With the altitude being what it was, there’s a limited number
of possible missiles that could have achieved this take down.
You make a valid point, but what is your alternative theory
if not an accident by the NAVY?
I’m not necessarily sold on the NAVY angle, but I’m not ruling
it out either.
We don’t know if there was a smaller type vessel that was maned
by a small team either.
Most of the people on this forum are strident supporters of
the U. S. Military. That would include the NAVY.
Mistakes can happen. I would prefer the truth of it come out,
rather than a report made up of pure fantasy, that no one
believed.
Lies and subterfuge, destroy faith in our nation’s higher
institutions. The FBI, CIA, the Media, and government
officials have no one to blame but themselves for a lack
of faith in their respective offices and agencies.
The NTSB was ordered to stand down. The FBI and CIA took
over. That right there made it clear this was a cover-up.
The NTSB always handled domestic flight investigations on
land or in the waters off our shores. What made this crash
investigation different than any other investigation?
Believe it or not, my alternative theory is the official theory. And believe me, it took me a while to arrive at that. But I do believe it is the most plausible explanation.
My own father at first didn't believe it. He was a union aircraft mechanic, turned supervisor, turned maintenance manager at JFK through his career. His specialty was the 747, 767 and A300. But our discussions were when it was the "static electricity" theory which ignited the tank. I never spoke to him after learning about the mixed voltages in the cable and the faulty level indicator. Too late to talk to him now.
Still, I definitely buy the overheated fuel from two hours of running the AC unit (located under the tank) and the spark from the chaffing wires over any US Navy shootdown and cover up theory. Especially considering that other Boeing planes have exploded similarly prior to and after flight 800.