Posted on 06/16/2016 9:12:21 AM PDT by Kaslin
James Sanders was the first investigative reporter to get beyond the TWA 800 press releases issued by the FBI. He paid a high price for doing so. If Sanders seems a bit cynical, the reader will soon understand why. -- Jack Cashill
America’s citizens must learn the truth: Reality is what remains after federal propagandists interpret fact. This is an absolute truth for citizens living in a failed republic -- including the United States in 2016.
I’m a medically retired police officer from southern California with more than thirty years experience investigating federal lawlessness buried within the National Archives storage boxes and the Freedom of Information Act. In my investigation of TWA Flight 800 among other incidents, I discovered that the greater story was the fall of the American Republic.
Over the decades it became abundantly evident the federal National Security State does not care what the law states. It will fight to keep the worst sins classified even though the law says documents classified secret and more than fifty years old must be declassified with only two very narrow exceptions: weapons of mass destruction and the name of a source.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Thanks. I hadn’t heard that one. If that is the case, there are a lot of navy and air force people who would have to be silenced. Not everyone of them were Clinton fans and would have kept silent for this long.
What are they covering up? It was around Billy Jeff’s reelection bid. There are many things that would have made him look bad enough to not grab a second term.
Two possibilities I thought of, after reading a lot about the case from James Sanders and other authors and sources, are as follows:
1. TWA Flight 800 was downed by a Navy missile.
The U.S. Navy had exercises going on around that area during that time period. They had restricted civilian flights to go around their area of operation.
2. TWA Flight 800 was downed by a terrorist missile.
This one is more likely than originally thought. The Afghan Mujaheddin had Stingers we had given them to take down Russian Hinds. By 1996, Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were active and had gotten most of their weapons from the moojies.
Also, if you have read the “Turner Diaries” and then take the Murrah building attack and 9/11 into account, you can see the pattern that the terrorists were following: using “Diaries” like a handbook for terrorist attacks.
One of the prominent attacks in the book was a handheld missile strike on an airliner taking off.
Don’t give me vapor crap. It was not a spark INSIDE the tank that caused the explosion. I have Jet A in several fuel tanks (have had for MANY years) lots of wires in fuel tanks. I fly with 100% confidence that there will NEVER be an explosion inside any Jet A fueled tank.
Look to the Clintooooon Administration - selling guided missile technology to the Chinese, opening up refugee routes in the Middle East.
Why did Sandy Burger steal documents from the National Archives and destroy them?
I believe Clinton wanted someone on that plane dead.
That's what I call the coersive power of the pulling of the pension. See my post 17.
The aircraft in question was the most reliable workhorse in every airline.
Some hot day in Atlanta caused crazy stuff to happen in a middle fuel tank? Please. Never happened before, nothing even similar to it ever happened afterward.
And I believe part of the cover-up involved giving Boeing a government contract for an upcoming warplane - a nice little bribe to insure their silence.
If there was a problem with center fuel tanks, then why were no planes grounded after this explosion?
A couple of them were direct witnesses to the event, and they didn’t keep silent. James Sanders and Jack Cashill documented their testimony.
I concluded that the day of the incident, I have seen NOTHING in the time since that remotely convinced me that this thing blew up from a stray spark in a fuel tank...
The story has been insulting from day one.
I agree.
Wholeheartedly.
As I recall, the aircraft’s fuel tank ‘section’ was not shown to the press, as the metal was bent ‘in.’ An explosion would have bent the metal ‘out.’ Like an old detective movie: ‘this window was broken from the outside...’
The press saw the other side of the aircraft...
A stinger won’t reach that altitude. Only a large missile fired from a big boat. When they are fired from a ship everyone on the ship knows it. They also work by proximity fuse so they frag the crap out of the target. They get close and explode peppering the target with fragmentation that leaves very distinct marks.
Everyone on the Navy ship (and in the chain of command) as well as everyone who investigated it (numerous agencies) as well as those who recovered the pieces (Coast Guard and Port Authority) would have to be sworn to silence.
Conspiracy theories always have an answer - it’s more conspiracy or more people who are sworn to silence. Once you are outside of one agency and a small circle of people it would be extraordinarily difficult if not impossible to keep such a secret. Every sailor, every investigator, every person even remotely associated with such an event remaining silent the rest of their lives?
Keep in mind that many of those in the hanger with the recovered pieces were not agency employees nor were they sworn to secrecy.
This is what a SAM strike looks like on an A-10 -
https://daliamaelachlan.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/comparison-from-sam-missile.jpg
SAM’s fired from Navy ships are likely just as (or more) powerful. I am not a forensic scientist, but this appears to be a whole lot of evidence on the aircraft as to what happened.......
Seems like a bridge too far to me.
I’m not arguing about the cause of the destruction. Millions of flights occurred up to that incident without an explosion. So, I too think that an internal fuel explosion wasn’t likely the cause. I neither buy the conclusion or discount it. I’m asking why would it have been intentionally shot down.
The power of government regulation?
Threats from the Clinton admin?
Your turn:
Iran, revenge for the Vincennes incident. My very first thought at the time.
Lot’s of possible reasons listed here.
Why did Vince Foster commit suicide and hardly bleed?
Never said it was a Navy missile...just know what I saw. For all I know it could have been launched by a sub. It was intense bright orange and I wasn’t in bed dreaming. I saw it with my very own spectacles.
I would not be surprised if this was arranged between Iran and Billy Jeff’s regime.
It wasn’t a missile strike. The findings and airworthiness directives since then to prevent fuel tank explosions have probably saved many lives.
I would not be surprised if this was arranged between Iran and Billy Jeff’s regime.
Are you serious? Holy crap. The fire control officer, radar operator, Chief of the Boat, XO, CO, and every sailor in the action station of a Navy ship (extremely sophisticated radar) KNOWING it was a commercial flight in a commercial flight path with a commercial flight profile turn the key and go weapons hot on a civilian aircraft at the direction of the White House? You don’t know much about the Navy.
They sack skippers and sailors for running their ship onto a sandbar. No way this was an accident - shooting down an airliner accidentally on a training exercise would be a bit more significant than running onto a sandbar. So accident doesn’t work and you now accuse the Navy of complicity in a murder?
Not to mention all the people who had to cover it up afterwards?
Shaking my head.
The reason for the shoot-down, which is covered up by Clinton et al, is that this was an Iraqi shoot-down in retaliation by that done by Vincennes.
don’t forget the BOOM aftermath:
CIA video showed a computer animation of a Boeing 747 losing its nose section and then continuing to climb 3000 - 4000feet before falling out of the sky.
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.
