Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
To: JohnHuang2
So 270 eyewitnesses should not believe their lying eyes? Granted, eyewitnesses are not always reliable but when you have 270 that say they saw the same thing there may be an awful lot to it.
To: JohnHuang2
I know I don't trust the United States govt. in regards to this nor in most every other matter.
Trust the C.I.A. and or F.B.I.? Not now or ever. If these rediculous agencies say the sky is blue, you'd be better off checking.
To: JohnHuang2
I'm interested in everyone's theory as to why there was such a massive coverup and who ordered it?
I think this was a terrorist attack covered up by high level gubment officials. Clinton (its the economy, stupid) couldn't have the sheeple too afraid to fly. The prevailing attitude was nothing to see here, keep flying.
4 posted on
12/12/2003 2:46:05 AM PST by
demkicker
To: JohnHuang2
Maybe Clinton is about to get that 'legacy' he so desperately wants. Not exactly the one he has in mind though.
Bet the Hillary camp is working on the 'spin' for this one just in case.
5 posted on
12/12/2003 3:01:10 AM PST by
Vinnie
To: JohnHuang2
Of all the times I've read about this I just realized something.
How far was TWA 800 from LI when it's trouble began according to the CIA video. The reason I ask is because they tell that the craft climbed less than 4000 ft after the nose fell off.
If the plane was 10 miles from shore then to that closest person would a 4000 foot climb even come close to looking like a missile? I mean could that be mistaken. Seems to me that the climb would appear only 1/10th of that size due to the distance, and then only if it climbed directly vertical.
I have never believed the center tank and zoom climb, but this is the first time I have ever considered perspective of distance and height.
Please feel free to be hard on my theory here, I don't have a dog in the hunt so tear this appart, if it doesn't hold water, so be it.
9 posted on
12/12/2003 3:09:06 AM PST by
Ispy4u
To: JohnHuang2
Makes you scratch you head and think...why would our government lie to us like that? What was to gain from this CIA video? Who ordered the bogus CIA story? Why was TWA 800 brought down? Who or what cargo was on board? Too many questions....The fact that Clinton was in office during this fiasco leads me to think something stinks to high heaven. But what? Was it a terror attck? Osama did not take credit. He would have for sure.
10 posted on
12/12/2003 3:17:15 AM PST by
USMMA_83
To: JohnHuang2
I still always have to marvel at how on 9/10/2001 all the nutters thought the Navy accidentally shot it down during an exercise and on 9/12/2001 all the nutters thought that it was shot down by terrorists, and the Navy thing hasn't been mentioned since.
12 posted on
12/12/2003 3:26:33 AM PST by
John H K
To: JohnHuang2; JohnFiorentino; backhoe; First_Salute
Bump and Ping.
19 posted on
12/12/2003 4:17:44 AM PST by
brityank
(The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
To: JohnHuang2
I don't know what really happened.
As an ex-pilot I never believed the pitch-up story (although what I flew was single-engine, prop, Vne 125KIAS)
AS a volunteer firefighter, I KNOW how preposterous the idea of an explosion in an enclosed JET-A fuel tank is.
AS a citizen of the US, I don't trust the Clinton era people about anything.
For whatever reason, they don't want the sheeple to know what really happened here. All the intrigue usually comes down to money and power.
Some day we'll know.
20 posted on
12/12/2003 4:18:48 AM PST by
Blueflag
(Res ipsa loquitor)
To: JohnHuang2
ping for later read
21 posted on
12/12/2003 4:18:56 AM PST by
Victor
To: JohnHuang2
Our government lies to us.
It's been going on for decades.
I doubt that it will change.
23 posted on
12/12/2003 4:20:08 AM PST by
WhiteGuy
(Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...)
To: JohnHuang2
Bump to read later.....
To: JohnHuang2
One reason to cover this up is that it wasn't a terrorist strike but some kind of military exercise gone horribly wrong.
To: JohnHuang2
You know this story and your quote of the day (I read it twice and I like it) could lead people to think negative thoughts about our government and possibly come to the conclussion that our US government is lying about something and we can't have people
knowing thinking that. I think Jim might just have to pull this post.
Copy and paste guys before it's gone!
To: JohnHuang2
To: All
Has the possibility of a meteorite been considered and if so any conclusions?
The month before TWA800 came down, I was vacationing in Ocean City, MD and early one evening witnessed several meteorites over the Atlantic Ocean that appeared to be travelling from the south to north.
I can believe a meteorite or a terrorist missile brought the plane down but have a real tough time with those who direct blame at the Navy. No way you could shut up a boat load of sailors if a Navy ship had anything to do with the tragedy.
MoodyBlu
30 posted on
12/12/2003 4:35:22 AM PST by
MoodyBlu
To: *TWA800_list
bump
32 posted on
12/12/2003 4:48:39 AM PST by
coloradan
(Hence, etc.)
To: JohnHuang2
Often the simplist answer is correct. This terrorist attack on TWA 800 took place in the summer of '96, exactly when the Clinton re-election campaign was ramping up. Clinton, the great apologist and appeaser did not want to deal with domestic terrorism during the campaign since this would have been a great campaign issue for Bob Dole. So, voila, a theory that a plane climbed 4000 feet after exploding from a center fuel tank. A theory totally in opposition to 270 eyewitnesses.
This is part of the "Clinton Legacy".
34 posted on
12/12/2003 4:53:58 AM PST by
JohnEBoy
To: JohnHuang2
Let's see........hum.........Flight 800, and OK city bombing
...both on Clintoon's watch........whats that I smell? Could it be a coverup ???
- Texas Lizard
37 posted on
12/12/2003 5:03:24 AM PST by
Texas Lizard
(If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything)
To: JohnHuang2
"The following program was produced by the Central Intelligence Agency," said the narrator at the outset... I think this one statement should be enough to taint the credibility of the video.
40 posted on
12/12/2003 5:05:15 AM PST by
Orangedog
(difference between a hamster & a gerbil?..there's more dark-meat on a hamster!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson