Former Obama Pilot: TWA Flight 800 was not blown up by a faulty fuel tank.

NY Daily News ^ | 4/15/15 | Andrew Danziger

[thefactor]

Was TWA Flight 800 shot out of the sky?

As a former pilot, that is a question I get asked about all the time.

I’m no conspiracy theorist, but let’s be clear: Yes. I say it was. And I believe the FBI covered it up.

[I am Richard Brandon]

"Yeah, the article talks about a wedding party that saw contrails from the water"

Those would be the people waving cameras around (for the wedding) who took multiple photos of this strange explosion in the sky. Those same photos which showed the rising exhaust trail. Funny how none seem to exist.

[I am Richard Brandon]

"They don't ground airplanes. Not without specific reason."

Would crashing and going missing work for you?

[brothers4thID]

I know, but sometimes I like to try.

FReegards

[Cyman]

BIGGEST problem with this theory...terrorists don’t hide their actions so it then would seem to implicate a lone nutjob with a rocket launcher. Also highly unlikely.

Mr Danziger’s theory doesn’t pass my smell test.

[DoodleDawg]

Would crashing and going missing work for you?

It didn't in any of the examples I gave. None of them led to groundings.

[Lazamataz]

Right, because 670 people did not see what they saw.

[BluH2o]

I had always thought Kallstrom was a straight shooter but his actions on this seemed out of character.

That was my initial assessment of Kallstrom as well ...
Even Rush Limbaugh ... who, in that era, carried a great deal of weight with conservatives (being one of the few prominent conservative media voices of the time), vouched for Kallstrom. They still are friends.
My opinion of Kallstrom is that he followed his marching orders ... cover up.

[matthew fuller]

Regarding the witnesses( whose identity was apparently kept confidential by the FBI):

-Approximately 80 FBI agents conducted interviews with potential witnesses daily.[65] No verbatim records of the witness interviews were produced; instead, the agents who conducted the interviews wrote summaries that they then submitted.[64] Witnesses were not asked to review or correct the summaries.[64] Included in some of the witness summaries were drawings or diagrams of what the witness observed. Witnesses were not allowed to testify at the court hearings.[66][67]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800#Witness_interviews

[razorback-bert]

My uncle, who was an engineer with Republic and then Lockheed, screamed BS. That is good enough for me.

[ilovesarah2012]

I imagine there are many government secrets that are kept quiet for years and years. Maybe in 50 years the truth will come out.

Top 10 Weird Government Secrets

It’s not just military secrets that governments keep close. And some information, like the recently revealed allegation that Winston Churchill ordered a cover-up of a UFO sighting, seems more amusing than disturbing. TIME takes a look at odd hush-hush moments

Churchill and UFOs
CIA Mind-Control Experiments
Area 51
UFOs in the U.S.S.R.
The Loch Ness Monster
The CIA Schemes to Kill Castro — with a Seashell
Julia Child’s Intelligence
Grand Central Terminal’s Secret Rooms
Listening In on Lennon
Potemkin Villages

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,2008962,00.html

[Vendome]

Total coverup.

I was living in Delaware at the time and recall a good many people on the news saying they saw something strike the plane and it appeared to them to have originated from sea or land but, their minds recall it flying from below and to the plane.

Now, go try to find these claims from news reports..

[meridenite]

Paging Jack Cashill.

[Minutemen]

Unfortunately for the American people, the truth about flight 800 was buried.....Exactly the same way that the Kennedy asasination was buried. As long as we keep electing evil
bastards to public office, we will have more of the same.

[Svartalfiar]

Not only that, but if they really thought it was a spark in the fuel tank, it would be very easy to rectify by just flooding the tank with nitrogen as the fuel was pumped out. That could be done with off the shelf components... A scuba regulator and a tank of nitrogen.

A spark in a fuel tank will, in most cases, NOT explode. In order for an explosion, you need a very specific ratio of fuel vapor to air, and a spark. Regular gasoline is only flammable between 4% and 7.6% in air. (Not sure on the different aviation fuels, but likely similar.) And with the evaporation controls, it's hard for an actual tank to get that low. The only way most fuel tanks nowadays could even have a chance of exploding is if they have a leak allowing more air to enter and lower that ratio. A small leak may get the ratio outside the tank to that point faster, but I doubt you'd get enough of an explosion to do that much damage.

Also, given the plane had just left the airport, their tanks were almost definitely full, meaning you would have extremely little room in the tank for fuel vapor/air, so even if it was the right ratio you would never get enough of an explosion to disintegrate the plane. (Near-empty tank could be different though.) And, liquid fuel CANNOT EXPLODE. It will burn, yes, but NOT explode.

[matthew fuller]

James Sanders, post #78.

[Rockpile]

I saw the CIA labeled cartoon also. Since when the BOJINKA is that gang an accident investigating outfit?

And why the BOJINKA is the FBI running an accident investigation?

---

BTW folks, the Philippine Airlines Flight 434 plane was an ex-SAS airline Boeing 747 and had a different seating arrangement than what Ramzi Yousef calculated would put him above the center fuel tank. His Row 26 seat bomb blew a hole into a cargo bay but it still damned near brought the plane down.

[matthew fuller]

Stole the name from Isaac Asimov, huh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nightfall_%28Asimov_short_story_and_novel%29

[GBA]

Of course TWA Flt. 800 was shot down!

After the explosion, more than three dozen witnesses reported they’d seen contrails going up into the sky towards the plane; 18 of those people said they saw something coming up from the water, rising to meet the plane.

The FBI only summarized the interviews in its reports; the witnesses weren’t permitted to see what was written or to review the reports, and the NTSB only received summary reports in which all personal information was redacted. And maybe most importantly, the witnesses — there were more than 700 of them — weren’t permitted to testify.

Witnesses? We don' need no stinkin' witnesses! We have a CIA video!

TWA Flt. 800's "faulty wiring caused spark in the fuel tank" explanation is exactly what one should expect from people who tell you that Benghazi was caused by a video and vice versa.

But hey, "What difference, at this point, does it make?!?"

Clinton was re-elected and some early model B747s were grounded and "repaired".

Move On...

[Yaelle]

Wow, great catch.

[woodyinscc]

But they did say they had a specific reason, a short in the fuel tank. They even recall automobiles when they have a specific reason that causes them to crash or endanger its occupants.

I have a cousin who worked as an electrical engineer at Boeing for 35 yrs. He says that the insulation around the probes in the fuel tank(the supposed cause of the explosion)could never have a crack in them. No rubbing, no chemical reaction against aviation fuel, and vibration under the location they were in, would take thousands of yrs.