Posted on 12/03/2001 7:24:22 AM PST by Carol Roberts
Monday Dec. 3, 2001; 11:07 a.m. EST
Flt. 587 Eyewitnesses Insist Explosion Came Before Tail Broke Off
Two eyewitness to the Nov. 12 crash of American Airlines Flight 587 said over the weekend that investigators for the National Transportation Safety Board are wrong to focus on potential structural defects as the cause of the disaster - insisting instead that the plane's tail came off over New York's Jamaica Bay only after it exploded in a fireball.
"It was after the explosion," eyewitness Tom Lynch, a retired firefighter, told the New York Post. "I'm telling you, the tail was there until the second explosion."
"No tail fell off, not before the explosion. I swear to that," Lynch told the paper's Steve Dunleavy.
The eyewitness said there was absolutely no doubt about what he saw.
"I had my head up taking in that beautiful, clear day and was staring straight at the plane. It made a bank turn and suddenly there was an explosion, orange and black, on the right-hand side of the fuselage. It was a small explosion, about half the size of a car."
He continued:
"The plane kept on going straight for about two or three seconds as if nothing had happened, then ‘vwoof' - the second, big explosion on the right wing, orange and black. It was only then that the plane fell apart. It was after the explosion and I'm telling you, the tail was there until the second explosion."
Lynch, who lives near the Belle Harbor, N.Y. crash site, said he knew thirteen others who also saw the explosion and/or fire.
One, retired police lieutenant Jim Conrad, told Dunleavy:
"I saw exactly what Tom saw. I was near a stop light at the Marine Parkway Bridge. First, the small explosion. The plane kept on going, tail intact, then the big explosion and the plane nose-dived. The first thing I said was: ‘The bastards did it again.'"
Lynch said he's tried to contact the FBI and the NTSB but they weren't interested in his story. Ditto Sens. Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, and his congressional representative Anthony Weiner, who also gave him the brush off.
"I got no response from anyone," he said.
Last week NewsMax.com asked New York State's newly appointed public security czar James Kallstrom why a traffic surveillance video that reportedly captured Flt. 587's mid-air break up has not been publicly released.
"I have not seen the tape. I heard some mention of it. But I've not seen the tape and I really have no knowledge of it," Kallstrom said.
"Why it hasn't been released, I suspect, is because the investigation is ongoing. But I don't know the answer to that."
In both cases they are wrong, the problem is, they never want to admit it.
They have the voice recorder which tends to pick up sounds like explosions and they heard none before the flight data recorder started picking up drastic rudder swings.
No evidence of a bomb. Sorry conspiratorists.
Wake tubulence?
You know, I lived in central Jersey when the TWA 800 happened. Same thing happened with day-of-incident eyewitness accounts on local newsbroadcasts describing sitings of missile trails. Then, after the incident day, we never saw or heard another word from the mainstream media about these reports.
I believe the flight data recorders and the wreckage evidence.
There is no such "slap" damage to the tail. Therefore this person was mistaken -- which is common in eyewitness accounts of such mishaps.
Is that the same NASA that faked Moon-Landings ?
I've seen the charts from the flight data recorders as well as photos of the tail and the tail mounts. There is no "wing slap" damage to the tail.
These witness accounts are often seriously flawed. The guy who saw the wing slap off the tail is clearly mistaken.
Were you on the team who listened to the recording? Have you heard the entire recording? Who says there is no data supporting an explosion. Whoever that....NTSB? Do you actually beleive what they say? Why do you discount folks who say they saw an explosion....and a burning wing come off? Why is any explantion, other than the governments, a conspiracy? Do you think any government entity has lied to the public to further an agenda?
You could make the tape public and still use the tape in the investigaion.
That way it would remove any conspiritorial types from claiming the tape was altered to fit the conclusion of the NTSB findings. The before investigation and after investigation tapes could be compared.-Tom
You could make the tape public and still use the tape in the investigaion.
That way it would remove any conspiritorial types from claiming the tape was altered to fit the conclusion of the NTSB findings. The before investigation and after investigation tapes could be compared.-Tom
Yes. They are as good as it gets. They have a lot more credibility than a bunch of arm-chair yahoo conspiracy nuts, if you don't mind me saying.
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.