Interesting read. I'm not sure it adds much though either way. The FBI needs to release its findings and put this to rest. I don't think the fact that they haven't indicates anything more than the usual bureacratic obsession with turf and secrecy. Like with the JFK assassination, keeping investigative findings under wraps just leads to conspiracy notions most often that prove baseless. For that reason, the FBI just needs to release what it has one way or another and if they too conclude nothing amiss then all the more reason to get the information out.
One question enters my mind as I read this though. Louis Freeh was no friend of the Clinton administration and freely critiqued Clinton's security stewardship during the 90s in his book last year. I wonder what he says about TWA 800 in his book. We know he didn't claim any cover up here or I think that would have made headlines. Why would he have not done so if there was one, especially if it was done as the piece above claims to protect Clinton in the 1996 elections? I think Freeh would gladly have let the cat out of the bag on that one.
Anyway, just a thought I had as I read this. The mystery continues I suppose. I still lean to the fuel tank theory, though I'm open to any contrary information that arises.
My thoughts on all of this is real simple. If the evidence supported the government's version of events, it would have been released at the time.
There would have been no need whatsover to classify it or bury it. I agree that probably now the inability of the FBI to put its hands on the data might be attributable to bureacracy. But that begs the question of how the critical data got separated from the rest of the data in the first place.