Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sharkfish
What did autopsies of the passengers on TWA800 show (as far as manner of death, trace elements found on clothing,bodies)???

Did all of the EXPERIENCED PILOTS and WAR EXPERIENCED PILOTS have hallucinations, when they claimed they saw a missile trail?

What kind of testing was being done by the NAVY? Were they testing a missile? What method of destruction was this missile(if it existed) designed to effect?

If the CWT caused the explosion, why was the FAA,NTSB not allowed to do the investigating? Why was the investigation and recovery done by the NAVY?

62 posted on 02/15/2005 2:01:36 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (sH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: UCANSEE2
Ok, Here goes.....

What did autopsies of the passengers on TWA800 show...

Nothing. No bomb parts, no foreign matter that was not attributable to the aircraft. Every body that was recovered was autopsied. Mind you, a body is the best place to find evidence of an explosive.

Did all of the EXPERIENCED PILOTS and WAR EXPERIENCED PILOTS have hallucinations

Who can say what they saw, exept them?

What kind of testing was being done by the NAVY? Were they testing a missile?

The area that TWA 800 went doen is a VERY busy place, aircraft wise. I cannot imagine that the Navy was testing any missile in the area. They have places that they test this stuff, and it is nowhere near Long Island.

If the CWT caused the explosion, why was the FAA,NTSB not allowed to do the investigating? Why was the investigation and recovery done by the NAVY?

The NTSB does ALL investigations of aircraft crashes. They have the experience and knowledge that no other agency has. The FBI were brought in because there was suspicion of a bomb/missile. Basically, they checked the work of the NTSB, and looked over their shoulder during the investigation. The Navy has the finset underwater recovery ships in the world, the Grasp and the Grapple.

The questions can go on and on (They do), but at the end of the day, there is no "smoking gun", only opinions.

63 posted on 02/15/2005 2:26:44 PM PST by Mr. Quarterpanel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

To: UCANSEE2

I have trouble believing the CWT story, but I also have trouble believing the Navy would be firing missiles into a known traffic pattern of a large airport like JFK. They have plenty of off-limits airspace to do that kind of thing. The terrorist missile story is also weak since they are not normally any use up to the altitudes in question. I'm not sure what to think.


64 posted on 02/15/2005 2:27:56 PM PST by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson