8 years later, TWA 800 case just heating up!

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, July 16, 2004 | Jack Cashill

[Rokke]

There are no radar guided SAM's that can fire on the move. There is no boat at sea that isn't "on the move". To enable a radar guided SAM to be fired at sea you need a ship the size of at least a frigate.

[Rokke]

"such as by an impact, or warhead detonation pressure wave"...or pressurized in a heated space...like a centerline fuel tank used to cool air conditioning pacs taken to 13,000 feet.

[wtc911]

You can stand on the south shore of LI on any given night and watch Europe bound flights with clarity hampered only by cloud cover, we've done it hundreds of times.

I can't speak to the "hundreds" of witnesses but we do know a couple ourselves. Both are life-long friends of ours (thirty-forty years). Both are sober, mature folks. Both saw the same thing. And, at the time they were nowhere near each other. You know what, I'll take their word for it.

[Rokke]

What exactly did they see?

[Tymesup]

Bachelor and Alexander devoted an evening to it on WABC 770 radio a few years ago.

[Tymesup]

"The Navy (proven to have been in the area that night) did not sail to the scene. "

The same Navy that initially denied being in the area.

[Tymesup]

'"They all said some missile-like object struck the plane."

Actually, exactly none of them said that. Perhaps TWA 800 conspiracy theorists would be more successful if they didn't insist on making things up to support their theories.'

Actually, Maj Frederick Meyer saw "two bright explosions, which he identified as ordnance".

[Tymesup]

"So there are a LOT of co-incidences which must have happened--besides the fact that there was NO OTHER Boeing plane on which this EVER happened."

One coincidence is the Navy being in the neighborhood that evening.

There was a study a few years back mentioned in the Wall Street Journal. They were considering changing fuel tank design, but when they found there would be one explosion in twenty years, on average, they decided it wasn't cost effective.

[Tymesup]

"What did John Kerry know and when did he know it? I'd like to hear about the TWA 800 Terror attack."

Besides Kerry, Stephanopolous also mentioned this on the air.

[Tymesup]

"Always follow the money. "

Under the Death on the High Seas Act, the passengers' families weren't going to get a lot of money for the event. The President enacted something that enabled them to receive a lot of money, which appears to have kept them quiet. That would be President Clinton, for those keeping score at home.

[Critter]

That's the part that proves to me that there is some major cover-up. I always thought though, that the truth would come out sometime after the upcoming election. I didn't think the Clinton administration could squash the truth so thoroughly.

My guess is that the Navy took out 800. It's the only logical explanation for their behavior (not sailing to the scene)and the fact that the truth hasn't been allowed to see the light of day. I think the cover-up was ordered by the white-house, and that anyone with knowledge has been threatened with imprisonment or worse.

If it were a terrorist act, it would have been politically expedient to let the truth come out eventually, even if it had to be done by the subsequent Bush administration.

[tpaine]

I remember news interviews with several people the night of the crash saying they had seen something climbing toward the aircraft and then an explosion when the object reached it. This was in that time period when the news people were desperate for anything to fill the air time and no one would have had an opportunity to change their stories a lot.
34 jwpjr

_____________________________________


If you do remember the interviews, then remember the person that had a video of the eastern sky from a patio dinning area. The FBI has the video and it is gone for now. It never saw the light of day.
80

_____________________________________


I remember seeing that 'cocktail party' video late on the night of the crash, broadcast by one of the major news networks.

It showed a fixed shot, looking across a deck, out to sea. People were milling around talking, a typical party scene, when there was a streak of light going up far out to sea.
It went up and out of the cameras view, and was followed by a flash from above. People at the party immediately ran to the decks rail, and the tape ended.

The west coast feed I was watching showed the loop several times in about half an hour or so, but I've never seen it since.

This video was discussed several times on FR 4 to 5 years ago, and few other FReepers remembered seeing it at that time..
--- Anybody now?

[FlashBack]

Reference BMP!!!

[MarshHawk]

>>There are no radar guided SAM's that can fire on the move. There is no boat at sea that isn't "on the move". To enable a radar guided SAM to be fired at sea you need a ship the size of at least a frigate.<<

Well, I did say, "a relatively small ship", not a boat. Technically, why couldn't a missile such as a SA-6, not be fired from the deck of a small freighter that is cruising just fast enough to steady itself? Are you thinking that the targeting radar couldn't 'paint' the (rather large) target long enough for the missile(s) to reach it? What is different about the ship borne versions of these small SAM's? I not challenging your statement, just asking. Rememember, these guys have a way of using conventional things in unconventional ways.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Actually, exactly none of them said that. Perhaps TWA 800 conspiracy theorists would be more successful if they didn't insist on making things up to support their theories.

I WILL REPEAT MY QUESTION ONE MORE TIME: GIVE ME ONE EXAMPLE OF A SPONTANEOUSLY EXPLODING JET FUEL TANK IN AVIATION HISTORY BESIDES TWA FLIGHT 800.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

[kabar]

I believe the USG covered it up to avoid panicing the public and causing great financial harm to the airline industry. 9/11 proved that the public and financial impact is far-reaching. This is not to excuse what happened but just a rationale for the cover-up. I would also add that Clinton was wont to attribute anything to international terrorism hence Oklahoma City was also covered up for domestic political reasons.

[jwpjr]

You have to wade through a lot of hysteria and bs, but the interviews and the info that comes out right after a crash can be pretty enlightening! Even when a turbine aircraft goes down there's always a report or two of the engine "sputtering" before impact, and of course the obligatory "it was on fire" eyewitness account. But sandwiched in among all that is occasionally a valid report. That was what impressed me about the reports of a missile trail, the witnesses were miles apart but yet all had the same general account. Would a shoulder fired SAM be big enough to provide a primary return on ATC radar, especially the kind used by enroute centers as opposed to systems used by tower personnel to monitor traffic in the airport traffic area? I doubt that the terrorists would be kind enough to provide a SAM complete with altitude encoding transponder, and if so, what would you have it squawk?

[Sender]

The Navy doesn't conduct live fire exercises anywhere near that area...

Of course not, for obvious reasons. Some have speculated that perhaps a US missile 'got away' completely by accident, and the gub'mint cannot admit it. I myself tend to think it was deliberately fired by unknown (Islamic) terrorists, from an unknown location, possibly a boat.

[Rokke]

"Technically, why couldn't a missile such as a SA-6, not be fired from the deck of a small freighter that is cruising just fast enough to steady itself?"

A missile system like the SA-6 is not composed of a single, autonomous vehicle. A full system requires target acquisition radars, target tracking radars, a launching vehicle and a crew of qualified operators to make everything work. Unlike an IR SAM, succussfully employing a radar guided SAM is an incredibly complex operation. The systems involved are fully integrated and not easily converted for employment in ways other than their original design. In other words, you can't just take parts from a system and create a "mini-launcher." The Navalized versions of SAMs are similar to their land based counterparts, but since they don't have to be air transportable, or autonomously mobile, they tend to be even larger and more complex.

With all that said, if a SAM had been responsible for the downing of TWA 800, the evidence would have been obvious and undeniable. Even the smallest SAM warheads are designed to direct thousands of fragments into the targeted aircraft with the hope of puncturing some vital system. And the missiles either hit their target, or they don't. Picture a target hit by a shotgun at close range. When the target is the size of a 747, if the missile functioned at all, the aircraft would have been peppered. Not punctured by one or two rogue fragments whose impacts left no evidence.

[hershey]

Clinton and his flunkies will roast in hell.