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 ...
OK. Read the Boeing report. It will tell you exactly what I will.
"The report does NOT reach a final conclusion"
It certainly does with regard to the break-up sequence, which is what you are trying to dispute now.
"plus the fact that classified peices of the puzzle are missing this very day"
What are they?
"The FBI and NTSB contracted scientists from the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) to analyze these items, but restricted the scientists from sharing their findings with individuals outside the official investigation. The parties to the investigation (e.g. Boeing and TWA) did not participate in this activity." In other words, the NTSB was NOT authorized to USE this information in its investigaion, it wouldn't surprise me that b*stard Hall was the only one privy to it.
Hint, the parties ARE an integeral part of the process, NTSB does not exist legally without the "parties".
Well there you go. Another potential conspiracy and cover-up blasted away. It appears Boeing simply made an error in accounting for their documentation. Can you imagine such a thing?
You have a habit of beating the same dead horse. The CRS study was published in 2003. That was seven years after TWA 800 blew up. Technology changes over time. And once again, nobody is disputing that aircraft are vulnerable to MANPAD attacks. And the sun still rises in the east.
Ummm. Grassley is a Republican Senator.
You know, I really don't know why I expect you to ever read the NTSB report. You don't even read the garbage you want me to read. THE NTSB HIRED THE BROOKHAVEN LAB TO ANALYZE THE PELLETS! It says so in your easily debunked, worthless, fraudulant "evidence" that you posted yesterday. And yes, that evidence is in the NTSB report.
I am beginning to understand why "duh" is appearing in all your posts.
Rokke,"What are they?
Ask Ray Lahr, the NTSB said the 747 climbed with 1/3 of its fuselage missing, lets see, that would be like attaching a 300 square foot circular flat plate spoiler on the nose of a 747.
Tell me Rokke, would it even climb away from the runway??? Now in lieu of that, we would like to see the classified data that supports this scenario? (lol)
I mean, you even touted this data as being complex, Rokke since the NTSB has concluded (?) that mechanical failure is the cause, why ALL the resistance to release this stuff....doesn't make sense....stinks!
You really have no case at all unless you make stuff up. So you do. Repeatedly. Give it up.
Absolutely. Ever see the 747 carrying the space shuttle. Any idea how much drag that creates?
"why ALL the resistance to release this stuff...."
What stuff?
Do you know the workings of the NTSB?
Hacks at the top of NTSB analyzed these pellets BUT DID NOT INCLUDE IT IN THE INVESTIGATION...WHY?
Are you comfortable with some Clinton hacks withholding these items from the decision making process...not including them in the NTSB report?
Doesn't that DESTROY the ROLE of the agency, not being accountable to industry and the flying public...the consumer driving the whole ball of wax?
Are you a communist?
Whaat? A couple posts ago you were claiming the pellets were never revealed to the NTSB. Now you are claiming hacks at the NTSB analyzed them? I guess Brookhaven is all part of the conspiracy. And now you are accusing me a being a Communist?!?
You've lost it.
Release the data, the drag computations, the average thrust acheived with controls cables gone, diagram how with the controls cables in total shambles, climb power is still available and aircraft controls stay balanced to maintain this stable situation.
But no, we get 1000's of pages telling us about the fuel tank....don't you feel cheated that they won't release the most INTERESTING description of all time...how that sucker did what it did!
They spent $50 million, I want to see it...they say they have it, just hand it over to Mr. Lahr...he's a good man,
Show me the page in your "bible" that refers to these pellets imbedded in the poor passengers?
Under Title 49, Terrell Stacey, as an NTSB investigator had the LEGAL RIGHT to remove items from Calverton hanger for the purposes of conducting chemical tests such as those provided by West Coast Analytical Service, Inc., in Santa Fe Springs. This is the lab which produced the chemical analysis published in the Riverside Press-Enterprise. Stacey may be fined and even fired by the NTSB, but he is not liable for any criminal charges.
Title 49 does have one criminal section: 1155(b). Congressional intent is clear:
"...the act would be amended so as to provide for the imposition of criminal sanctions against persons who knowingly and without authority remove any part of a civil aircraft involved in an accident or any property which may have been aboard the aircraft. The Board [NTSB] witness testified in the hearings that numerous instances have occurred where souvenir hunters thoughtlessly and, on many occasions, maliciously carried off parts of aircraft wreckage which are vital to the accident investigation. Criminal penalties proposed in this bill will assist materially in alleviating this problem by providing a reasonable and effective deterrent.
And are you suggesting that a missile whose motor burns out several seconds prior to hitting its target because is runs out of fuel, leaves a trail of what Sander's and Stacey theorize as being "rocket" fuel through an aircraft?
dual-thrust (boost/sustain) solid-fueled rocket motors burn out? I thought that's what the "sustain" part of the motor was for. And didn't you say this in 820? DJ, you do an absolutely wonderful job of supporting the argument that a manpad can shootdown an airliner. However, no one on this thread is disputing that. In fact, that is one of the few things that everyone on this thread can agree about. Are you now saying that a rocket wouldn't leave any kind of chemical "footprint"?
What has? Specifically.
Didn't use the link in the post again. The witness video is the most famous. Also the FBI couldn't answer an FOIA because they "couldn't find" the requested documents. radialenginefan gave you that info and I gave you this link And this is handy for them also. Appeals Court Rules No Additional TWA Flight 800 Records Will Be Released
Boeing and TWA are in full agreement on that point.
TWA is out of business. Boeing tried fighting. I've posted these to you before.
TWA 800 - Boeing Pursues Missile Theory
Boeing attorneys still saying missile may have downed TWA Flight 800
Baloney. They were convicted of a felony for stealing from a federal crime scene. Was the jury that convicted them also part of the Clinton conspiracy?
Terrell Stacy WAS part of the investigation. He had a legal right to have evidence checked by a lab. Juries can be swayed by misrepresentation. They aren't infallible are they.
When the Federal Government refuses to respond to a nonsense civil suit it isn't admitting anything.
Bull. When sued, there is a response. And you've been given info and defend the phoney investigation by using the phoney investigation. Give me links where independant pilots and engineers agree with the suggested scenario by the FBI/ CIA/NTSB.
1980 study on fuel pump performance in the E-4B. The 19-year-old report on fuel tank heating in a military version of the Boeing 747 was prepared for the U.S. Air Force.
It was a document about fuel pump performance that in retrospect bears a resemblance but, by the way, has to do with a configuration that is entirely different (than a commercial 747) under a different use. It would not have changed the outcome of the investigation.
It's in the report you refuse to read. Do you not feel the least bit ridiculous, continuously making claims that are just plain wrong and easily refuted?
I find it unpatriotic of a Freeper to not show concern regarding this revelation, instead to mock and make humor over the strange fate of these victims, your definately in the Clinton /Gore camp here.
Rokke,"It's in the report you refuse to read"
The zoom flight data is NOT in the report, otherwise you would haved posted from it.
Then why are you arguing the point? You're really stuck on 2003. Where in the report does it state a year when MANPADS could reach 15,000ft? It doesn't. The ALPA report that I gave you said MANPADS have been used since 1978 to bring down aircraft. We've been over this. cpdiii hasn't.
cpdiiis point was The place to use it would be on the departure end of runway or the approach end of the runway.
That was not the finding of CRS.
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.