10 Years Ago Today

[Ken King]

258 people saw the streak of light. 38 said it was vertical. 45 said it went east, 23 reported it went west, 18 said it went south, and 4 said it went north. The reast didn't give directions. I don't understand how you can say it triangulated back to any point if it was travelling five directions at once.

If you read the FBI interviews, it is obvious that the FBI was trying to prove that a missile was involved, but they couldn't. The investigators were working under the assumption that it was a missile. That's why this went on for 16 months: the data was not there.

I guess NAWC-WD is in on the conspiracy?

Going by the triangulation plot and reports on CDR. Donaldson's site he stated that besides interviewing witnesses he "in many cases, going to the spot where the witness was located when they spotted the streak in the sky." And "As you can see from the plot, the witnesses saw the streak from quite a few different angles and at different points in its flight. This explains the variability in witness statements as to direction of their observation and direction of travel with respect to them."

As to the tests conducted by NAWC-WD what was it that they tested? It seems they only looked over parts of the airframe as not all of it was recovered and made generalizations on what they were given to look at. I wouldn't suspect them as being complicate, but I wouldn't say that they conducted a complete investigation either.

But what of the seat material provided to James Sanders (the reporter prosecuted for possessing seat scraps) given to him by the Senior TWA check pilot that was on the investigation team, did NAWC-WD test that also? Sanders had them tested and these are the test results.

Since the TWA 800 "accident" there has been a lot of testing concerning survivability of large aircraft from MANPADS. One comment I found interesting was where those involved in the testing said that a strike in a fuel tank where the fuel is used to the attackers advantage can result in catastrophic failure of the airframes.

And one more thing is that there is the book bin Laden: The man who declared war on America by Yossef Bodansky (1999) that on page 325 reportedly says "The Islamist terrorists did not arrive lightly at considerations of using weapons of mass destruction. International terrorism is in the midst of a quest for the super spectacular terrorist strike. The case of TWA 800 served as a turning point because of Washington's determination and to a great extent ability to suppress terrorist explanations and float "mechanical failure" theories. To avoid such suppression after future strikes, terrorism sponsoring states must raise the ante so that the West cannot ignore them."

 

[MMDad]

I tried to let it go, but I couldn't This will be my last try.

Wouldn't a cover up like this have to go to the top?

Yes or no. (If you answer no, give up on the rest because I assumed you are a man of reason.)

Suppose George didn't look into this before 9/11, wouldn't he have reason to after 9/11?

Yes or no.

If George looked into it and found a conspiracy, would he have held that back after 9/11?

Yes or no.

Would he still have held back in the '04 election?

Yes or no.

We have the ultimate conspiracy here. It transcends party lines, as well as lasting 10 years. Are you really trying to convince me that people were so loyal to the Clinton administration that we wouldn't hear squat six years after he left office? Don't even pretend that the CIA or FBI are secure. Their records have proven otherwise.

Oh well. You will always believe that there was some conspiracy to cover up a terrorist attack. I will always believe it was an accident. I won't try to change your mind, and it would be pointless for you to try to change mine, unless new evidence (not your SOS) comes to light.

 

[Bruzilla]

...SAM's, heat signatures, triangulation, reflection, flocks of birds, FBI, NTSB...

Anyone want to help a brother out? If the fuel tank that is said to have blown up is THE cause of the plane falling apart, how come the story says the front of the plane, forward of the wing, fell off, the plane rose (which would require a wing, yes?) and THEN the wing tank blew up. Right?

I mean, if the tank is IN the wing and it was full of vapor and was ignited by an electrical spark, then the tank, which was confining the vapor, would be the first thing to go, yes? Given where the tank is;


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/TWA/WINGBOX/magic.html


...it just seems to this layman that the wings would have had to fail and that the fuselage would have been more likely to stay together, not come apart first.

Larry, when you have something with the size of a 747 climbing upwards and it explodes (for whatever reason) you still have a lot of momentum to overcome. Plus even if a large section of the wing or the front of the fuselage were to come off the engines are still turning and thrusting the mass forwards, so until what's left of the plane stalls and starts to fall, it'll keep climbing.

 

[Bustem' Down]

So if you want to believe that the Navy shot the aircraft down, what would be the reason? There would have to be some reason because there is no way it could have been a mistake, it would have had to be deliberate.

 

[Ken King]

I tried to let it go, but I couldn't This will be my last try.

You’re full of sh!t. If you tried to let it go why bring up a conspiracy post directed towards me in the quotes? This had sat silent for several days before you did that, had it not?

Wouldn't a cover up like this have to go to the top?

Yes or no. (If you answer no, give up on the rest because I assumed you are a man of reason.)

More than likely and maybe done with well intentions too. After all what would have happened to the airline industry in this nation if it was known that it was so vulnerable?

Suppose George didn't look into this before 9/11, wouldn't he have reason to after 9/11?

Yes or no.

Why? He had the office, it happened in 1996, and don’t most politicians let sleeping dogs lie?

If George looked into it and found a conspiracy, would he have held that back after 9/11?

Yes or no.

What are the implications of exposing it, would it do more harm than good?

Would he still have held back in the '04 election?

Yes or no.

Why would he and what would be the good to come out and say that the airline industry was at the mercy of any yahoo with a Stinger? Would destroying a major economic industry be something that you would do as President? Besides he was now taking it to them on their turf, was he not?

We have the ultimate conspiracy here. It transcends party lines, as well as lasting 10 years. Are you really trying to convince me that people were so loyal to the Clinton administration that we wouldn't hear squat six years after he left office? Don't even pretend that the CIA or FBI are secure. Their records have proven otherwise.

Talk of conspiracies lasting and people mention the JFK shooting. This is an infant by comparison. If it has no merit then why did law enforcement and not the NTSB lead the investigation into the “event”, a supposed crash, for the first 16 months? And then why were the witnesses prevented from testifying at the NTSB’s hearings as to what they saw?

Oh well. You will always believe that there was some conspiracy to cover up a terrorist attack. I will always believe it was an accident. I won't try to change your mind, and it would be pointless for you to try to change mine, unless new evidence (not your SOS) comes to light.

I believe that it was a shoot-down, who knows what you believe, if you even have looked into this at all, or if you are just shooting from your lips. And what new evidence do you expect to be found 10 years after the fact? None, because you, like many others, would prefer that the matter be dropped and not looked into at all. There are many pieces of evidence out there that make this look unlike an accident.

But you go ahead and believe whatever version you want and I’ll believe the version I want, just don’t lie and say that you are done with it because I know you can’t keep your mouth shut.

 

[donbarzini]

I THINK I've read the whole thread, and unless I missed it, nobody has mentioned what is, to me, the most curious part of this whole "occurence".

The fact that there was an El Al flight scheduled to go up at that time, but they were "pulled out of line" and #800 was allowed to go in their place.