I read the James Sanders book (referenced in Cashill’s article here) Sanders published shortly after the shoot down. I then met Sanders in person and talked to him in Nashville.
The U.S. Navy had multiple ships in the area the night of the shoot down. They quickly steamed AWAY after the crash. Why would they do that?
There was known to be testing of a “friend or foe” missile project that the U.S. Navy had been secretly working on which could discriminate between enemy aircraft and civilian aircraft. This was apparently a LIVE test that failed.
There is evidence the White House situation room was monitoring events BEFORE the crash.
Bill Clinton was running for re-election. This deadly explosion happened in August before the November presidential election. Any disclosure of a military shoot-down would have been a political disaster for Clinton.
Two Air National Guard helicopter pilots were in the air near the explosion and saw the missile. They initially talked about it and then were ordered silenced.
Hundreds of eyewitnesses clearly saw the missile rise. The FBI said these hundreds of people did not see what they saw.
The FBI unlawfully seized control of the investigation almost immediately. The National Transportation Safety Board is the agency charged by federal law to investigate airliner crashes. They were unlawfully kicked off of the investigation.
The CIA created an animation trying to explain the explosion and aftermath which animation showed the airliner CLIMB after the nose came off. What was the CIA doing in this investigation? The animation so defied the laws of physics as to be laughable to any scientist or engineer.
Uh, the military has had that ability for decades before TWA 800. They're called transponder codes.
Perhaps the clip I referenced in my #54
The CIA created an animation trying to explain the explosion and aftermath which animation showed the airliner CLIMB after the nose came off. What was the CIA doing in this investigation? The animation so defied the laws of physics as to be laughable to any scientist or engineer.
~~~
Why would a climb defy the ‘laws of physics’?
First off, if you severe the front of the aircraft, you are likely taking away all control of the flight surfaces of the aircraft, including those from autopilot? No? I don’t have an schematics handy. You tell me.
Secondly, even if all flight surfaces remained steady at the moment of separation, they would very likely not have nearly the level of aerodynamic augmentation characteristics that all the unpredictability that the irregular breakage point profile would present, let alone the fact that you now either have an open faced cylinder funneling wind at 400 knots, or a closed one cupping the air. So let’s just say that the forward fuselage broke and went down and back, and even if it pulled the rest of the craft downward, there could easily have been a large flap of metal bent downward acting just like leading slats would on a wing.
Third, all other things being equal, if you lose mass from the front of the aircraft, the balance is to the rear, which would cause you to rotate upward
And Sander's book had a dim picture of a (rogue?) missile sneaking by a back terrace family party that evening. {can't find the picture and can't post a picture} {Looks like much has been scrubbed from the web}