Posted on 07/13/2006 3:02:34 PM PDT by Hal1950
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Bolstered by eyewitness accounts and the Internet, the explosion of TWA Flight 800 off the coast of New York 10 years ago spawned a slew of sinister conspiracy theories, most notably the belief that a missile from a U.S. Navy ship was responsible.
So prevalent were these theories that the term "Pierre Salinger Syndrome" - the belief that everything on the Internet is true - entered the lexicon.
For investigators, the conspiracy theories wasted time and diverted valuable resources. Investigators ultimately determined that Flight 800 was the victim of a center fuel tank explosion, most likely caused by a spark in its vapor-filled center tank. Terrorism was ruled out, as was the notion of a friendly fire missile.
Then came Pierre Salinger
"It's a document I got about five weeks ago -- came from France -- from an intelligence agent of France. He had been given this document from an American Secret Service agent based in France," Salinger said at the time. "He had been doing an inquiry and had some contacts with the U.S. Navy."
It turned out to be a discredited document that had been floating around the Internet for weeks. Salinger took to the news airwaves, including CNN, touting his theory. But as baseless as it sounded, Salinger could not be ignored. His accusations gave conspiracy theorists a voice of distinction and credibility.
"He was an idiot," said Bob Francis, the former vice chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. "He didn't know what he was talking about, and he was totally irresponsible."
As for Salinger, after years of suffering from dementia, he died of heart failure in 2004, but his syndrome lives on.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I do not believe the fuel tank thing for one second.People better be careful they do not get too close to the truth.
Was this the flight that Laurie Mylroie says exploded on Saddam's "Iraq National Day" or some other such Saddam-celebrated holiday?
Other 747's sat on runways in Saudi Arabia, hotter tarmac, for longer times, and didn't blow up when taking off.
Prior accidents involved poor maintenance, one was a bomb placed by men dressed as 'maint crew' , on foreign soil.
Tests were unable to get the CWT to explode.
They had to run much higher current than the wires were designed to handle (meaning the current was never that high in the actual 747 CWT's) to get it to 'pop'.
(hook a small diameter wire up to both posts of your car battery. Same results)
Why were those airframes not grounded? Before or after?
Why do TWA and Boeing mechanics and pilots argue against the findings of the FBI (NTSB was herded by FBI)?
"On an International flight, that is simply not going to be the case. "
Yes, it is. Common thing on 747's.
For it to be completely empty? Whatever.
Yes, it is. Common thing on 747's.
a 747 with an empty tank going to France? that must be a common thingy.
Did anyone ever claim responsibility for downing the plane?
That's not uncommon at all. The range of a fully fueled 747-131 like TWA 800 was about 9500 kilometers. The distance between New York and Paris is less than 6000 kilometers. It makes no sense for an airline to buy fuel it isn't going to need just to haul it around in an airplane.
I feel a little guilty, but I think that last line is pretty funny.
Hal1950 has a 'Pierre Salinger Syndrome' about "The TWA 800 Conspiracies", -- in reverse.
In the last few days hal, I counted about a dozen different threads you've posted on flight 800... - Whats up kiddo?
The commercial Boeing 747 aircraft began its career in the seventies. Since that time, "there has never been an in-flight explosion in any Boeing built airliner of Jet-A kerosene fuel vapor/air mixture in any tank, caused by mechanical failure," wrote Donaldson. Yet, in congressional testimony and statements to the media, the NTSB "cited the loss of an Air Force 707 and 3 KC135 air to air tanker aircraft to fuel tank explosions as examples of mishaps similar to TWA FL800," wrote Donaldson, who was a flight instructor and Air-Wing Safety Officer in charge of crash investigation for mishaps ashore and afloat. Officials at the Air Force's safety center, out West stated "there is no record of a 707 loss, and all three KC135s were fueled with JP4, a fuel as volatile as automobile gasoline.". . .
the NTSB told the media that a CWT explosion had caused the Philippines Air 737 crashed in 1990. Donaldson, however, noted that video and still photography taken after the Philippines Air 737 fire was extinguished, "show the Center Wing Tank did not explode." The plane's "undercarriage, wheels and center wing box (tank) were structurally sound enough to carry the load of engines and fuel ... under tractor tow," he noted. "Had the Center Wing Tank actually exploded in the manner the NTSB leadership suggests, the aircraft would have dropped on the ramp ..."
The 707 is an entirely different aircraft and the apparently spurious report of one CWT explosion (if it happened) is much more explicable as the 707 had live wire fuel tank sensors; the 747 does not. As stated, the KC135s (essentially flying gas stations) were carrying JP4... and it was not the CWT that exploded.
The Philippines Air 737 was to have carried the Philippines President on its next flight when it exploded on the tarmac... Some evidence points the explosion being caused by a bomb. Terrorists claimed credit for bombing the plane.
Not ONE Boeing 747 before or since TWA-800 has experienced an explosion in the CW. That includes millions of flights in 38 years.
Your positive about this. Again, I do not disagree, I just remember seeing a show on television where an NTSB official was citing a crash in France due to the same circumstances.
I agree with you.
And IMO this is not simply a case of a simple cover-up, or a single incident. Starting in the late 1980s, there were a whole series of aircraft explosions which look like major terrorist incidents, but we are told that they are not.
The Oklahoma bombing, also, is an incident left largely unexplained - a few little questions are outstanding, such as who conspired with the 2 perps, and where did they get the explosives (no forensic trace of the explosives was ever found on them or their belongings.)
While on the topic, I would like to remind everyone of El Al Flight 1862, which crashed in Amsterdam on Oct 4 1992. An Israeli cargo plane, en route to New York via Amsterdam. We were told that it was carrying perfume, which caused an explosion. Then the explosion was in the fuel tank. Then they said that the crash was caused by the engines falling out by accident.
Not everyone believed this. Nutters and obsessive types got caught up in conspiracy theories. Moreover Dutch activists followed up with the injuries of the people on the ground, which showed, without a doubt, that they had been exposed to chemical weapons, and possibly even nuclear materials. So finally it was officially admitted that the plane was carrying sarin, and other unindenified materials.
The implications of this are quite scary. This plane was full of chemical weapons, and also had people on board from Israel's institute for bio-warfare. Can you imagine the security surrounding that flight? And yet ... down it came. Someone brought it down.
It is very likely that the hand which arranged that is the same one which brought down the Egypt Air flight full of generals, TWA800, and others as well.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20060530X00642&key=1
Oh yeah and since when did the US send the NTSB to India to check out an accident which no one was hurt?
One of the victoms few people talk about of the NTSB's report is Boeing.
It's not right for me to speak for Hal1950, But maybe... just maybe he thinks 230 innocent souls deserve better?
Didn't George Stephenopolis say on national tv that he and Clinton and others all went to the situation room after the bombing of TWA800? I think another Clinton staffer also mentioned on tv that the plane had been brought down by terrorists.
God bless all the passengers of that flight... including Patrick Bell, a high school classmate of mine.
The big question is why the FBI was making the findings at all. Once the NTSB ceded their natural jurisdiction of the crash investigation over to the FBI, the final report's conclusion was assured.
In the last few days hal, I counted about a dozen different threads you've posted on flight 800... - Whats up kiddo?
It's not right for me to speak for Hal1950, But maybe... just maybe he thinks 230 innocent souls deserve better?
I'd bet most all of us would like to see a better resolution to flt 800, than the one put forward by the NTSB.
Hal, however, supports the NTSB report, last I heard.
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.