Posted on 11/09/2006 9:04:16 AM PST by Hal1950
Direct hit!
Direct hit!
BTW, have you seen what's left of a SAM after it does its job? TSuchman hasn't, or he wouldn't have believed that story, and that "diver" hadn't, or he wouldn't have told it.
In any group of 230 people flying from NYC to Europe, there is going to be somebody that the conspiracy moonbats can make into a Clinton hit victim. Let's all grow up, shall we?
dubs=subs
Folks who got loose lips around the Clintons seemed to have a habit of waking up dead in the morning...
Pierre Salinger was right!
--What exactly was the motivation? To prevent the need to a military response against militant Islam?--
Yes. It was an election year. The last thing BJ wanted to do was being forced to take military action of any kind, particularly if Saddam was involved in financing the terrorists - the public would have clamored for war.
The reason the "Navy shot it down" theory has no creedence with me, is that the Clintons would have used it, were it true, to decimate the armed forces. No love lost there, either way.
--Just curious. When the IslamoNazi's do a terrorist act they always brag about it. Why have they not done so in this case? I mean I can't remember hearing any claims from them.--
If Saddam was involved, he could not have bragged, without being blown to smithereens. Ditto for the OKC bombing.
It'a BIG IF, but would explain the perpetrators' silence.
Also, there MAY have been claims of responsibility that were simply buried by the Clinton-friendly Enemedia. We just never heard about them.
That said, I haven't read 'First Strike'. However, 'The Third Terrorist' by Jayna Davis raises many questions, indicating how an FBI motivated to cover-up evidence of a terrorist act could have pulled it off.
--We know from other stories that Sandy Berger and Jamie Goerlick met and determined this should be deemed an accident. Why the NTSB went along is strange, but I found it interesting then and still do that Robert Francis and others retired right after the investigation ended.--
If I recall correctly, US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald
(the Plamegate B.S. artist /prosecutor) was involved in the TWA case. If misdirection of an investigation was needed, he was the perfect man for the job.
--What if it was a revenge attack by Iran for the accidentally shooting down of one of their passenger planes? Odd how these things seem to happen in balanced pairs...--
But that would have been 8 or 9 years after the fact.
You must really hate the military in order to believe that.
Well I've yet to see a picture of the streaks but you're right, many people saw as streak of light. Depending on who you talked to that streak came from the east heading west, west heading east, north heading south or south heading north. It came from the sea, except for those who saw it rising from the land. It was yellow, green, pink, red, almost any color of the rainbow. Which is one of the reasons why any police officer will tell you that quite often the least reliable piece of evidence is an eyewitness account.
My tinfoil hat suggested that it was a warning to him to remain silent about the findings
See, my tinfoil had would suggest that he was clumsy. If I wanted to warn someone off I don't think I'd so it in such a vague manner. I'd probably take him aside and threaten to blow his head off. But that's just me.
I do remember that when explosive residue was found it was said to be from a dog training session on that plane. That was never confirmed.
Nor was it disproved.
I recall reporters at the site saying that there had been middle east 'chatter' surrounding the downing of the plane.
A lot of reporters are right here on this site reporting any number of things.
It wasn't long before all suggestion of a terror attack was a forbidden topic.
So I see. It hasn't come up around here for, oh, a week or so.
Which is, of course, why William Clinton managed to make it through 8 years of presidency without a whiff of scandal. </sarcasm>
The reason why the "Navy shot it down" theory has no creedence with me is that the Navy would not shoot down a civilian airliner and the participate in a consipiracy to cover it up. The officers and enlisted I served with are far to honorable to do something like that.
While that may have been a struggle for control in the cockpit, it was also mentioned that those would be the actions of a former military pilot trying to evade heat seeking missiles in an aircraft with no countermeasures.
Whatever the case, they ran out of air.
All as I can say is, Thank God Jack Cashill is still working on the truth.
I'm not excluding or discounting that, either, (there are many who would violate orders to the contrary and disclose an accident), just saying the Clintons would have shat upon the Navy in a heartbeat.
TWA 800: the conservative tinfoil hat analogue to the leftie WTC conspiracy/cover-up nuts.
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.