Posted on 06/13/2016 8:53:08 AM PDT by Lockbox
As I hoped would happen, American Thinker’s series on TWA Flight 800 has prompted individuals with first hand knowledge to come forward. “Mark Johnson” is one. An air traffic controller (ATC), he worked the night of July 17, 1996 -- the night TWA Flight 800 was destroyed -- at the New York Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) located in Westbury, New York.
Johnson has provided me with his real name, and I have confirmed that he was in a position to know what he says he knows. He requested that I use an alias because he has children who depend on him. The federal government, he believes, “will seek revenge, retribution and/or any other remedy they feel like. I would be fearful my pension would be at risk.” I have heard this sentiment voiced by many people involved in this incident.
Although Johnson was not responsible for tracking TWA Flight 800, he spoke directly with the ATC who did. In fact, he asked him “plenty of questions to prepare myself for the ‘suits’ who were beginning to arrive.” Along with several other ATCs, he viewed the radar tape of the incident. According to Johnson, “A primary radar return (ASR-9) indicated vertical movement intersecting TWA 800.”
An advanced radar system, the Northrop Grumman ASR-9 is able to detect a “target” in severe clutter even when the target has no transponder. The absence of a transponder is what distinguishes a “primary radar return” from a “secondary” one. In others words, the radar picked up a small, unidentified, ascending object intersecting TWA 800 in the second before the 747 “disappeared from radar.”
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Remember, you initiated contact with me, not the other way around. I responded to you. You did not respond, which of course is A-Okay. But then I noticed you posted the same illustration on this thread, again without information. I figured you for a hit and run type of guy and made a comment. You thought it was sassy. BTW if you hover over a poster's handle, it will show you how long they've been around.
As for the rest of your comments, here are my answers:
I did mean "don't" as I am pretty damn sure that we do not have this capability even now, but you are correct in that I am no longer in the military and obviously not in a position to know what new technologies are being fitted to submarines.
That of course is moot since this occurred in 1996 when I was in a position to know quite a bit about new tech. I was on two Los Angeles class attack boats (a flight I and a flight II), yet I know all about the reactor design on the yet to be commissioned at the time USS Seawolf (or PCU Seawolf more accurately). Please don't tell me an anti-aircraft missile is something to be more closely guarded than the most advanced nuclear reactor design ever created at that point.
As for new military technology... it has a very long gestation period. It's not like an iPhone.
You are right that I never participated in fleet exercises. Both my boats were spec ops and never attached to a carrier group.
Concerning the rest of your post, it's all speculation and while many of the things you said may be technically possible, I think they are highly improbable.
Those in the military swear an oath to obey lawful orders. I doubt any court martial would find an order to cover up a crime as lawful.
I signed a lot of forms agreeing to keep my mouth shut when I was discharged. There is no way in hell a piece of paper would keep me from blowing the lid off a conspiracy like this if I knew my ship just blew a 747 out of the sky. And knowing my buds on the boat, I'd have to race them to be first.
Good luck trying to threaten guys in their early 20's with no family, a panache for drinking heavily, an extreme sense of right and wrong, and signed up willing to die for their country.
For someone who was in the military, you sure don't know much about how it works
That's rich. Let me guess. You thought Captain America 2 was based on true events. (You know, the one where the Nazis infiltrated the agency and controlled the aircraft carriers... no? Okay nevermind.)
Believe what you want, I don't really care.
Actually, you kind of do. You responded to me did you not?
IIRC, generally weapons systems are used in areas designated for that purpose. I’m unaware of a naval range in that area. What multi-national naval exercise are you referring to?
Well, a MANPAD sort of sounds like a shoe, with pads of plastic explosive laced onto the Man's feet.
But it would be launched manually...or to be more accurate, "pedally".
Yeah, well bless your little pea-pickin heart too....and twice on Sunday.
(I know what that means Mooner.)
.
It would certainly be convenient for your theory.
Where is the part that says that a missile can be shot from a submarine and controlled by the surface ship?
My post from another thread,
Sub launched missles.
This was the public announcement in 2012. It was probably in dev/testing for years before this release. This was only one example of many that came up.
This is an easy Google search.
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/euronaval-2012/714-dcns-introduces-a-new-weapon-system-for-submarines-anti-aircraft-self-defense-.html
This was the public announcement in 2012. It was probably in dev/testing for years before this release. This was only one example of many that came up.
This is an easy Google search.
-------------------
Thanks, Gary!
Now let's see if our naval sub combat tech experts have a comment...
Lower Deck: Ridiculous stories of non-existent weapons tests is not the way to explain it.
Any comment on this existing sub missile system, Lower Deck?
OA5599: What hyperbole? I am a submarine vet of that era and I am telling you that we did not have anti-aircraft capability. So either it did not exist or it was a greater secret than the NOFORN, Confidential, and Secret information I was freely given and Top Secret information I was exposed to. Or maybe I'm part of the conspiracy...
Maybe you are indeed, OA5599.
You mean other than it's a proposal and hasn't been built or tested yet? Or that it's a French system and not a U.S. one? Other than that, nope, you got me. Proof positive that a U.S. sub shot the TWA jet down.
Tsk tsk, shameless. You were deriding me for the concept of a SAM fitted to a sub. I never claimed proof of anything, but this is proof-of-concept. Show some class.
If it were from a USN ship or sub, would it not have leaked out by now? The entire crew would've been aware of the event. Somebody would've talked...
Yet, I don't recall a single report of such a leak.
Why, because you can't imagine what would be necessary to keep them silent?
I sure you, others can, and do.
Unless the terrorists had something more powerful than a shoulder-launched missile...
Actually yes you did. In your reply 310 you referred to an existing weapons system, which this is not. It's not even a proof of concept. It's a proposal which doesn't exist, even in test. But don't let me get in your way. You go on ahead with your theory.
Survivors of Benghazi were also sworn to secrecy and, no doubt, subject to threats.
Yet, some have talked.
And Benghazi was only four years ago; TW800 was 24 years ago.
Besides which, I question whether the USN would ever conduct a missile exercise in waters like Long Island Sound. It's shallow, it's narrow...and the air space is crowded with commercial traffic.
It's operational and available for purchase by navies around the world from DCNS.
You just keep blowing smoke from your cubicle. It's your jobette. Other than insults, you have nothing to say. Typical loser shill.
I'm not getting your point here, and I don't see what Benghazi has to do with this. At the very least, you are extremely uncreative. People stay silent for many reasons, not just threats. Is it beyond your ability to imagine they were told they were preventing a catastrophe? That they were told a nuke was on the plane, or a biological terrorism threat of some kind, and they had just minutes to act? Cover stories create a DESIRE to remain silent, to regret the loss of life but see it in a bigger context.
Benghazi, on the other hand, was understood by operatives as to its real purpose. So they can only be threatened, not lied to or misdirected.
The game is far deeper than you realize.
Then you have better run out and buy yours before the Christmas rush.
You just keep blowing smoke from your cubicle. It's your jobette. Other than insults, you have nothing to say. Typical loser shill.
Of course. After all what's my 30 years of ASW experience against your imagination and internet searches? So yes, I'm a loser. TWA 800 was brought down by a subsurface to air missile launched by a rogue submarine. You have it all figured out. You are right and everyone else is wrong. You should be very happy now.
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.