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 ...
I have said repeatedly that I think it was a missile.
If you can provide some evidence that shows TWA 800 was hit by a missile, perhaps you could provide a link to that.
And you know there is NO way that I can prove it was terrorists. I have gone over old FR threads trying to find info. Guess what? Links to articles are broken. News websites have been purged. Even FR has lost articles in our metamorphasis to our current software.
Rokke, I know what I saw on east coast news that night. You can call me all the names you like, conspiracy theorist etc, but it won't change it. And until this thread, I had no idea there were reams of sites devoted to Flight 800. Even Alamo Girl has info on her site. I found this Googling for her site. It's an FR thread.
FLIGHT 800: Missile Witness Study
I have to go to bed. I'll catch you tomorrow.
The official record yes, facts no.
Gary, "The statement that the plane could not continue upward was made by two aeronautical engineers earlier in the thread."
Rokke,"Yet a team of highly trained engineers using data provided by Boeing, and some of the most complex computer simulation programs in the world proved it could"
Lets revisit your statement above, because it is majorly flawed.
Show us Boeings public endorsement of the CIA "zoom climb" simulation and their willing participation providing data etc.
Rokke, you're flip floppin on this issue, because you also state (in this thread) that the CIA video also has NO Bearing on the merits of the whole picture, so what exactly is Rokke's position on the CIA video?
Rokke,"Yet a team of highly trained engineers using data provided by Boeing, and some of the most complex computer simulation programs in the world proved it could" (climb 3000ft)
Rokke, please explain?
You can get that by being in 11th or 12th group. They are USAR and National Guard. I would be more than happy to send you my records on active duty. If you retired from the military you have more active duty than I do. I was only active for 12 years and got caught by the RIF after Vietnam. During those 12 years, all of my assignments were in EOD, MI, or ammo plants. Most was EOD and quite active in Korea, Vietnam, and CONUS. I spent another 10 years in the USAR in ammo assignments and worked at additional ammunition plants in Civil Service. I still keep up with it. Last trip to visit my daughter in Florida I went by the school at Eglin and they took me on a tour. They have come a long way on defeating IED's.
I was always interested in explosives and munitions. I started making black powder when I was 12 years old and used to fish in my parents pond with my own version of a Dupont lure.
Was that the C130A that had one side of it props reverse on final? Happened about 1980 or so.
I'd be satisfied with proof it was a missile. The thing about a missile or a bomb taking down an aircraft is that it leaves loads of irrefutable evidence. Evidence that can't be covered up. Kind of like killing someone at close range with a shotgun blast. There are thousands of pieces of easily identifiable shrapnel from the weapon itself that leave thousands of easily identifiable holes all over the target they strike. Those holes usually contain microscopic or larger traces of whatever made them. But in the case of TWA 800, what you have is a body that's been badly mangled but reconstructed until it is 95% whole. There is no evidence of anything resembling a shotgun blast to that body, but a group of people who have no experience with shotguns or their effects on the human body, want to claim the body was killed by a shotgun. No one is disputing that a shotgun can kill people. But it simply can't without leaving a trace of evidence.
The same is true, in my opinion of the video that you and others believe they saw. A video like that is something that couldn't disappear without a trace or even a mention in the MSM. You believe you watched it, and I believe that is what you believe. And if that is true, so did millions and millions of people up and down the East Coast. That includes competing media outlets all up and down the East Coast. Yet, the only mention anyone can find about such a video is an article by one of the leading TWA 800 conspiracy theorists in the world, who claims the video was never shown on television. So those of us who never saw the video are left with a choice of options. We can believe the TWA 800 "Zapruder Film" marks the first time in history, that every media source successfully conspired together to hide and deny evidence so startling people like you can never forget it, or we can believe that maybe the video wasn't quite what you remember it as. Regardless, folks like tpaine recall it strongly enough to remember where the camera was positioned with respect to the guests at the party. And that it was a stationary camera. And he says it did not show a streak of light hitting TWA 800. It didn't even show TWA 800. It showed a streak of light followed by a large flash. TWA 800 did not explode into a fireball until 41 seconds after the initial event that caused its demise. So unless the video ran for the length of time a missile would be in flight (around 15 seconds) plus the 41 seconds from the first event until the fireball, then there is no telling what the video was of. Do you recall if there was a time and date stamp on the video?
And finally, the link you provided regarding the witness study is an article based entirely on evidenced provided by the NTSB in its accident report. Have you read the report? It might save you a lot of internet search time. It is very comprehensive.
I'm still waiting for facts that refute the official record.
This was summer, and many hours of prolonged ground running of the AC packs (below the CFT)had been logged.
Airline records should show when the aircraft received fuel in that CFT.
The Caltech Explosive research points out high temperatures and CONSIDERABLE vaporizing of the JET A, both ON THE GROUND and ALOFT.
Do you (as I do ) find it could be feasable that ALL the residual fuel in the CFT could have boiled off prior to the incident?
Is this part of your attempts to yank my chain? I have posted many times on this thread including a few times since you joined that the CIA video has nothing to do with the NTSB investigation. It was part of the criminal investigation whose purpose was to determine if criminal activity played a role in the mishap. The NTSB investigation does not support what was shown on the CIA video. The NTSB investigation, using data provided by Boeing and some of the most complex simulation programs in the world, concluded TWA 800 climbed 1200 to 2200 feet after the initial event of its break up.
I have never flip flopped on this issue. That is because I am one of the apparently very few people who has actually read the NTSB report. It really does help clarify things.
"While many witness accounts remain a mystery to me, I believe that my effort to pin the crash of TWA 800 on the Navy was reckless and a mistake. I apologize to all those in the Navy I have wrongfully accused. I also apologize to those who believed in my efforts and who are now upset with me for my change of mind. "
DUH????
I agree. And witness statements are usually the least reliable form of evidence.
"You accept as evidence the testimony of eyewitnesses regarding one event, but then reject it regarding TWA 800."
I do? I don't remember doing that. I've used the statements of witnesses to counter the theories of people who rely on the witness statements as their primary evidence that TWA 800 was shot down by a missile. Maj Meyers is a good example. He is a primary missile theory witness. But his statements refute any chance it was a MANPAD that took down TWA 800. So if you believe him, you can put your MANPAD theories away. But I don't consider any witness statements more conclusive than the tangible evidence available with the wreckage itself.
"However, you reject out of hand the testimony of those who saw it."
No I don't. I have very clearly said several times that I believe they believe they saw what they say they saw. But for a variety of well documented reasons, human recollection is not more reliable than tangible evidence, and no tangible evidence of the video exists.
With regard to your post 828, see my post 834, and don't edit my statements to try to make a point. The CIA video was not part of the NTSB investigation.
The NTSB is a government agency cleared to recieve classified information.
duh.
I can't believe you are still at it here. Tell me, did Algore's movie clarify global warming for you?
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.