Posted on 09/20/2001 12:47:40 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
The 'bombing' of TWA Flight 800
By Reed Irvine
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
Over five years have passed since the crash of TWA Flight 800 killed 230 people, and now, at long last, two former high-ranking government officials speaking on television have implicitly disavowed the claim that a fuel-tank explosion caused the destruction of that airplane.
The government's $40 million investigation of the crash of TWA Flight 800 ended up with the National Transportation Safety Board, the FBI and the CIA all agreeing that an explosion in the center-wing fuel tank caused it to crash. They said that after the explosion broke off the entire front end of the plane, its tail dropped and it shot up like a rocket, trailing burning fuel behind it. They said that was what hundreds of eyewitnesses saw, mistaking it for a missile. The CIA actually produced a video showing the huge noseless jet ascending like a rocket, an aeronautical impossibility.
They got away with it because our establishment media in the Clinton era had the bad habit of believing nearly everything government agencies told them, even if it was patently ridiculous. But now, a former White House official, George Stephanopoulos, who was a senior adviser to President Clinton, has made a statement on television that indicates that the claim that a fuel-tank explosion caused the TWA 800 crash was false. On September 11, the unforgettable day of disaster, Stephanopoulos, who is now an ABC News correspondent, was talking to ABC's Peter Jennings on camera about President Bush being flown to Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska and taken to the situation room on the base where he could keep in touch with Washington by teleconferencing.
Stephanopoulos, implying that this was unnecessary, made this surprising statement: "There are facilities in the White House, not the normal situation room, which everyone has seen in the past, has seen pictures of. There is a second situation room, behind the primary situation room, which has video conferencing capabilities. The director of the Pentagon, the defense chief, can speak from a national military command center at the Pentagon. The Secretary of State can speak from the State Department, the president from wherever he is, and they'll have this capability for video conferencing throughout this crisis. In my time at the White House it was used in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing, in the aftermath of the TWA Flight 800 bombing, and that would be the way they would stay in contact through the afternoon."
The TWA Flight 800 bombing? Peter Jennings, the anchorman for ABC's "World News Tonight," didn't bat an eyelash. Instead of asking his colleague to explain his use of the word "bombing" and why there was a special meeting in the White House situation room to discuss it, Jennings asked a question about the president taking orders from the Secret Service.
Efforts to reach Mr. Stephanopoulos to find out if he has information that the plane was destroyed by a bomb have been unsuccessful, and no one at ABC News recognized that Stephanopoulos had revealed that he was privy to what might be a very important change in the story about TWA 800. When informed of this, Brian Ross, who heads ABC News's investigative unit, promised to look into it.
There had to be something special about the TWA 800 crash to justify holding a meeting in the White House situation room to discuss it. That surely is not done every time one of our planes crashes. Stephanopoulos said that it was held in the "aftermath of the bombing," but the precise date and time are important.
In his book, "The Downing of TWA Flight 800," James Sanders says that there was a meeting in the White House situation room on the night of July 17, 1996, that began before the crash. Sanders says that he was told by a confidential source that high officials gathered there to watch in real time a video transmission of a Navy demonstration of its ability to shoot down a missile off the shore of Long Island. They were horrified when something went wrong and they saw the missile shoot down TWA Flight 800. What Stephanopoulos should tell us is whether the meeting he described began before or after the plane crashed. If he won't reveal that, the White House should.
The fuel-tank theory of the crash was also disavowed by James Kallstrom, who headed the FBI investigation. He said on CNN on September 11 that the attack that day was "the first act of terrorism in the U.S. since TWA 800." He has yet to explain when he discovered that TWA 800 was brought down by terrorists.
Reed Irvine is the chairman of Accuracy In Media, a media watchdog group based in Washington, D.C.
For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.
My point is, if you are going to parse words, do it right.
I'd amend that comment as follows:
"That is an amazing statement. The same kind of national security that failed to detect act on critical weaknesses in airline security?"
There. But I hesitate to sieze on this issue given that it's now moot and we face a long bloody war as a result. We now have only to act and let the historians sort out the recriminations.
Probably a slip of the tongue.
The last thing the WTC bombers did before 9/11 was send their "idyllic" families back to Saudi Arabia.<P.
<]:^)
Ashland, Missouri
Didn't have to pass by the hog pen on the way to the outhouse, did you?
A darker thought is they knew 9/11 was coming and saw an opportunity to protect the Navy's reputation. Again, since no one has echoed, they seem to be on their own.
Interesting that George S used "bombing".
Actually nothing in a luquid state can burn it's the complete opposite. A liquid state removes the one portion of the fire triangle needed for fire which is oxygen. The other two parts are heat and fuel. Vapors or rather a concentration of vapors make the fuel. A lot of persons who fix leaks in gas tanks actually fill the tank with either gasoline or water but never will you find anyone willing to wield an empty gas tank. But as for 800 I think a stinger brought it down. It was hushed for reasons we now see the damage control to the stock market.
How come these BRANIACS never address something more plausible, like the condition of aircraft, or, failures of those aircraft due to commonly known (within the aviation safety circles) systems or subsystems?It's like they have BOMB emblazened on their minds - they have a 'theory' desparately in search of evidence, evidence that is thin to non-existant in nature ...
Oh - that's right!
THOSE are kinds of stories that sell NEWSPAPERS and get WEB SITES PUBLICITY!
To persue, say, something more obscure and technically challenging would require *real* analytical skills -
- the kind of skills and ability beyond most who write books or 'dream up' whacky rivero-class conspiracies ...
Hmmmm ....... wonder if that's what all that kissin' was about? (the clintons and the arafats)
EXACTLY! Clinton couldn't let the economy fall on his watch...after all, he knew he had absolutely nothing to do with the economic boom this country experienced during his term. But, he was happily taking the credit for it. He had to keep the economy booming, because he sure as heck didn't know how it got started and wouldn't know how to fix it if it broke.
IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!
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.