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.
We're looking at hundreds, maybe thousands of people, and none of them are speaking up. Simply not possible.
Thanks for accusing the Prez of covering up a terroist attack, moonbat.
Here's a little ditty to add to the conspiracy/coverup theory. FWIW, I was chatting with someone recently who said that the HAARP project had something to do with TWA 800. Supposedly, someone who worked at HAARP at the time said that they had really screwed up. What that means, I don't know.
"I don't believe that anyone in the military would shot down a passenger airline (excepted one controlled by terrorist). And if they believed that is what they were doing, they would not keep it a secret."
I happened to be an observer a few years ago when two Navy missiles were fired from Wallops Island for the purpose of hitting a drone off the east coast of the U.S. Perhaps flight 800 was in the wrong place at the right time. That would explain the presence of other military assets in the area that night.
If there were a missile test for the purpose of testing SDI technology for example, you can be assured that it would be classified so highly no one would talk about it.
I'm not saying I believe that's what happened (I tend to believe it was a terrorist hit), but that is a plausible explanation as to how the military could have been involved.
The internet is truly amazing. I decided to search for any information that included TWA 800 and HAARP. What I found is basically what this person was saying.
Here's the link: http://www.dudeman.net/siriusly/0/sup/twa800.shtml
IF HAARP had anything to do with it, it wouldn't be so surprising that it would have been covered up due to classified information.
It would have to be at least hundreds. The Toon and friends couldn't even keep word about his fickle pickle from leaking out, or keep the lid on the stuff Gary Aldrich put in Unlimited Access, but they can shut up hundreds of people, many of whom had no love for the Toon, I'm sure?
Get a grip on this: Conspiracy theories such as this require the silence of hundreds of people who have zero incentive to be silent. It's crap. The center tank exploded (similar thing happened to a KC-135 while I was working them) and when the nose came off the burning rear half looked like a missile trail. End of story.
I'm not sure what you mean by conspiracy theories--the possible missile strike or the alleged cover-up, but virtually every terrorist strike that occurs is a conspiracy. The 9/11 incident was a conspiracy. The first WTC bombing was a conspiracy. The government typically charges terrorists with conspiracy along with other things when they're caught. Terrorist strikes by nature must be carried out through the coordinated action of numerous individuals--a conspiracy by definition.
Now, it is much harder to envision our own government officials being involved in a conspiracy, but it isn't impossible. Implausible but not impossible. That may be what you're saying.
Actually, it was the Clinton administration which covered it up. The Bush administration's motive in letting things lie is preserving the integrity of the presidency. That's what the New Tone is all about.
Why not, especially if it brings out the truth?
I am fed up with people who keep avoiding the truth.
Exactly. Sure, there are eywitnesses who say they saw missile trails, but no one who saw a launch. The fact that the rear half of the plane shot up and left a fire trail explains the "missile trail" sightings. The lack of a missile launch sighting cannot be explained.
Some people actually think Bush engineered the attack on the WTC and this war. I'm assuming you weren't talking about that.
Think about it: why is it farfetched to think the media would 'hide' any complicity of Bill Clinton's involvement in the TWA flight going down? The MSM protect Dems all the time, so as infuriating as it would be, it doesn't surprise.
Doesnt Iran have anti-aircraft missiles on its navy ships and submarines?
I don’t believe the military fired the missile. I don’t think that could be covered up.
I doubt that American enlisted servicemen would keep a secret like shooting down an American commercial airline. Some of them would talk long before now.
A few years back under clinton, we had extensive discussions of this here on FR. Alamo Girl made a whole fantastic compilation, which she put on the web (link on FR main page - or at least there was), and I do remember that there was some famous person on board, who had just escaped from another crash/attack. In fact there were several other 'people of special interest' too.
34 - "Some will say I am crazy, but I am almost positive someone showed on a news channel the radar data that showed TWA 800 and something intersecting with it, then both disappeared on one of the news shows shortly after it happened?"
===
Relax, you are not crazy. I saw it too, found it on the net, and had a copy (until my hard drive crashed), and as you said, it 'disappeared' from the web, and I could never find it again, anywhere, and I really searched. But I still have a picture in my mind of that scope, the two tracks intersecting and then both disappearing.
Claims were made at the time. I can't remember who it was right off the top of my head, but I recall seeing information about this several times. IIRC, the FBI initially mentioned a couple of groups claiming responsibility, then... nothing...
From what I've read of this incident, it was a missile.
The Bush administration covered up all the clinton's crimes.
I'm a skeptic, too. But I don't think there's anything wrong with simply challenging the version of events presented by the government. Certainly, there are difficult questions about that version. If the investigators already had hatched a theory to include a specific culprit without solid evidence I would join you in equating them with the left. The left's wild conspiracy theories always start with the premise that "the government" or Bush or the CIA did it. Here, people like Lahr are saying, let's figure out what happened before assigning responsibility. I don't think they're the same.
BTTT. I love this freaky crap!
I remember that, too, but I've never seen it reliably verified.
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.