Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Second Video of Flight 587 Casts Doubt on Crash Probe
NewsMax.com ^ | Jan. 27, 2002 | Carl Limbacher

Posted on 01/27/2002 11:38:36 AM PST by Carl/NewsMax

News that a second toll booth video camera captured doomed American Airlines Flight 587's breakup moments after its Nov. 12 takeoff from New York's JFK airport raises new questions about the candor and thoroughness of investigators conducting the probe into the disaster.

Time.com reported Sunday that National Transportation Safety Board investigators "last week got their first look at a remarkable videotape of the deadly accident."

Time adds: "This is the second video record the board has obtained of the crash, but the first one was virtually useless because the plane could be seen only as a tiny speck."

In reality, both traffic surveillance videotapes - shot from a toll booths on causeways that cross New York's Jamaica Bay (adjacent to JFK) - were reportedly turned over to crash probers within four days of the disaster.

On Nov. 16 the New York Daily News reported:

"Metropolitan Transportation Authority spokesman Tom Kelly confirmed that the agency has given surveillance videotapes from the Cross Bay Blvd. and Marine Parkway bridges to the FBI."

At approximately 3 miles distance from JFK, a camera mounted on Cross Bay Blvd's Veterans Memorial Bridge toll booth would have had a much better view of Flight 587's takeoff than one on Marine Parkway - approximately 7 miles away.

But on Nov. 16 the News quoted MTA spokesman Kelly as saying that only one tape captured the plane's breakup - which turned out to be from the more distant Marine Parkway vantage point.

That could have been an oversight on his part. Kelly told NewsMax.com later that day that he had not personally reviewed either videotape but relied instead on the accounts of others.

Kelly also told NewsMax.com, "We turned (the Marine Parkway tape) over to the FBI and they have now turned it over to the NTSB."

Did the FBI withhold from the NTSB the much closer Cross Bay Blvd. videotape?

Otherwise, why is an NTSB source now telling Time.com that the agency got its first look at that better video last week, more than two months after the FBI reportedly took possession of both tapes?

More troubling still, however, is Time.com's claim that the more distant Marine Parkway Bridge tape was "virtually useless."

That's not what a reporter who actually examined the footage said on Nov. 17:

"The tape, viewed by the Daily News, shows a white outline of the jetliner against a clear sky in fairly steep decline. Seconds later, the outline disappears and the video shows a blurry, white undefined patch as the plane apparently breaks apart."

The toll booth obscures the moment of impact but, said the News:

"At the end of the bridge videotape sequence, which has been turned over to the FBI, there appears to be a puff of white smoke in the sky."

Nov. 12, the day of the crash, was a cloudless day in New York, a fact that makes that "puff of white smoke" particularly problematic for investigators who have bent over backwards to ignore the accounts of dozens of eyewitnesses who say they saw a midair explosion and fire before the plane broke apart.

Does the closer Cross Bay Blvd. videotape undermine the NTSB's repeated attempts to blame the crash on mechanical failure? Time.com's source will only say the new evidence shows Flight 587 "flying along normally and intact, and suddenly things start to go very wrong."

Stay tuned.


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aaflight587
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next last
Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: Carl/NewsMax
I think it was a shoe bomber. They may never know. I think there is a "shoe bomber brigade" out there.
22 posted on 01/27/2002 1:35:47 PM PST by Swede Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldvike
Ah, yes, the tinfoilers have scored another direct hit. Strange, isn't it?
23 posted on 01/27/2002 2:18:23 PM PST by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
I don't think the tape shows an "explosion." Not exactly. It shows something else. And, just for the record, it will never see the light of day.
24 posted on 01/27/2002 2:21:04 PM PST by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
What I don't understand is why I am supposed to feel more comfortable believing that planes just fall apart in midair.
25 posted on 01/27/2002 2:30:27 PM PST by Samwise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldvike
Just a dance. Had to suppress the info for the Christmas time airline traffic. Now perhaps the "truth" will come out--timed for limiting damages to airline profits. Ask Mrs. Daschle.
26 posted on 01/27/2002 2:49:31 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: laconas
"So remember folks, if you happen to videotape a big event--don't analyze yourself or post it on the internet. Turn it over to the experts!"

What if the experts have reason to decide to deep-six it (it got lost; it got ruined, it got stolen; we never got it; when we looked at it, there wasn't anything on it, etc)? I would say, keep a few copies in a safe-deposit box or elsewhere safe).

27 posted on 01/27/2002 4:40:42 PM PST by Irene Adler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
One theory, argued well.
28 posted on 01/27/2002 4:50:36 PM PST by gg188
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sungirl
That was my first thoughts after Reid tried it. Thank G-d he didn't succeed.
29 posted on 01/27/2002 6:00:23 PM PST by MsLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Crowcreek
I know nothing about explosives, is the residue visible? Or do they have to run a test?
30 posted on 01/27/2002 6:03:16 PM PST by MsLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MsLady
The gentleman, former mayor of San Diego, who replaced Rush week before last, made mention of this. "Shoe Bomber #1" I believe he called him and something about these "shoe bombers" sit in seat 19A, I think it was. That way the explosion does the damage to the plane the terrorists want done.
31 posted on 01/27/2002 6:10:32 PM PST by chouli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Crowcreek
Semtex or C-4 would have left chemical traces on the wreckage. It should be an easy matter to rule it out -- or confirm it.

IF that's what they really want to do...

32 posted on 01/27/2002 6:24:07 PM PST by null and void
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: gg188
Very interesting link! Thanks!
33 posted on 01/27/2002 6:38:25 PM PST by null and void
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: gg188
What your link says is frightening. Here is evidence of what most likely occurred to flight 587. There needs to be profiling of anyone near our planes. Makes me real glad I don't need to fly these days.
34 posted on 01/27/2002 7:37:33 PM PST by whenigettime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Bump for later.
35 posted on 01/27/2002 7:53:57 PM PST by StriperSniper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
bump
36 posted on 01/27/2002 8:02:01 PM PST by GretchenEE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: null and void
IF that's what they really want to do...

Yeah -- I'm sure it's already been done . .

MsLady : It's a residue that's invisible, but obvious, as I understand it.

38 posted on 01/27/2002 9:21:27 PM PST by Crowcreek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Carl/NewsMax
"At the end of the bridge videotape sequence, which has been turned over to the FBI, there appears to be a puff of white smoke in the sky."

Right. The puff of smoke is at the END of the sequence -- where one would expect that a plane breaking up in mid air would produce clouds of fuel, etc.

Had the puff of smoke occurred at the BEGINNING of the sequence, then the bomb explanation would at least have some evidence going for it.

So the tinfoilers are wrong again -- batting 0. As usual.

39 posted on 01/27/2002 9:26:54 PM PST by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson