Posted on 07/17/2021 7:15:25 PM PDT by ml/nj
And all these people hallucinated. I tend to think a shoulder fired missile from a small boat.
All muzzoid “inspired” during BJClinton’s reign of terror
TWA 800
OKC
WTC
It wasn’t a Navy missile period but you can’t talk with the tin hat crowd.
Actually every dropped or launched ordnance is accounted for by type and serial numbers and many air launched missiles also require flight time be logged and if there’s an active seeker that seeker on time is also logged due to maintenance requirements.
Navy missiles are semi active? Navy has semi active, active and passive systems.
Yep. Fuel tank my ass. The ‘zoom climb’ was a nice touch of BS.
There WAS a missile, but MANPADS, not SM2. The sub theory is laughable (never heard that one before this thread).
The FBI was distributing pictures/drawings of the launch components of a type of MANPADS I can’t recall (buried somewhere in my notes for an article I never wrote).
Ah: Found the reference. The FBI ‘trawler operations manual’ is linked with images.
http://twa800.com/pages/missilesearch.htm
All written by people with no knowledge of how the USN conducts range clearing for live fire exercises, and no clue where those ranges are.
It was a terrorist attack close to the time of the election.
I tend to think a shoulder fired missile from a small boat.
It wasn’t a Navy missile period but you can’t talk with the tin hat crowd.
Whatever do you think this could mean?
It comes directly from a scan of a New York Sectional which is a map published by the Department of Commerce (this one from 1989) used primarily by pilots flying under Visual Flight Rules. Below you can see it at the lower-left corner of this larger image which shows the Hamptons area of Long Island and part of the Warning Area, "W-105a," which begins five to ten miles south of Long Island in this area.
For a discussion about terrorists vs. navy I would suggest my, "It wasn't terrorists. It couldn't have been," post to FreeRepublic sometime before 2000. Unfortunately all of these posts are no longer available due to some consent agreement. But some good person did capture the text of this post. It can be seen at https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg66149.html.
ML/NJ
The map and warning is supposed to prove something?
There’s test areas all over the east, west and gulf cost. The Chesapeake Bay alone has several. Florida has a ton including AUTEC. Hawaii has the Pacific Test Range. I’ve be done flight testing and missile testing in about all of them so what’s your point?
The warning you post and that map is nothing unusual and SOP. We did lots of missile ops right off the LA flight corridors which is extremely heavy in commercial flight.
That would have been AA Fl. 587 on Nov. 12, 2001. It went down on the Rockaway Peninsula Queens, NYC.
Yet another disaster that the gov’t lied about.
What's my point?!!
My point is that military weapons are tested on close proximity to populated areas which contradicts those who suggest it is absurd to say so.
I could ask, what is your point, Smoke Blower? Sure. Talk about the Chesapeake Bay, Hawaii, Florida, &c. They have a lot to do with TWA800, RIGHT?
ML/NJ
It's been a while since I read his TWA800 book, but my recollection is that he sort of soft-peddled the notion that the Navy accidentally shot down the plane. I thought he did a disservice to the truth.
ML/NJ
Your point is that military weapons are tested on close proximity to populated areas which contradicts those who suggest it is absurd to say so.
Who’s contradicted it besides those who don’t have a clue and would be irrelevant anyway?
Testing has always been done with in proximity to populated areas. Hard not to, hence the purpose of listing some of the other ranges. It’s nothing new and that’s been known for years but it doesn’t mean the USN shot down TWA 800 accidentally or on purpose... that’s one hell of a stretch.
This is the most plausible explanation done by the Iranians as payback. Jim Kallistrom passed away July 3nd. I totally missed that.
More smoke.
Of course it doesn't mean the Navy shot down the plane. But all those Navy assets in the area mean something. The fact that TWA800 was more than 5000 feet lower than where it would usually be passing the Hamptons means something. The CIA Cartoon propaganda means something. The exclusion of the NTSB means something. That the FBI "investigated" means something. None of this is good for apologists for the Navy.
Please note that I have suggested that the plane was intentionally destroyed, your implication notwithstanding.
ML/NJ
“...of the shoot down that was broadcast on the nightly news back then.”
I’m not a conspiracy guy when it comes to the Twin Towers, but...
I recall watching one of the news anchors talking with the live image of the towers and he says something like “A report just in that one of the towers has collapsed.”
He looks at the video feed and says “Well, ok, obviously that is in error as there they are - still standing.” Switching to all the other channels and they still show both towers standing.
It was several minutes (5??) and then the “live” feed did show the first tower collapsing.
It was far too long to be a tape delay. Perhaps something large fell off a building first? Miscommunication?? But it was really odd. Before the collapse actually happened that was the furthest thing from anyone’s thoughts - at least from the news or me. (My thoughts were that it would just continue to burn, and all the people in the buildings.)
I have not been able to find that news footage again. Even right after 9/11.
“It wasn’t a Navy missile period but you can’t talk with the tin hat crowd.”
That’s a fact. And sometimes it’s good just to let them talk because they tend to destroy their own credibility without anyone else’s help. I’m sure I’m not the only person who actually read the source linked to the original post, but I’ll quote it here...
“There is more to the official story of what happened to TWA flight 800. In all likelihood the aircraft was shot down, by persons unknown for reasons unknown, by three missiles, two from land and one from sea. “
Now it’s three missiles. Two launched from land. This is the kind of crap that feeds the tin hat crowd.
Please point out where I say something that is untrue. (Search all my posts on any topic.) If you are unable to find any inaccuracies or misrepresentations, I would appreciate an apology.
As for the text at the source I linked, I must say I didn't even read it. I linked it because it was the only way I could see to present the useful Australian 60 Minutes presentation about TWA800. You might let me know if you think they got anything wrong.
ML/NJ
So you buy the CIA/FBI center fuel tank explanation?
👍👍 Concur..
“ Please point out where I say something that is untrue. (Search all my posts on any topic.) If you are unable to find any inaccuracies or misrepresentations, I would appreciate an apology.”
Ok. You said this one in your original post.
“ (Spoiler alert: It was a Navy missile.)”
Both the website you linked, and the video you posted say it was three missiles including one fired from land. Not only do you admit to not bothering to read the website you linked, you apparently didn’t even bother to watch the video you linked. Like all tin hat conspiracy theorists, you simply make things up and then claim victim status when you get called on it. Enjoy your fantasy world. But being wrong doesn’t entitle you to an apology. It just reinforces why conspiracy theorists are most effectively discredited by their own crackpot theories. Keep it up. You’re on a roll.
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.
