1. Only one SAM system at the time capable of bringing down the plane at that altitude and location and it needed a mounting— could NOT be a MANPAD. No terrorist group at the time or since has shown the ingenuity or coordination to rig said system. As I said, talk to an air defender. I have, AT LENGTH, considering I grew up in a house full of them. None of them were lovers of the Clinton administration and none of them said this was possible.
2. If you rule out SAM that leaves a ship based system of the US Navy or an on-board bomb. Sailors are a loyal bunch, but they are Americans first. Had this been an accidental shoot, someone would have talked. Someone ALWAYS talks.
3. That leaves an on-board bomb. This seems more likely than either of the preceding scenarios but for one major sticking point. Terrorists like claiming their kills. No one claimed this one. There would have been the added embarrassment factor for the administration if, after a week of spouting “center fuel tank explosion” some jihadist a-hole had said “Oh yes, we blow up plane!”.
Look, I’ll be happy to be proved wrong. But you have to prove it, because all of the evidence and factual support of years of military professionals are saying exactly what I’ve just told you. (And what others have said in multiple threads over the years.)
“2. If you rule out SAM that leaves a ship based system of the US Navy or an on-board bomb. Sailors are a loyal bunch, but they are Americans first. Had this been an accidental shoot, someone would have talked. Someone ALWAYS talks.”
I had people here on free republic assure me that (better put your coffee down if you value your computer equipment), if the commander ordered the crew not to talk about their vessel shooting down a commercial airliner, then the crew, being good sailors who always follow orders, would never, ever say a word.
It doesn’t help to talk rationally about TWA 800 or JFK, there are always those who prefer to believe the conspiracy theory of the day.