Posted on 07/03/2013 4:13:24 AM PDT by Carriage Hill
Current and former federal officials who played key roles in the investigation of one of the nation's worst aviation disasters said Tuesday they stand by their conclusion that the explosion of TWA flight 800 was caused by overheated fuel tank vapors, and not a bomb or missile.
The officials spoke to reporters at a briefing on the National Transportation Safety Board's four-year investigation following the explosion and crash of the Boeing 747 off Long Island, N.Y., on July 17, 1996, killing all 230 people on board. The board took the usual step of organizing the briefing on an investigation that has been closed for years. That's in response to a new documentary film set to air this month on the 17th anniversary of the tragedy. The film says new evidence points to the often-discounted theory that a missile strike may have downed the jumbo jet.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/02/twa-800-accident-say-investigators/?test=latestnews#ixzz2XyoJDbTM
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Yes. That was part of the narrative, in addition to the many witnesses that stated categorically they saw a streak of vapor, highlighted by the setting sun, arching up in the sky in close proximity to TWA 800. This was all discounted after Kalstrom was called to Washington (within two days of the crash) and given his marching orders ... TWA Flt. 800 went down as a result of a empty fuel tank explosion. All other possibilities are off the table.
Of course they do. They lied and covered up in 1996 and now that lie must be preserved at all costs.
They couldn't walk around to the other side?
Yes, but statistically, if you crash are you more likely to survive in a plane crash or a car crash. I have been in several car crashes and I’m still kicking. I doubt I would have survived that many plane crashes.
The fact that you had the FBI and CIA involved in an airline disaster investigation, and that the CIA felt compelled to produce an animated video of an explosion/crash sequence that was comical to anyone who had flown an airplane, made this thing suspicious from the get-go.
See the video at post #35.
Me too and I remember it like it was yesterday. I'm not sure if the missle was an errant launch by the navy who was active in the area that night (highly unlikelu IMO) or if it was a deliberate terrorist attack (I'd bet the ranch) but I know that immediately following the crash people were coming forward...within an hour of the crash...claiming to have seen a light streak from the surface to the plane just before the plane exploded.
Some people are just really stubborn.
At this point, what difference does it make?
Does anyone remember when a pilot near Los Angeles reported a missile trail near his aircraft? It was immediately downplayed as just a “bottle rocket”.
If it were a center fuel tank malfunction, there would be class action lawsuits as far as the eye can see.
Scores of people of sound mind and body saw the same trail leading up to the plane.
But then again why would I believe anything other than the official story?
Good point, Kalstrom always seemed like a stand up guy to me.
In First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America James Sanders and Jack Cashill make a pretty convincing case that the Navy was trying to shoot down an explosives-laden small aircraft that was trying to collide intentionally with TWA 800. I know the theory sounds far fetched, but their argument is a plausible explanation of a lot of facts that don't fit together any other way.
And Kallstrom got a nice job in an investment banking firm after he retired at the conclusion of the investigation.
A 35 year gumshoe gets hired by an investment banking firm.
Riiiiiiight.
Wow, hadn’t seen that interview before...
Au Contraire, Mon Frere!
My first question, too.
IINM, they tried many times and couldn’t ignite kerosene vapors to recreate it.
It is quite possible,even likely,that, NO,the reporters couldn’t walk around to the other side of the reconstructed plane because of physical barriers and security people stationed to prevent just that.
Check the video at post #35. This testimony by a very credible witness would support the 'two plane' downing theory and the fact that 200+ eyewitnesses saw multiple missle streaks across the sky.
I remember “water cars” with sealed bottoms, propellors etc, but I sure wouldn’t want to travel for very long a distance in one. My long-distance travel days/years are over, anyway.
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.