Posted on 01/31/2002 12:01:36 AM PST by JohnHuang2
Those who accept the government's claim that the crash of TWA Flight 800 was caused by a fuel-tank explosion dismiss the evidence that the plane was shot down accidentally by missiles launched in a Navy exercise off the Long Island coast. They say that such an accident could not have been covered up because a lot of Navy personnel would have known about it, and some of them would have talked.
One of them has finally done so. He recently said in an interview that I recorded that he was on the deck of a Navy submarine very close to the crash site and saw TWA 800 shot down.
He was brought to my attention by an acquaintance of his who told me that this retired Navy petty officer had said he was "underneath TWA 800 when he saw a missile hit it and the 747 explode overhead." He had told this acquaintance that he had given a statement to the FBI when they returned to their port, and that the FBI had checked all their torpedo tubes and all their missile silos to make sure they had all the missiles on board that they had when they left port. Asked if there were other military vessels in the area, he had said, "Yes, several."
When Pierre Salinger, at a press conference in March 1997, declared that TWA Flight 800 had been shot down accidentally by a U.S. Navy missile, this former presidential press secretary, U.S. Senator and ABC News correspondent, was mercilessly attacked by his former colleagues. They accused him of peddling unsubstantiated Internet gossip. Salinger said that his information had been confirmed by a source who learned of the Navy's involvement from a friend who had a son in the Navy. The son was said to have personal knowledge that a Navy missile had downed the plane, but his father did not want to be identified, fearing his son would suffer retaliation for disclosing information the Navy was hiding.
There are hundreds of Navy and Coast Guard personnel, as well as some FBI, CIA, FAA, NTSB and former White House employees who know that the real cause of the crash of TWA 800 was papered over with a tissue of lies. Two of them, James Kallstrom and George Stephanopoulos, have made statements that indicate an official cover-up. Stephanopoulos, a Clinton adviser who is now an ABC News correspondent, mentioned on the air a secret meeting in the White House situation room "in the aftermath of the TWA 800 bombing." Kallstrom, who headed the FBI's TWA 800 investigation, told me – and I have this on tape – that three radar targets close to the crash site were Navy vessels on a classified maneuver. We know they were submarines because the radar tracks disappeared when TWA 800 crashed.
Our newly found talker was on one of those submarines. The Navy claims that it was at least 80 miles from the crash site, but he says it was very close, and that is confirmed by the radar tracks. In our taped interview, he was more guarded than he had been with his acquaintance. He said he didn't want to do anything that might "mess up" his retirement.
He said he saw "something come up." "I don't know what in the hell it was," he said, "but that's what it looked ..." Not completing what he started to say, he said, "You know, something went up." He estimated that it went up about a mile from his location, which was only a few miles from the shore. He said there were a couple of other subs nearby. When told that the radar tracks of all three disappeared because they submerged when the plane went down, he said, "Yeah, that's what we did."
He acknowledged that a number of Navy vessels were heading for W-105, a large area of the ocean south of Long Island that is used for naval maneuvers. He said that nothing they did off Long Island was classified, but he was not comfortable in discussing it.
When I called him a few days later, he was scared to death. He feared the Navy would withdraw his pension if I reported what he had said. It was not possible to convince him that the Navy couldn't do that. Not wanting to worsen his anxiety, his name and other details are being withheld as we try to get his and other interview reports that the FBI has withheld.
Oh please. Either come up with some good facts, refute the facts on the table, or flame the man. Well, you may have tried flaming already :).
Just don't babble.
Fact: there are a lot of eyewitnesses that saw this happen. Which you know perfectly well.
I have none (as if that mattered) but then again I don't have to. I can rely on the expertise, training and first-hand knowledge of the NTSB agents. You lot on the other hand rely on WorldNutDaily and their cabal of anonymous conspiracy mavens. 'Tis to laugh...
Yes there are wires running into and out of the tanks. I will see if I can scrounge up an old Boeing book and scan a diagram for you.
I'll take that as a yes. Therefore, we can both agree that 96 is less than 100. We can also agree that by the definitions you've provided, "hundreds" can include any number between 100 and 999. Since it is a fact that there were only 96 witnesses who reported seeing an object rise from the surface before TWA800 exploded, it is also a fact that by your own definition, your statement concerning "hundreds of witnesses who saw a light streak up from the ground toward the plane" is incorrect. That was exactly the point I made in my original post to you. The facts stand. You are wrong.
Duh, again.
I admitted this a long time ago in this thread. Work on the reading comprehension.
I haven't made anything up yet, and I have no need to start now. Any information I have is available for everyone on the NTSB website.
FYI and response, if you have any.
Excerpt from TWA 800: Glue Repels Missiles See post #9
Sixth in a NewsMax.com exclusive series of installments based on James D. Sanders' book "Altered Evidence," exposing the government's tampering with evidence, cover-up and misleading the public in the crash of TWA Flight 800.
"Congressman Wolf: ". . . These articles report that a trail of reddish-brown residue was found embedded in seats [sic] 17 through 19, which contained chemical elements consistent with [a] solid-fuel missile. Although your accident investigation into this crash is still ongoing, can you give us some explanation for the residue?"
Dr. Loeb (NTSB): ". . . One thing I can say categorically is there is no such thing as a red residue trail in that airplane. There is a reddish-orange substance that is on virtually all of the seats in the forward part of the plane. For that matter, I am sure it is on all the seats in the airplane, because we believe the red residue material is an adhesive.
I cannot say for certain that that is what these folks are talking about, but it is the only reddish or orange material that we are aware of that exists inside that airplane in the seats.
We took seven samples yesterday from Calverton and had them brought to our headquarters. We are now testing them in our laboratory, and we will do some testing in the FBI laboratory. If need be, we will do testing in outside laboratories just to make certain that they are, in fact, consistent with the manufacturer's descriptions of those products.
Adhesive is the only substance that we know of that is reddish-orange in that airplane."
When he made that statement on March 11, Dr. Loeb was technically telling the truth. If he had been under oath before Congress the previous Friday, his testimony would have been false.
Multiple sources inside the Calverton hangar verified Terry Stacey's claim that a red residue trail existed across the passenger cabin in Rows 17, 18 and 19. The government, by arresting Terry Stacey and my wife and me, confirmed the residue given to me for testing represented legitimate foam-rubber samples from the Calverton hangar.
Kallstrom knew, as of 15:30 hours East Coast time, March 7, 1997, that the reddish-orange residue was outside his control. We know from multiple sources and the samples Stacey removed from the hangar that the foam rubber laden with residue was stripped from the seats at the Calverton hangar sometime after 15:30 hours March 7, 1997, when the FBI learned the residue was outside its control.
Four days later an NTSB representative confidently stated that no foam rubber unique to Rows 17, 18 and 19 would be found inside Calverton hangar. So we can reasonably place the time of removal of the foam rubber between Friday afternoon, March 7, 1997, and Tuesday morning, March 11, 1997.
After the act of removal was complete, no reddish-orange foam rubber could be found in the hangar. All that remained was rust-colored bare metal and some hard plastic panels glued to the backs of the seats."
Next: Government's Position Exposed
See also:
Part One of Series: 'Obstruction of Justice Was Ongoing'
Part Two of Series: Missile Evidence Doesn't Lie
Part Three of Series: Powerful Interests Are Threatened
Part Four of Series: How NBC News Was Used
Part Five of Series: TWA 800: Altering Evidence to 'Fit'
Go here and follow the links. President Clinton's Executive Order 13039
Excerpt......
Exective Order 13039 repeals the rights that are granted to the Naval Special Warfare Development Group found in U.S. Code Title 5 Chapter 71. Title 5 Chapter 71 Sec. 7101 (b) states "It is the purpose of this chapter to prescribe certain rights and obligations of the employees of the Federal Government..." [1] Included in those rights are the right to appeal disciplinary action (which could include actions that might be taken against a whistleblower) and the right to make grievance and seek corrective action from the Office of Special Counsel against prohibited activity (which could include covering-up mass murder)(5-7121). E.O. 13039 explicitly removes these rights from the Naval Special Warfare Development Group.
Cheers:^) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe you should point out that numbers are no longer in the hundreds, once they reach a thousand.
See post# 130 above.
http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAR0003.pdf
It starts on page 179. The section is titled "1.18.1 Accident Record and History of Fuel Tank Fires/Explosions on Airplanes"
3.2 ...determines that the probable cause....
Even they are not certain. Why? They likely hit a roadblock at Boeing Engineering.
An interesting read, anyhow. But if you do a search of their database of fuel tank explosions, 800 doesn't come up.
And the 26, incidents were not all internal from the tank alone; some had external bombs penetrate and explode the fuel.
Excerpt......
Donaldson claims the evidence is now irrefutable that a missile is responsible for the downing of TWA flight 800. He also claims that the FBI, CIA, and the National Transportation Safety Board have known about this evidence from the beginning.
This evidence is from radar. Look at it. Can you Refute it. Sorry Charlie. "NO CIGAR".
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.