[mississippi red-neck]

At the FIRO hearing, Meyer spoke about the streak he saw: "I tracked it across about twenty degrees of azimuth in the sky and then...I saw an explosion. And that explosion was military ordinance. I'll stake my life on it, and I have many times. I have two years in combat over North Vietnam. I hold the distinguished flying cross. I made nine over-land rescues. If I don't know what a missile looks like, if I don't know what flak looks like, I wouldn't be here talking to you. I saw military ordinance explode in the sky that night."

I think this guy is credible. He was major flying in a BlackHawk at the time.

Why would he lie?

Why should we not believe what he says he saw and yet believe you when you where not there and saw nothing.?

Why should we believe you and the people who agree with you and not believe him and the other eye witnesses who general agree with him and what he saw.

[Rokke]

I don't believe he did lie. In fact, I believe he described the events that night very precisely. Have you actually read the transcript of his interview with the NTSB. It is located at this site...

http://twa800.com/witnesscd/AppendixO.pdf

In it, he describes a streak of light that flies a slightly descending arc for about 3-5 seconds. He states several times that he doesn't know what it was. It resolved into a fireball that fell in the same arc into the water. The fireball was preceeded by up to three "hard explosions" he describes as looking like flak. I too have flown in combat. I've been shot at by SAM's and AAA. Myers description of a "Flak" explosion is confused. When AAA explodes at altitude in daylight, it appears as a ball of smoke. No flash or flame at all really. A missile warhead creates a more visible flash, but Meyers says he saw three "hard explosions". Were there three missiles? If all three were "hard explosions", how could they all be "military ordinance"?

He then goes on to describe his experience witnessing SAM launches in Vietnam. He says he's seen SAM-1, SAM-2 and SAM-7 launches. The SAM-1 was never used anywhere but to defend Moscow, so I'm pretty sure he never saw that one, but we'll let that slide. But he very specifically describes how you can identify a SAM by its smoke trail and erratic flightpath. He accurately states that you can see the smoke trail long after the missile is gone. But he then specifically says the streak of light he saw left no smoke trail, and it didn't fly an erratic flight path.

So if Fred Meyers is the most credible missile witness, the missile theory is even weaker than most people realize. Meyers didn't lie. He certainly, by his own testimony, did not describe a missile attack. He almost exactly described the breakup sequence of the self-destructing 747.