TWA Flight 800 - Someone Has Finally Talked!

Those who accept the government's claim that the crash of TWA Flight 800 was caused by a fuel-tank explosion dismiss the evidence that the plane was shot down accidentally by missiles launched in a Navy exercise off the Long Island coast. They say that such an accident could not have been covered up because a lot of Navy personnel would have known about it, and some of them would have talked.

One of them has finally done so. He recently said in an interview that I recorded that he was on the deck of a Navy submarine very close to the crash site and saw TWA 800 shot down.

He was brought to my attention by an acquaintance of his who told me that this retired Navy petty officer had said he was "underneath TWA 800 when he saw a missile hit it and the 747 explode overhead." He had told this acquaintance that he had given a statement to the FBI when they returned to their port, and that the FBI had checked all their torpedo tubes and all their missile silos to make sure they had all the missiles on board that they had when they left port. Asked if there were other military vessels in the area, he had said, "Yes, several."

When Pierre Salinger, at a press conference in March 1997, declared that TWA Flight 800 had been shot down accidentally by a U.S. Navy missile, this former presidential press secretary, U.S. Senator and ABC News correspondent, was mercilessly attacked by his former colleagues. They accused him of peddling unsubstantiated Internet gossip. Salinger said that his information had been confirmed by a source who learned of the Navy's involvement from a friend who had a son in the Navy. The son was said to have personal knowledge that a Navy missile had downed the plane, but his father did not want to be identified, fearing his son would suffer retaliation for disclosing information the Navy was hiding.

There are hundreds of Navy and Coast Guard personnel, as well as some FBI, CIA, FAA, NTSB and former White House employees who know that the real cause of the crash of TWA 800 was papered over with a tissue of lies. Two of them, James Kallstrom and George Stephanopoulos, have made statements that indicate an official cover-up. Stephanopoulos, a Clinton adviser who is now an ABC News correspondent, mentioned on the air a secret meeting in the White House situation room "in the aftermath of the TWA 800 bombing." Kallstrom, who headed the FBI's TWA 800 investigation, told me – and I have this on tape – that three radar targets close to the crash site were Navy vessels on a classified maneuver. We know they were submarines because the radar tracks disappeared when TWA 800 crashed.

Our newly found talker was on one of those submarines. The Navy claims that it was at least 80 miles from the crash site, but he says it was very close, and that is confirmed by the radar tracks. In our taped interview, he was more guarded than he had been with his acquaintance. He said he didn't want to do anything that might "mess up" his retirement.

He said he saw "something come up." "I don't know what in the hell it was," he said, "but that's what it looked ..." Not completing what he started to say, he said, "You know, something went up." He estimated that it went up about a mile from his location, which was only a few miles from the shore. He said there were a couple of other subs nearby. When told that the radar tracks of all three disappeared because they submerged when the plane went down, he said, "Yeah, that's what we did."

He acknowledged that a number of Navy vessels were heading for W-105, a large area of the ocean south of Long Island that is used for naval maneuvers. He said that nothing they did off Long Island was classified, but he was not comfortable in discussing it.

When I called him a few days later, he was scared to death. He feared the Navy would withdraw his pension if I reported what he had said. It was not possible to convince him that the Navy couldn't do that. Not wanting to worsen his anxiety, his name and other details are being withheld as we try to get his and other interview reports that the FBI has withheld.

Reed Irvine is the chairman of Accuracy In Media, a media watchdog group based in Washington, D.C.

One of the radars on long island showed a number of ships in the area of the crash. They had to be more than about 60 feet high to show up over the horizon at that distance. They moved in formation at 30 knots.

Was a radar duct present? They are often called "summer ducts" because they tend to occur in...well, the summer. A duct significantly extends the radar horizon. They are so common that some navies deliberately modify their radars' signal characteristics to exploit them. I have yet to see any discussion of whether ducting was going on or not. That's something we need to nail down.

The only large ships that move in formation at thirty knots belong to navies.

If a duct was present, then significantly smaller targets could be detected--like cabin cruisers, for example.

Also, this tends to militate against these targets being submarines: submarines are designed for submerged speed, and travel well below 30 knots while surfaced.

A conspiracy of silence involving all of these agencies and departments?

Perhaps just a conspiracy of silence involving KEY PEOPLE in all of those agencies and departments. The rest just do as they are told, see what they are allowed to see, say nothing out of fear of retribution, and otherwise have no voice.

If you don't believe this, then explain another case ... what happened in the crash of Ron Brown. In that case we know that the White House and Air Force leadership tampered with the normal investigation process. They skipped the Safety Board phase, which EVERY OTHER crash before or since has had. The Safety Board is the phase of the normal investigation process which is explicitly charged with "finding the cause". The final report from the Accident Investigation Board does not mention many facts that are highly suspicious ... such as the statements of the pathologists at the examination and what the x-ray of Brown's head showed. The final report also does not explain the loss of transponder and radio contact when the plane was 8 miles from the crash site, nor the coincidental "suicide" of the maintenance chief that was in charge of the beacon which disappeared just before the crash. It doesn't mention the fact that the Department of State was told there were two survivors ... not just one as was reported (a survivor who COINCIDENTALLY managed to die on the way to the hospital under a doctor's care after surviving for 10 hours on the ground). It also doesn't mention the apparent fact that the first rescuers to "officially" arrive at the crash site were met by 3 Americans on the ground (according to Associated Press). And the families (and lawyers) of the victims were also not told about any of the suspicious facts surrounding the crash. Instead the government paid out an average of about 14 million dollars per family to keep them from pursuing lawsuits (and thereby asking uncomfortable questions).

Further evidence that a few key people can control the flow of an investigation in the Brown case is that the White House and JCS ordered that there be no autopsy of Brown's body even though forensic pathologists at the examination called for one and every single pathologist to see the body or look at the x-rays since has said there should have been one. BY LAW, the FBI should have been called in once suspicions of gunshot were mentioned ... but they were not. The key department heads also have not investigated the disappearance of all photos and x-rays of Brown's head from a LOCKED safe at AFIP. Instead, they destroyed the careers of the military officers who did speak out, rather than simply show them that they were mistaken. They even threatened them with JAIL! That, of course, had a chilling effect on any other potential whistleblowers.

Since then, neither the FBI or military justice system has investigated even though there is clear proof that the management at AFIP lied to the public about the nature of Brown's injuries and the opinions of their pathologists regarding the need for an autopsy. They haven't investigated even though a military officer stated under oath that another officer told her that AFIP management tampered with a second set of x-rays to hide evidence of gunshot. They haven't investigated even though sworn testimony from one of Brown's close associates suggests a urgent motive for killing Brown at that time.

And that is just SOME of the evidence that exists pointing to the murder of Brown. There is additional testimony pointing to motive, opportunity and means ... all of which the key players in government have IGNORED or LIED ABOUT. And it doesn't hurt that the mainstream media is complicit. NOT ONE of the major media players EVER reported the facts of the Brown case to the public. Instead they just regurgitated the LIES spouted by the Air Force spokesperson and the Clinton administration officials about weather and blunt force trauma. Instead they just tried to associate those who question the Brown death with UFO-ologists.

So yes ... here is an example where a few key people have managed to keep the public from knowing the truth and controlled the investigation to the extent that suspicious evidence was buried or ignored. And if they could do it in this case, why think they couldn't do it in another?

--ya man! I guess one of those babies would work! bofors rang a bell, they been in the biz of knocking down aeryplanes for a long time now. And being sweden, they sell to anyone with cash most likely. Is that plane one of theirs as well? I remember quite a few years ago reading about their sonett (sp?) that could fly sideways.

For a small country they got rearranging steel into interesting parts way down pat.

funny story. many moons ago I was working a tradeshow. Small show only a coupla booths, military jazz. Our booth was this whizzbanger like in the picture sorta. It was fairly hefty, a domestic made missile, forgotten the name now (AIM?-dunno, had small fins on it), but it was pretty big, like around 12 feet long. The show was in a private ballrom in a hotel in atlanta. Myself and one other guy get the nod to go do the booth install. We meet the truck on the sidewalk, sidestreet of the hotel, get the crates out. The crates for the booth fit, but the missile is like too dang long! It just AIN'T getting in that freight elevator to go upstairs. So here's me and this other guy with our tools out on the sidewalk in atlanta, all kinza folks walking by and driving by, disaasembling this whizzbang atlas rocket action to get it into pieces so it would fit into the elevator! HILARIOUS! Getting some serious stares and commentary from the townfolk and all. heheheheheheheheh Got it in chunks, up it went, re assembled, no one knows nothing,. just doing our jobs!

I think it could be either one, but not a fuel tank.

Well, IMHO the fuel tank certainly did blow...but one would expect that to happen when pierced by a missile. It was an CYA explanatory manuever by a team who were lucky enough to have all the media oulets onboard.

The difficult thing about this is that a person like myself just really wants to know the truth about the circumstances. I don't think Kalstrom is an bad man...he did what he had to do, most likely knowing anyone with half a brain knew his new math didn't quite add up.

My question is, if TWA 800 was militant Islam's first aviative-take down success, and the powers that be (in this case Bubba's fuck `til you drop and run the nation between Monicas crew of halfwits) covered it up, how on earth were are pants around our ankles on 9-11?

IMHO, instead of utilizing our national treasure bombing the If U See Kaye out of Iraq, why aren't we focusing that amount of effort on finding out who are insiders are? They are obviously here, and I'm ready to bet dollars to donuts that they ain't Arabs!

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.