-- Lisa Perry
"After work on July 17, 1996, I went to our ocean-front summer rental house to have dinner with my wife and one-year-old son before putting him to bed, so I decided to go to the ocean-side deck to enjoy the view. As I walked thought the sliding doors to the deck, a red phosphorescent object in the sky caught my attention. The object was quite high in the sky (about 50 to 60 degrees) and slightly to the west and off-shore of my position. At first it appeared to be moving slowly, almost hanging and descending, and was leaving a white smoke trail. The smoke trail was short, and the top of the smoke trail had a clockwise, parabolic-shaped hook towards the shore. My first reaction was that I was looking at a marine distress flare that had been fired from a boat. I said to myself, someone must be in trouble."
-- Paul Angelides
"Bilodeau and McBride state that on 7-17-96 at 2045 they were at the Moriches Inlet, South Shore, facing south to southeast. Bilodeau and McBride observed a reddish glowing flare ascend skyward from due east, but they could not tell if from land or water. [The] flare was tight, corkscrew shapes, with even but fast speed. [They] did not see what [the] flare struck, but it exploded in air into a large orange fireball. Two large flaming chunks of debris fell from the fireball. Both recall hearing a deep, thunderous rumble during the explosion."
-- Vincent Bilodeau and Joseph McBride
Lots of other eyewitnesses saw similar things, at the same time. Many described the ascending object as a flare or fireworks, something they might be 'familiar' with - but of course these things don't go to 13000 feet and blow up aircraft. So, lets see, a few hundred people from the region coincidentally say they saw a 'flare' launch to blow up an airplane, and really they didn't see anything because they called it a flare... Is that what you think? Clintonesque!
"The object came over the dunes of Fire Island. It was shiny, like a new dime; it looked like a plane without wings. It had no windows. It was as if there was a flame at the back of it, like a Bunsen burner. It was like a silver bullet. It was moving much faster than the plane. The silver object took a left turn, and went up to the plane."
There isn't a SAM in existance that follows that flightpath. And the "missile" was close enough for her to tell it had "no windows", yet her description of its most obvious feature (if it had been a missile) is..."It was as if there was a flame at the back of it, like a Bunsen burner." Are you kidding me? And no mention of smoke. I have no idea what this lady is describing, but it isn't a SAM missile.
Now take a look at Paul Angelides. He observes a descending (started 50-60 degrees above the horizon and descended to 10 degrees above the horizon) red light that resolves into a series of explosions. Sounds a lot what TWA 800 did as it came apart in midair. He goes on to mention he immediately called the Coast Guard and was told "oh, thats the Air National Guard they are firing flares tonight". Interesting that little tidbit never makes it onto TWA 800 conspiracy sites. Do you suppose there is any chance that might explain what people were seeing before TWA 800 blew up, or was the Coast Guard operator already immersed in a massive government cover-up.
Vincent and Mcbride saw a red flare, but didn't report seeing any smoke. That, despite it being light enough to determine the color of an aircraft flying by just 15 minutes earlier.
Your final point is legitimate. People do describe things based on what they are familiar with. But then again, these people living on Long Island were all very familiar with flares, and a SAM launch is significantly different than a flare launch. You would think many of them would have said something along the lines of "it was like a flare, but different in that....". And this statement of yours..."a few hundred people from the region coincidentally say they saw a 'flare' launch to blow up an airplane" is an outright lie. You can't possibly provide evidence to back that up, because the evidence does not exist. If you want to talk Clintonesque, why don't you start by examining your need to at best exaggerate, and at worst lie, to try to support your point.
ping