Witness Tampering Alleged in Flt. 587 Probe

NewsMax.com ^ | 7/16/02 | Carl Limbacher & Staff

[goody2shooz]

A group of eyewitnesses to the Nov. 12 crash of American Airlines Flight 587 are charging that the National Transportation Safety Board has engaged in deliberate cover-up; complaining that investigators have ignored their accounts of a fiery midair explosion and even tried to persuade some of them to change their story.

"The plane was definitely on fire. It was in the middle of the plane," said Maureen Hager, a flight attendant who watched Flt. 587 crash from her apartment window in Belle Harbor, New York.

She told the New York Daily News that crash investigators tried to get her to change her account. "They told me I didn't see it," she complained.

Hager was one of 25 who addressed a gathering of Flt. 587 witnesses at a Queens, New York restaurant located not far from the crash scene last week.

Others were equally adamant.

"I resent the fact that the NTSB and all these other people think we're making this stuff up," added Joann Catanese, a Rockaway Park resident who joined the group of 45 fellow Flt. 587 witnesses.

Still others said the NTSB simply refused to take witness statements from those whose accounts conflicted with official theories of how the crash happened.

Some who said they saw an explosion claimed the NTSB declined to conduct follow-up interviews.

Since the earliest hours after Flt. 587 crashed outside JFK International Airport, the NTSB has maintained there was no indication of an onboard fire or explosion, evidence that could show terrorists brought the plane down.

Yet most of the witnesses at the meeting said they heard an explosion, then saw the Airbus 300-600 engulfed in a fireball before it plummeted to the ground, killing all 260 aboard and five on the ground.

The crash took place on the Veteran's Day holiday, a day after the FBI had issued an air travel terrorist alert.

Five weeks later, al Qaeda terrorist Richard Reid was apprehended trying to detonate a bomb on board Miami-bound American Airlines Flight 63.

"I kind of think there's a cover-up," local diner owner Kenny Good told the Daily News.

Good, also a Flt. 587 witness, said he had to force investigators to recover jet debris he collected from the roof of his restaurant.

"I had parts [from the crash] for a full day and nobody picked them up and they could be covered with explosive residue," Good said.

The NTSB was invited to attend the Flt. 587 witness meeting but declined to send a representative.

[Sundog]

Sorry for the confusion...

Soooooooooo Sorry.

My [book mark for the] flight 93 web site has [quit functioning so I presumed the site had] disappeared...

Thanks for the alternate link.

Cheers.

[mrustow]

... all over again.

[freepsolo]

In light of '93 WTC bombing - and Final WTC takedown...

Another exercise out of New York such as a Stinger missle on a large Airliner is very possible.

Airlines got protection and FBI (RENO) ran political cover for Democrat administration.

Leftist Media operations out of the East Coast would not push the issue of an effective attack during Democrat watch.

The FAA Facsists will strip search those in western clothes.

Then let pass - the robe wearing Arab right on through the gates - as not to obstruct his honorable (intimidating)Religion.

[Victoria Delsoul]

"I kind of think there's a cover-up," local diner owner Kenny Good told the Daily News.

While it has not been possible to provide definite answers to these questions I'd like more concrete evidence.

[lawdog]

Don't you mean the "BS factor" ? LOL!!!

[DAnconia55]

Sinkspur?

[FReepaholic]

Ummm...RobRoy, I just now realized you were being sarcastic.

You had me going there for a minute.

[BOBTHENAILER]

Deja vu.

All over again.

[honway]

Tell me tin foilers, how'd a sabatour make both engines come off at the same time?

Why don't you attempt to explain how two engines separate from an aircraft in the absence of sabotage. It has never happened before.

[honway]

It has never happened before.

I should qualify that, in civilian aviation.

[eno_]

Actually, there is a consistent explanation for exactly what happened, and there are well-documented precendents: Loss of control, followed by an "unusual attitude" followed by midair breakup, especially of large surfaces, in this case part of a wing, the tail, and engines (because of the cowlings). So the question is: What caused loss of control? Maybe it had to do with what the witnesses saw.

[copycat]

! I said it on the other threads and I'll say it again on this one...Reid was shoe-bomber #2. The first one was on flight 587.

Agreed. I believe a shoe bomber detonated near the wing of Flt 587. The first blast caused the wing to "fold back" along the plane, causing the reported "lurch to the left." The damage also caused a larger explosion when a fuel tank nearby went up. Witnesses saw TWO explosions and the cockpit voice recorder captured two "shudders."

According to the local fisherman, pieces of the wing struck the tail, but I believe the tail was sheared off when the plane fishtailed due to the sudden loss of drag on the wingless side.

Just my humble opinion...FReegards.

[Valin]

Non-tin foil hat latenight bump.

[eno_]

Another interesting Google result: While "unusual attitude" is a very common expression used in accident investigations, "airframe rattle" appears nowhere before AA587. It is a neologism. The phrase was made up to explain noises on the CVR. They could just as well be the sound of small explosives detonating. Also telling is the fact the plane jerked to one side and then to the other, corresponding with the noises.

[goody2shooz]

When Reid was collared and his shoe-bomb detected, I immediately thought of Flt587. It really grates that this administration would put the airlines' bottom line above telling the truth to this nation's citizens and letting us make up our minds on how much risk we're willing to take on.

[goody2shooz]

What do you mean, your website "disappeared"? Aliens spirited it away perhaps, or did the FBI zap it?

I used to have a website. They don't exactly evaporate or get eaten by mice.

[copycat]

Bump. I have postulated that an explosion in the middle of the plane, when heard from the cockpit, could very well sound like an "airframe rattle." Due to the fact that the sound comes from behind you in a vehicle travelling at several hundreds of mph, there would be distortion, doeppler and otherwise to the "sound", but the vibration would carry right through the hull.

[RobRoy]

I WAS JOKING! Of course an airplane can't bounce!

But hey, if over half the nation will vote for AlGore, who knows what the FBI can get them to believe. 8^>

Sorry it took so long to respond, this was embedded in all that BBQ Kitty stuff for me.

[RobRoy]

I just read your 67. Heh, Heh. Actually, I've made the same mistake myself. Of course, so much baloney is spouted as real nowadays, it really is hard to know when people are serious...