knowledge that this was an American ship and lied about it. Survivors have been forbidden for 40 years to tell their story under oath to the American public. This USS Liberty Memorial web site tells their story and is dedicated to the memory of the 34 brave men who died.
This is simply not true. I refer you to Cmdr. Donaldson's page (Donaldson was also Navy) where he has video of several experiments including one described thusly:
In this experiment Cmdr. Donaldson uses a crab steamer to heat Jet A fuel beyond the fuel's boiling point. The experiment shows that the vapor does not become explosive until 185 degrees and even then it is not enough for a violent explosion. This closed container test uses a 5 gallon container placed on top of a propane burner. The container has a temperature probe inserted in the bottom of the tank to measure the internal fuel temperature. The ignition source uses a light bulb element to create an extreme spark.
Actually, as I pointed out the FBI never did take over the investigation. But leaving that aside, are you suggesting that the NTSB decided that TWA 800 was in good shape (Actually they decided the opposite, didn't they?) and they decided this in less than 24 hours?
I really hope you will consider all of the evidence. The eyewitnesses count too, and include several military pilots. The activation of W-105 and the naval craft known to be in the vicinity should also be considered, along with the obvious disinformation the government has proffered. There is only one reason disinformation exists and that is to obscure the truth.
ML/NJ
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.