Posted on 11/09/2006 9:04:16 AM PST by Hal1950
This week I received a communication from retired United Airline Capt. Ray Lahr. It contained two items of great interest – one dollop of good legal news and one unexpected and truly incredible report.
The legal news concerned Ray's success in Los Angeles District Court after years of "long and lonely and expensive" effort. Judge Howard Matz had succinctly mandated that "Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) shall produce to plaintiff the material set forth in Exhibit A and the National Transportation Safety Board shall produce to plaintiff the material set forth in Exhibit B." Significantly, the judge also authorized Lahr attorney John Clarke to file for fees and costs. This is a definite win.
Lahr has been suing for release of the information that the two agencies in question had used to produce their notorious zoom-climb animation subsequent to the 1996 downing of TWA Flight 800 over Long Island – animation that was used to discredit the testimony of hundreds of eyewitnesses, many of them military and aviation personnel. Lahr sees this animation as the Achilles' heel of a consciously skewed investigation, and in this he is correct.
Lahr also sent me a CD review of the case titled merely "TWA Flight 800 Crash Evidence Review," which I will hereafter refer to as "the Review." Before I finished reading it, I sent Lahr an e-mail, which read in part:
"Brilliant work on your explication. I am only halfway through it, but I am totally impressed. Everything else that has gone before it is the work of amateurs, mine included."
The message I got back from Lahr, however, floored me. He did not write this report. He received it anonymously in the mail. I was stunned. The Review in question is the most sophisticated piece of investigative reporting that I have ever read on this or any other crash. The unknown author likely put years into this work. He surely comes from within the aviation community, which may explain his desire for anonymity. He argues crisply, patiently and comprehensively. He provides ample illustration of his contentions and rarely, if ever, does he exceed his knowledge base.
Most impressive is his knowing synthesis of all the available evidence – radar, eyewitness, physical, audio, GPS, debris field – to recreate in detail the flight taken and damage done by each of the missiles fired at TWA Flight 800. What is more, the author uses only the evidence that was available to the National Transportation Safety Board to reach conclusions that they should have reached with the same data.
The Review author believes that based on the debris field alone, "the administration would have known within the first two weeks after the crash that missiles brought down the aircraft." Although prudent in his accusations, he strongly suspects that the long delay in recovering the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder indicates that the decision to misdirect the investigation "actually occurred the night of the disaster." With this conclusion, I fully concur.
No one who reads this Review can doubt for a moment that the government has engaged in a massive misdirection in the gathering of evidence. Every major media outlet owes it to its audience to assign its best technical writer to read and review this work. The one CD includes the entire NTSB report as well.
To make things simple, I will happily provide a copy of the entire Review to any interested major media party. The author asked that the information be shared. Interested observers, who are willing to identify themselves, can obtain a pdf copy of Part I of the Review by contacting me through my website, .
In the weeks to come, I will break down the information into manageable chunks. For now, allow me to summarize the author's approach. The Review is divided into four parts. Each of the first three parts is dedicated to the destructive path of one given missile.
In the way of example, the author argues that the first of the three was a large surface-to-air missile launched from 16 to 22 miles west of the crash site. The missile approached the aircraft on a descending track from the rear and struck it without exploding. The author is very specific in his detail, to wit, "This impact broke the horizontal stabilizer pitch trim jackscrew in tension and caused the aircraft to pitch upward." Not all the writing is this technical, but where specifics are needed, the author does not shy from providing them.
The fourth part, and the one least supported by existing evidence, is dedicated to other unidentified objects in the sky that night. The author makes the public relations mistake of calling them UFOs. What he means are unidentified aircraft. They do not come from outer space. I will call them UACs.
In the book "First Strike," James Sanders and I argue that a UAC may very well have been in the mix, and that UAC may have been a terrorist plane. The author, too, believes that a UAC was in the mix as well as three missiles, but he does not believe that the UAC was a manned aircraft. He makes a compelling argument that the UAC information that the FBI gathered was so hot that it was simply not allowed in to the official record. Every now and then, however, some information bled in accidentally. The most obvious example of the same was a photo taken by Linda Kabot that seemed to show a slender cylindrical object flying away from the scene of the crash.
Wisely, the author refrains from saying who fired the missiles or launched the aircraft, although the evidence strongly leads away from anything but a highly sophisticated military operation. It is possible that terrorist involvement may have gone no deeper than warnings given and credit claimed. Someone in Washington knows just how deep that involvement was.
The author argues that an independent panel from outside Washington is essential to conduct a new investigation. "Otherwise," he contends, "the same insider influences in both political parties, who have prevented the truth from being revealed previously, would control the investigation's outcome."
In the best of all possible worlds, Ray Lahr's case may just crack open the official door.
"The other thing is, you can't simultaneously believe the Clinton Administration was a bunch of bumbling incompentents, AND also evil geniuses."
HA show how much you know... The Bush Administration has been doin that for 6 years now,(if the Moonbats are to be belived)
OK, but I'm willing to concede his demeanor changed when he was taken aside and pulled up short for talking out of his @$$, when there was no reason to make that statement.
As far as Clinton's grand plan to curry favor with Muslims, it didn't turn out so well if that was his plan.
A number of years ago, a nuclear loaded B-52 was shot down in New Mexico, it crashed on Mount Taylor west of Albuquerque, if I recall. The crash site was so hot with radioactivity that investigators couldnt even get close for a long while. It was years before the truth of the matter was released.
It seems that some fighter jets were playing with the B-52 doing mock missle runs on it, when a missle actually left the rail and popped the bomber. The information that was eventually released was that the pilot did not fire. Upon teardown of the planes, they found some moisture in some electrical part that allowed the radar pickup and all the automatic wizardry on the fighter to jump across the safeties and launch the missle.
I always wondered if something like this happened with 800? We may never know.
Another problem. Even a match doesn't do it and can be plunged into the liquid. But to be fair to that theory it was vapor which was claimed to be ignited.
For example . . .
The government and military brass of this country conducted medical experiments on thousands of people for decades -- and this information was never revealed until years later.
Why do you assume he was not telling the truth based on what he already knew from previous events that weren't public? Why do you automatically assume the opposite? For an experienced FBI agent who had moved up the ladder the former seems more reasonable to me than your opinion.
As far as Clinton's grand plan to curry favor with Muslims, it didn't turn out so well if that was his plan.
Arafat double crossed him and the last time they were seen together Clinton was giving him a look that could kill and blamed him for the failure.
This is not all conspiracy stuff if you have been paying attention to the news for the past 20 years. These are logical conclusions when considering the character of the people involved.
What's that you say? The MSM didn't investigate the Clinton administration's lack of concern about American security? I'm shocked. Shocked, I say.
Aw jeez, not this crap again...
Marine mounted Russian or Chinese HW, snuck in by the Mukhabarat or other hostile Spec Ops / Black Ops. Given the security environment during the Klintoon years, I personally cannot discount the idea.
Source:US Veteran Dispatch
Ferrat was an Algerian business associate of Ron Brown.
Don't believe for a minute that the large numbers of military folks that would have been involved would *all* keep silent, just to protect old BJ's butt. He wasn't exactly beloved by the military you know.
Sure, and there would only be a couple of hundred people MINIMUM in a position to know that, and all of them military members with no love of the Toon or any reason to want to kill Americans.
Grow up, for Pete's sake, you sound like a dang lib.
Truer words were never writ.
You assume (incorrectly) that the missiles were fired by (Islamic) terrorists. They weren't. They were fired (accidentally) by our own navy. President Reagan would have covered it up too.
ML/NJ
July 3, 1988 - USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Airbus A300B between Bandar Abbas and Dubai.
July 17, 1996 - TWA 800, Boeing 747-131 "exploded" in mid-air off Long Island.
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.