Was 'TWA FLIGHT 800' [1996, where 230 Americans were killed] an ISLAMIC TERROR attack?I saw Jack Cashill on C-Span over the weekend. I forgot to post the story then. I remember seeing the video at the time and later being told it was an optical illusion. Topping it off was the unlikely explanation that it was caused by a faulty design in the fuel tanks that never happened before, and that the fuel tanks needed to be redesigned, IIRC.
1 posted on
11/06/2007 9:21:23 AM PST by
neverdem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
To: neverdem
That tape was supposed to go to the Clinton library. Sandy, get your baggy pants!
2 posted on
11/06/2007 9:24:16 AM PST by
massgopguy
(I owe everything to George Bailey)
To: neverdem
Kooks, crazies,
conspiracy theorists... Bill Clinton would never lie about terrorism. Especially in an election year.
And besides, center fuel tanks blow up on their own all the time... especially in the Philippines and Indonesia.
To: neverdem
60 Minutes did a segment on Enron and the gas line deal in India in 1998. When the connection to the White House was made, they showed File Footage of the Bush Administration.
4 posted on
11/06/2007 9:26:22 AM PST by
massgopguy
(I owe everything to George Bailey)
To: neverdem
5 posted on
11/06/2007 9:26:54 AM PST by
oyez
(Justa' another high minded lowlife.)
To: neverdem
While the search for the truth in this is worthwhile in and of itself; sadly, it will never bring back my beloved TWA.
6 posted on
11/06/2007 9:27:59 AM PST by
Uriah_lost
("I don't apologize for the United States of America," -Fred D Thompson)
To: neverdem
I believe that this was indeed an act of terrorism or a naval exercise gone wrong.
However, this article does nothing to lend credence to my theory.
7 posted on
11/06/2007 9:28:28 AM PST by
JerseyDvl
(If You Support America - Thank a Soldier; If You Support Al-Qaeda - Thank a Democrat!)
To: neverdem
To: neverdem
Adding a new level of intrigue to the investigation is the fact that the video in question appears to have been shot on July 12, 1996, five days before the crash. Adding to the intrigue? Well, no, actually... in order to add to the intrigue I would think that the missile would have to have been fired *on* the day of the crash. A missile track five days before the crash is... not involved.
11 posted on
11/06/2007 9:32:19 AM PST by
Ramius
(Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
To: neverdem
The first manpad launch was too far out and the airliner was too high.
The second manpad launch was 5 or so days later and made no such err.
Sadly, our National Defenses did not correctly detect and defend the U.S. homeland from the second attack.
The first attack is one thing to excuse...it’s the second launch that downed TWA 800 that should have had General Wesley Clarke and his peers fired.
12 posted on
11/06/2007 9:32:48 AM PST by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: neverdem; All
Can somebody explain that last picture....the one of the President and Air Force One? What is circled in red and what does it mean? Thanks.
14 posted on
11/06/2007 9:34:57 AM PST by
toldyou
To: neverdem
I knew it. Surprised it wasn’t properly covered up.
15 posted on
11/06/2007 9:35:22 AM PST by
Kevmo
(We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
To: neverdem
Yea, I saw the video too. I wonder if it is still around. Didn’t look like an optical illusion to me.
16 posted on
11/06/2007 9:37:04 AM PST by
TLI
( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
To: neverdem
17 posted on
11/06/2007 9:37:37 AM PST by
sourcery
(Referring a "social conservative" to the Ninth Amendment is like showing the Cross to Dracula.)
To: neverdem
If you put together a ping list on this, please do include me.
Thanks.
18 posted on
11/06/2007 9:39:12 AM PST by
papasmurf
(sudo apt - get install FRed Thompson)
To: neverdem
This is World Net Daily, so that in itself is a “grain of salt”.
I would say that this paragraph doesn’t mean much. Just because at 1 point (early) they said it looked like A, doesn’t mean they could not discredit A later with ALL the evidence and call it B.
This doesn’t mean I don’t believe something besides “faulty 747” happened there; just that this is not what I’d qualify as “smoking gun”. It’s not good evidence.
23 posted on
11/06/2007 9:46:21 AM PST by
the OlLine Rebel
(Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
To: neverdem
We should ask Jim Kalstrom, he will tell us the truth. Sarcasm on!
26 posted on
11/06/2007 9:56:57 AM PST by
NY Attitude
(You are responsible for your safety until the arrival of Law Enforcement Officers!)
To: neverdem
He and his wife (I believe) somehow got ahold of a piece of seat fabric from the crash debris recovery hangar, did HPLC on it (or some assay) and the results were that the sample was covered with RDX or some chemical consistent with explosives, like from a missile.
And for THAT, the FBI basically put him and his wife in PRISON.
I can never trust the gov't again in the same way I did before.
28 posted on
11/06/2007 10:03:56 AM PST by
gaijin
To: neverdem
I heard Jack Cashill on Coast-to-Coast live one saturday night. This was early september. I am not convinced a manpad was use.
Until better “evidence” is presented, I accept the fuel tank issue, which was corrected on Air Force one.
30 posted on
11/06/2007 10:06:27 AM PST by
Perdogg
(Elections have consequences.)
To: neverdem
One thing is certain: There have been a lot less acts of terrorism perpetrated against us since W put Saddam out of the terrorism business.
To: neverdem
The whole investigation into TWA Flight 800 is a sham. Crimes were committed both in the bringing down of the plane and the subsequent cover up. It is my belief this crime goes to the very top of the Clinton Administration. Hopefully someone will get to the bottom of this prior to next years elections.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson