Skip to comments.
TWA FLIGHT 800
3rd party
| 11/27/01
| Fred Roberts
Posted on 11/27/2001 1:52:03 PM PST by sandydipper
Today I had conversation with a commercial pilot who said that in July of 1996 just after the SHOOT DOWN of TWA800 a co-worker also a commercial pilot told him that he was sent to Paris to pick up the TWA president and fly him back to DC. The second pilot was a military pilot at the time and said that as soon as they returned to DC the TWA guy was helicoptered to the White House.
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: twa800list; twaflight800
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 481-495 next last
It appears to me that the fix was in and that TWA was "on board" from the get go.
Why can't the politico's just tell us the truth? The Stingers that the Taliban are alleged to be missing have been used against our own airlines. The FBI and CIA were sleeping at the gate and for "national security" reasons we aren't supposed to know the truth.
Kick me gently - this is my first post.
1
posted on
11/27/2001 1:52:03 PM PST
by
sandydipper
(sandidipir@aol.com)
To: sandydipper
Totally believable. Thanks for posting it.
But who is Fred? Your friend?
Comment #3 Removed by Moderator
To: sandydipper
Just one more item on the massive pile of evidence that TWA 800 was shot down. Thanks for the post.
4
posted on
11/27/2001 2:02:02 PM PST
by
GingisK
To: sandydipper
My personal conclusion is that TWA Flight 800 was shot down but that the most recent crash was an accident.
Your post is one more straw in the wind, and I suppose some enterprising news person could follow up on it to see where the President of TWA was at the time and whether he visited the White House as claimed. But without names and corroborating facts, it doesn't mean very much.
Clinton covered up and lied reflexively, and the media were happy to back him to the hilt. I won't say that Bush wouldn't cover up if he thought there was good reason to do so, but so far I think the evidence is the other way.
5
posted on
11/27/2001 2:02:57 PM PST
by
Cicero
Comment #6 Removed by Moderator
To: Cicero
"Clinton covered up and lied reflexively, and the media were happy to back him to the hilt. I won't say that Bush wouldn't cover ..."
Bush most certainly knows the facts here, so he is complicent if flight 800 was shot down.
7
posted on
11/27/2001 2:06:38 PM PST
by
gjenkins
To: sandydipper
"3rd Party," huh? Sounds like "hearsay" then.
This is such steaming, REEKING BULLSH*T!
8
posted on
11/27/2001 2:12:39 PM PST
by
Illbay
To: gjenkins
God knows we hate complicenty.
To: sandydipper
Here is a real tough question: Which is a more likely reason for the Bush Administration to conform to the same TWA 800 coverup strategy set in place by the Clinton Administration ?:
(A) Both administrations decided to conceal, for diplomatic reasons, a foreign terrorist attack on US citizens on a US airline.
(B) Both administrations decided to conceal, for reasons of national security, a friendly fire accidental shootdown of a US commercial aircraft.
Try not to pick the one you would like to be true.
Pick the one that is most logical.
10
posted on
11/27/2001 2:18:17 PM PST
by
doyle
To: sandydipper
The x42 and staff perfected cover up, I hope more people will come forward to expose the fraud who thought he was king.
11
posted on
11/27/2001 2:20:51 PM PST
by
boomop1
To: MadameAxe
FYI.
12
posted on
11/27/2001 2:23:24 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: doyle
Right. And your radar verification of the missile is . . . where? Why is it that Rivero or NONE of the conspiracy kooks have EVER produced a SINGLE RADAR IMAGE of a missile??? Oh, we don't need that. Their word is good enough. Some red residue on a seat cover that could have been from virtually ANYTHING---except a missile that actually exploded (and which doesn't leave residue like that)is supposed to be a case for a "shoot down." Time to give this one a rest in the same coffin as the Masons, the Rothschilds, and Hangar 18.
13
posted on
11/27/2001 2:23:33 PM PST
by
LS
To: GingisK
Uh, it's a massive pile of something, but not evidence.
To: Angus_Day
Give me evidence and those satellite jpgs showing the launch of the stinger towards Flight 800. It will be interesting to see where the launch came from. But it all went the way of the grassy knoll , the missing shooter and suicidal clintonistas...didn't it. 6 posted on 11/27/01 3:03 PM Pacific by Angus_Day [
Why don't you get ahold of Mr .Fibber McGee KALLSTROM and ask him to explain the 30-Knot boat, heading away fron crash site from almost directly below it, that he (Kallstrom) "morphed" into a Helicopter. What was up with that big lie?! Huh Huh Huh?
Then he had to quit that lie when he realised that a rougue helicopter, flying helter skelter around N.Y. and" nobody" know who it is, or where there from, or where they went is totally unbelievable, and would be darn right scary if it were true!
So how about it--was it a 30-Knot boat, or was it, as Kallstrom said on national t.v., a helicopter?!
15
posted on
11/27/2001 2:27:06 PM PST
by
timestax
To: sandydipper
It was reported at the time that the President of TWA was taken to the Pentagon the next day. One other report said the government bought a new plane for TWA. I have nothing to support any of that except that I remember reading it at the time.
16
posted on
11/27/2001 2:27:28 PM PST
by
OK
To: Angus_Day
Give me evidence and those satellite jpgs showing the launch of the stinger towards Flight 800. It will be interesting to see where the launch came from. But it all went the way of the grassy knoll , the missing shooter and suicidal clintonistas...didn't it. 6 posted on 11/27/01 3:03 PM Pacific by Angus_Day [
Why don't you get ahold of Mr .Fibber McGee KALLSTROM and ask him to explain the 30-Knot boat, heading away fron crash site from almost directly below it, that he (Kallstrom) "morphed" into a Helicopter. What was up with that big lie?! Huh Huh Huh?
Then he had to quit that lie when he realised that a rougue helicopter, flying helter skelter around N.Y. and" nobody" know who it is, or where there from, or where they went is totally unbelievable, and would be darn right scary if it were true!
So how about it--was it a 30-Knot boat, or was it, as Kallstrom said on national t.v., a helicopter?!
17
posted on
11/27/2001 2:27:58 PM PST
by
timestax
To: clintonh8r
lol complicent=complicit
18
posted on
11/27/2001 2:31:18 PM PST
by
gjenkins
To: LS
Right. And your radar verification of the missile is . . . where? Why is it that Rivero or NONE of the conspiracy kooks have EVER produced a SINGLE RADAR IMAGE of a missile??? If that is your standard, you will forever be dissatisfied. Missles, especially the smaller ones that might be launched from a small boat, rarely have enough radar cross section to produce a radar "hit", oh you might get one every ever 10 or more sweeps if the geometry was just right, but then again you might not. They don't carry transponders either, so the only possibility would be a skin paint, and as I said, that is unlikely. Even larger missles, such as Sparrows and AMMRAAMS rarely show up on radar.
19
posted on
11/27/2001 2:31:37 PM PST
by
El Gato
To: timestax
No mention of the Egypt Air hijack and crash by a man mumbling to Allah. Was he a Taliban OBL sympathizer? The man flew the aircraft into the ocean and he supposedly wore a pilots uniform. No mention of this maniac at all after 09/11/2001?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 481-495 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson