Posted on 06/22/2006 8:43:39 AM PDT by canuck_conservative
Editor's note: On the evening of July 17, 1996, at 8:19 p.m., TWA Flight 800, a Boeing 747, took off from Kennedy Airport, bound for Paris. At 8:31 p.m., over 730 people watched Flight 800 explode, killing all 230 of the people aboard.
Not long afterwards, millions of Americans watched their televisions in fascinated horror as search and rescue crews looked for survivors among the flaming debris. Only dead bodies were recovered.
Flight 800 is mostly an ugly memory for people these days. The U.S. government issued an explanation that a fuel tank had somehow exploded. Yet, they flatly denied any evidence existed of foul play, including the possibility that Flight 800 had been blown out of the air by a missile.
All but a few journalists accepted the government's version of events. Few bothered to investigate the numerous eyewitnesses, the radar records and the physical evidence that all suggested a strikingly different explanation of Flight 800's untimely demise. And those few who did question the government's version were made to look like fools or, worse, thrown in jail and prosecuted as criminals for meddling in an official investigation.
What really happened to Flight 800? ....
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Any friend of the Navy is a friend of mine.
That is 850 Watts/second. What does an arc welder push? I can’t even find a light bubble in the store that burns that hot.
http://www.galcit.caltech.edu/EDL/publications/reprints/galcit_fm97-5.pdf Page 28
BTW from your comment:
”Considering you don't seem to understand there are dramatic differences between aircraft and automobile fuel tanks, I'll reserve judgment on your ability to comprehend anything on the site.”
I reported this for what it is. If you can not argue on the facts don't take it to a personal level. Is that understood?
I would love to know your source for that tidbit.
The late Commander Donaldson
Again you are stating a false hood. There where hundreds of Fragments that where taken from the coroners office alone, which the coroner was not allowed to use the fragments as a possible the cause of death. In other words the Coroner could not do his job. The fragments where taken by the FBI.
The technology discussed in the 2001 magazine article hadn't even been fully developed yet. It says they've designed a prototype warhead. That means they hadn't even constructed one when the article was written. But you want to claim the military was already using missiles that use that technology? Or better yet, that terrorists had already gained access to those weapons? Maybe Kit Carson arrived at the Alamo in a helicopter too. Just who do you think the military buys its weapons from? Military factories? And the pellets found weren't even metal. They were transparent. The pellets in the 2001 article are Tungsten. Can you think of any reason why they'd want to use Tungsten instead of what was essentially plastic? Maybe because tungsten is a very hard, very heavy metal? You think? I already told you why the document was classified. It was a report on tests done on possible criminal evidence during an FBI investigation. Do you think that might need to be classified? The New York Times obviously doesn't, but in the real world, Federal criminal investigations into possible terrorist attacks are full of classified procedures and documents.
"Why did Kalstrom order this evidence kept from the NTSB hearing process?"
His investigation was not part of the NTSB hearing process. Somehow you need to understand that an accident investigation is separate from a criminal investigation.
"Not used anywhere on a 747....so where did it come from?"
You've got an aircraft filled with hundreds of passengers and thousands of pounds of cargo. And you think everything found after the aircraft was basically thrown into a blender and plunged into the ocean should be identifiable as coming from a 747. The pellets might have been anything from bean bag stuffing to Mardi Gras beads. Who knows. But one thing they obviously aren't is part of a weapon. Unless TWA 800 was taken down by terrorists armed with bean bags.
My what?
No. I'd be running around screaming lies about phony analysis that says my wife and mother were killed by nonexistent missiles armed with plastic ball spitting warheads. < sarcasm off >. Nobody on that aircraft was killed by your little mystery pellets. But if my wife and mother died in TWA 800 I would have followed the NTSB investigation with great interest. I would have read all I could about the incident, and I would have thrown out all the garbage and all the absolute BS that I've read on conspiracy sites. And then I would follow blood money merchants like FIRO and WND like stink on $hit exposing them for the frauds they are.
Well why didn't you say so. I'm surprised the NTSB didn't call you to help out in the investigation. But on a serious note, I would love to build my own airplane someday. And someday I probably will. For now, I'm stuck tinkering around on my kid's go kart.
"Downloaded all the NTSB report, and poured over it exhaustively for 5 years."
Then you know the answer to the question about the front spar you asked me earlier.
"...not a SINGLE sighting witness was allowed to appear and testify at the ALL important Baltimore Hearings"
That was based on a request by the FBI. Not the CIA. And at the time, there was still an active criminal investigation in progress in which the witnesses were a large part.
"which BTW was the most hideous, prescripted sham ever foisted on our great country, such a damned shame, and the've won..for all practical purposes"
You really think so? You're talking about the Baltimore hearing in 1997 right?
Your ignorance is almost comical. You heard about Zarqawi dying right? Guess whose "old shaky" jets are deployed there.
"The article linked above (2002) describes optimizing the warhead with PTFE in the matrix."
Well, timeline wise, you are moving in the wrong direction. 2002 is even later than 2001, and programs that are in the experimental stage in 2002 are probably not going give you much help in exploring a production run of weapons prior to 1996.
We have a whole lifetime ahead to sort the truth out, I'm not going anywhere, I'm keeping eye on it.(YOU)
You might as well put your guard down, and be friendly about it, I don't plan to "bite" you.
You flatly told me warheads were not made of composite matrix, lets both see what is out there, obviously the MOA was hot that night, with 800 on the Betty and so on. Was there a royal glitch, who knows, but shades of the Iowa Battleship scandal/coverup tell me things are easy to cover up.
So instead of being a stick in the mud, give me a hand, I'd be JUST as happy to find that RENO, CLinton and Hall were truthfull here!
Can you clarify what you are talking about here? The report you linked shows them using 850 joules as the specific heat capacity of hot air to help them solve their calculations for peak pressure estimates.
"I reported this for what it is. If you can not argue on the facts don't take it to a personal level. Is that understood?"
The facts are, you've got several posts on this thread making direct comparisons between aircraft and automotive fuel tanks. Until you indicate you understand there is a difference, I will continue to reserve judgment on your ability to comprehend the information the EDL provides.
Rokke, this I find disgusting.
The Withheld Flight 800 Shrapnel Evidence
May 2005 SUMMARY:
In a 5-year freedom of information litigation ( Sephton V. FBI ) the FBI asserts that they cannot find any of the most critical forensic evidence from their $40 million investigation of Flight 800. In March this year a federal judge ruled in favor of the FBI and thereby accepted the FBI’s failed search as “adequate” under the law. The forensic details about hundreds of metal fragments and other evidence removed during autopsies was never shared within the official investigation by the FBI; not with the County Coroner, nor with the relatives of the victims, nor even the NTSB. As vital evidence, those objects potentially painted a detailed forensic picture of the actual explosion of Flight 800: its specific chemistry, its force and its physical composition and probable origin . Despite this large sampling of intimate details of the explosion, eight years later it can still only be described as mysterious. No one has yet been told exactly what that forensic picture showed. Exacerbating the controversies around the investigation, the FBI now claims that they can’t find any of those forensic details.......snip......
There was a gap or power loss right before the explosion. Something shorted to the fuel probe.
Where did you see this? It's not on the CVR or FDR...are you refering to the fuel flow gauge?
You need to get a little hands on experience with military equipment to include munitions.
Let me ask you a quick question and don't look it up.
When was the first television guided bomb developed and by who?
Yes like the bomb fragments damaging the fuel tanks.
How would cause a short by hitting the fuel tanks? Then you have already said, the fuel tank was empty and could not explode.
Read the NTSB report, it makes a lot of sense and they don't grasp at straws.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.