TWA flight 800

[Sunshine]

may have been shot down by a missile or missiles.

TWA Flight 800 crash not due to gas tank explosion, former investigators say

Jim Speer, an accident investigator at the time of the crash for the Airline Pilots Association, who sifted through the recovered wreckage in a hangar, said he discovered holes consistent with those that would be formed by a high-energy blast in the right wing. He requested it be tested for explosives. When the test came back positive, he said, he was "physically removed" from a room by two CIA agents.



Holy shit...

To what end would this cover up have happened? 1996, Clinton was president. Are you saying he had an American plane shot down to see if it could be done? If not, what, then?

It's got forensic experts convinced. Someone with pinpoint ground to air targeting capability would have needed to have shot them down. This whole thing stinks of false flag terrorism if you ask me.

Who? The US?

 

[SteadyMercury]

It's got forensic experts convinced.

It has "some" forensic experts convinced, many of whom happen to also want to sell books.

Who? The US?

If it was a surface to air missile it would almost have to be the US. The plane was over 12k feet high so it wasn't a couple of Iraqis sneaking a shoulder launched missile onto a boat, it would have had to have been something a lot bigger that would have required. Maybe the Iraqis snuck something like this over and set it up somewhere in Brooklyn in a field:

 

[CaféAuLait]

I recently saw a documentary about this on the History channel. I wondered if it was conspiracy garbage. However, I read this the other day and wondered.

Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali

Copies of a detailed guide instructing al-Qaeda extremists in how to use a surface-to-air missile capable of taking down a commercial aeroplane have been found in Mali.

Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali - Telegraph

 

[TemplarKormac]

To what end would this cover up have happened? 1996, Clinton was president. Are you saying he had an American plane shot down to see if it could be done? If not, what, then?

It's got forensic experts convinced. Someone with pinpoint ground to air targeting capability would have needed to have shot them down. This whole thing stinks of false flag terrorism if you ask me.

Who? The US?

I can't help but speculate, I was only 9 years of age when this happened. Besides, the best place to hit a plane is in the wings, tail, or center fuselage (where a 747 would normally keep it's fuel). It might be a coverup, it might not. Don't mind me, I'm thinking out loud, Sunshine.

 

[Sunshine]

I recently saw a documentary about this on the History channel. I wondered if it was conspiracy garbage. However, I read this the other day and wondered.

Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali

Copies of a detailed guide instructing al-Qaeda extremists in how to use a surface-to-air missile capable of taking down a commercial aeroplane have been found in Mali.

Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali - Telegraph

I don't see how someone could have a surface to air missile launcher in New York and no one know about it. The population is too dense. It would have had to have been in the bay.

There is more than one article that says the plane had been used at an earlier date for bomb dog training which is how the bomb residue got there.

She said investigators admitted bomb residue was found at the scene, but they concluded that a police officer training his bomb-sniffing dog had used the exact same plane a few weeks before the crash, and sprinkled the residue as part of the training. She said investigators painstakingly reconstructed thousands of pieces of debris, lining up holes to see if there was any evidence a bomb ripped up part of the plane, and found nothing to indicate that.

TWA Flight 800 gets another look 17 years later - CBS News

 

[flacaltenn]

I believe there were ties to Iraq for this "accident" and the Admin at the time didn't want to go to war just then.

Interesting. So you believe Iraq planted a bomb on the plane?

AND -- It occurred on Iraq Independence Day...

Iraq Independence Day is October 3rd, as they became an independent country on Oct 3rd 1932. TWA Flight 800 happened when?

No bomb.. Missile.. Ample evidence actually from military witnesses and forensics.

July 17 is Iraqi Revolution Day.

Both Clinton and Bush greatly exaggerated the threat of Saddam against PUBLIC knowledge of why he was such a threat. Clinton bombed him daily and invented the WMD argument. To lie to us with that little factual cover smells phoney.

So I've always assumed that BOTH OF THEM had some inside knowledge on Saddam. It's not just TWA800, it could be any or all of the largely unsolved Anthrax attack, help or aid in the OKCity bombing, and there were IDENTIFIED IRAQI ties to the 1st World Trade Center bombings. All I need is for ONE of those to pan out to prove my theory.. I think my chances are excellent.

 

[KissMy]

TWA 800 Witness 80 & 754 - "He saw what he described as an orange flare, which appeared to be launched from the beach or beyond which went straight up then suddenly he saw a large red glow which he described as an "explosion" and thereafter saw the fireball split into tow distinct parts and drop from the sky"

TWA 800 Witness 88 - "observed what he thought was a firework ascending into the sky." " originally felt this firework emanated form the shoreline" "this object which was ascending left a wispy white smoke trail." "observed an airplane come into the field of view .." "the object ran into the airplane....and then exploded."

 

[flacaltenn]

may have been shot down by a missile or missiles.

TWA Flight 800 crash not due to gas tank explosion, former investigators say

Jim Speer, an accident investigator at the time of the crash for the Airline Pilots Association, who sifted through the recovered wreckage in a hangar, said he discovered holes consistent with those that would be formed by a high-energy blast in the right wing. He requested it be tested for explosives. When the test came back positive, he said, he was "physically removed" from a room by two CIA agents.



Holy shit...

The fuel tank explosion story was always bullshit....Kerosene (jet fuel) doesn't explode.

Can jet fuel explode

Any combustable can explode when givin the right condition. For example even small fiber from a corn mill in a containment can explode. So yes jet fuel can explode. For this condition you have to be aware of temputure ,volume, and the stade of fuel is it soild or gasous state or bolth, open air or containment. Yes jet fuel can explode under the right conditions.

Yeah -- but the EXCUSE was it was warm at JFK that day. As though 100000 flights from Abu Dhabi or Tahiti wouldn't have caused the problem first..

 

[Sunshine]

It's got forensic experts convinced. Someone with pinpoint ground to air targeting capability would have needed to have shot them down. This whole thing stinks of false flag terrorism if you ask me.

Who? The US?

I can't help but speculate, I was only 9 years of age when this happened. Besides, the best place to hit a plane is in the wings, tail, or center fuselage (where a 747 would normally keep it's fuel). It might be a coverup, it might not. Don't mind me, I'm thinking out loud, Sunshine.

Well, I worked for the feds at the time. You know, the year Clinton let the government get shut down and we didn't get a paycheck for 2 months. That can really hurt a single mom with 2 kids in college! And it did. So, I wasn't exactly in 'tune' to all this although I do recall it happening. I recall I had a supervisor whose family lived on Long Island. I remember him talking about them watching the plane be brought up and out of the bay.

I went to NYC in 1992, and as densely populated as it is, I don't see how anyone could own or fire a surface to air missile launcher without someone seeing it. If there was a missile fired it had to be from the bay. Where's the boat?

 

[Sunshine]

The fuel tank explosion story was always bullshit....Kerosene (jet fuel) doesn't explode.

Can jet fuel explode

Any combustable can explode when givin the right condition. For example even small fiber from a corn mill in a containment can explode. So yes jet fuel can explode. For this condition you have to be aware of temputure ,volume, and the stade of fuel is it soild or gasous state or bolth, open air or containment. Yes jet fuel can explode under the right conditions.

Yeah -- but the EXCUSE was it was warm at JFK that day. As though 100000 flights from Abu Dhabi or Tahiti wouldn't have caused the problem first..

I don't know about JFK in 1996. But I can tell you the unorganization in JFK in 2009 made me determined to NEVER set foot in it again. JFK is a terrorist attack waiting to happen there is so much chaos.

 

[flacaltenn]

Who? The US?

I can't help but speculate, I was only 9 years of age when this happened. Besides, the best place to hit a plane is in the wings, tail, or center fuselage (where a 747 would normally keep it's fuel). It might be a coverup, it might not. Don't mind me, I'm thinking out loud, Sunshine.

Well, I worked for the feds at the time. You know, the year Clinton let the government get shut down and we didn't get a paycheck for 2 months. That can really hurt a single mom with 2 kids in college! And it did. So, I wasn't exactly in 'tune' to all this although I do recall it happening. I recall I had a supervisor whose family lived on Long Island. I remember him talking about them watching the plane be brought up and out of the bay.

I went to NYC in 1992, and as densely populated as it is, I don't see how anyone could own or fire a surface to air missile launcher without someone seeing it. If there was a missile fired it had to be from the bay. Where's the boat?

If you're brave enough and believe that Obama is not spying on you --- go do a search on Stinger missiles or man-launched surface to air.. If you're not in Guantanamo tomorrow, then the NSA took the day off.

A small arms case is all you need to take aboard. There WERE prelim reports of a rented boat out in the approx area.. Don't remember what happened to that..

We gave TONS of these to Mujahadeen fighters and AL QUEDA when they were "our buds" fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.. Really caused Russia that defeat..

 

[CaféAuLait]

I recently saw a documentary about this on the History channel. I wondered if it was conspiracy garbage. However, I read this the other day and wondered.

Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali

Copies of a detailed guide instructing al-Qaeda extremists in how to use a surface-to-air missile capable of taking down a commercial aeroplane have been found in Mali.

Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali - Telegraph

I don't see how someone could have a surface to air missile launcher in New York and no one know about it. The population is too dense. It would have had to have been in the bay.

There is more than one article that says the plane had been used at an earlier date for bomb dog training which is how the bomb residue got there.

She said investigators admitted bomb residue was found at the scene, but they concluded that a police officer training his bomb-sniffing dog had used the exact same plane a few weeks before the crash, and sprinkled the residue as part of the training. She said investigators painstakingly reconstructed thousands of pieces of debris, lining up holes to see if there was any evidence a bomb ripped up part of the plane, and found nothing to indicate that.

TWA Flight 800 gets another look 17 years later - CBS News

That is exactly what the History Channel report implied, they may have been in one of several unidentified boats in the bay. It was a pretty interesting report in my opinion. I usually try to stay away from conspiracy theories, this one captivated my interest given the amount of witness who said they saw a flare, missile, fireworks, etc. The other fact that the bomb residue was blamed on glue by investigators made me a bit suspicious though.

 

[Sunshine]

I recently saw a documentary about this on the History channel. I wondered if it was conspiracy garbage. However, I read this the other day and wondered.

Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali




Al-Qaeda's how-to guide for using surface-to-air missiles found in Mali - Telegraph

I don't see how someone could have a surface to air missile launcher in New York and no one know about it. The population is too dense. It would have had to have been in the bay.

There is more than one article that says the plane had been used at an earlier date for bomb dog training which is how the bomb residue got there.

She said investigators admitted bomb residue was found at the scene, but they concluded that a police officer training his bomb-sniffing dog had used the exact same plane a few weeks before the crash, and sprinkled the residue as part of the training. She said investigators painstakingly reconstructed thousands of pieces of debris, lining up holes to see if there was any evidence a bomb ripped up part of the plane, and found nothing to indicate that.

TWA Flight 800 gets another look 17 years later - CBS News

That is exactly what the History Channel report implied, they may have been in one of several unidentified boats in the bay. It was a pretty interesting report in my opinion. I usually try to stay away from conspiracy theories, this one captivated my interest given the amount of witness who said they saw a flare, missile, fireworks, etc. The other fact that the bomb residue was blamed on glue by investigators made me a bit suspicious though.

If there was a missile, it had to have been fired from a boat. I know we have silencers for guns, but I can't in my wildest imagination think there could be a silent missile launcher. Anywhere.

If it was from a boat, it could have not been visible from land. Think about the curvature of the earth, the horizon, etc. Things disappear from view pretty close in. A boat just over the horizon could have launched a missile from far enough away as to be undetectable as to sound. It would have to be a pretty big boat, sea going, so it could put out to open sea just after. Again, I would have to wonder why other water craft would not have seen it.

 

[Trajan]

I have the same skepticism here I have for 911 conspiracies.....


look, the aircraft was at 13.760 feet and traveling at approx. 450 to 500 mph, so you would need a missile that can catch it, from a dead stand still.

Then you need the guidance equipment, that doesn't just come in a suitcase, you need the fire contl. apparatus, the radar mechanism so you can start with a 'lock', you just don't fire a missile into the air and expect it to pick up a heat signature from 10 miles away in the dark, (which it was when it was hit) from the Long Island shoreline.....a stinger for instance or any man-pack does not utilize that type of fire control and its combo of playing catch up, sighting, range and speed would make it the greatest shot since william tell.

It had to be something bigger with a large footprint or a lot closer, if its shipboard, then you're talking about how they handle the backblast, sighting in the dark of night and with the same speed and height/speed tail chase factors...


So, in the end, it has to be military, and? I just don't see a US naval ship mistakingly firing a missile that took it down and that remaining a secret for all these years, the cover up would be IMMENSE.....

I don't buy it.

 

[Oddball]

I have the same skepticism here I have for 911 conspiracies.....


look, the aircraft was at 13.760 feet and traveling at approx. 450 to 500 mph, so you would need a missile that can catch it, from a dead stand still.

Stinger.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I have the same skepticism here I have for 911 conspiracies.....


look, the aircraft was at 13.760 feet and traveling at approx. 450 to 500 mph, so you would need a missile that can catch it, from a dead stand still.

Then you need the guidance equipment, that doesn't just come in a suitcase, you need the fire contl. apparatus, the radar mechanism so you can start with a 'lock', you just don't fire a missile into the air and expect it to pick up a heat signature from 10 miles away in the dark, (which it was when it was hit) from the Long Island shoreline.....a stinger for instance or any man-pack does not utilize that type of fire control and its combo of playing catch up, sighting, range and speed would make it the greatest shot since william tell.

It had to be something bigger with a large footprint or a lot closer, if its shipboard, then you're talking about how they handle the backblast, sighting in the dark of night and with the same speed and height/speed tail chase factors...


So, in the end, it has to be military, and? I just don't see a US naval ship mistakingly firing a missile that took it down and that remaining a secret for all these years, the cover up would be IMMENSE.....

I don't buy it.

ok Buzzkillian

Then why are these guys, 17 years later they had all this evidence?

If it was the US Navy? yeah, it would have leaked and leaked quickly.

so that leaves other ships that may have been in the region.

possibly just a tragic accident

 

[Oddball]

may have been shot down by a missile or missiles.

TWA Flight 800 crash not due to gas tank explosion, former investigators say

Jim Speer, an accident investigator at the time of the crash for the Airline Pilots Association, who sifted through the recovered wreckage in a hangar, said he discovered holes consistent with those that would be formed by a high-energy blast in the right wing. He requested it be tested for explosives. When the test came back positive, he said, he was "physically removed" from a room by two CIA agents.



Holy shit...

The fuel tank explosion story was always bullshit....Kerosene (jet fuel) doesn't explode.

Can jet fuel explode

Any combustable can explode when givin the right condition. For example even small fiber from a corn mill in a containment can explode. So yes jet fuel can explode. For this condition you have to be aware of temputure ,volume, and the stade of fuel is it soild or gasous state or bolth, open air or containment. Yes jet fuel can explode under the right conditions.

I stand corrected.

Even so, "the right conditions" isn't in a vented fuel cell.

Jet-A has to be vaporized and put under tremendous pressure to burn in the jet engines.....Pressure that you're not going to get in a fuel cell.

The official story has been a crock since day one.

 

[tjvh]

Very interesting!

The US government may have covered up the murder of 230 people.

That's horrific

No more horrific when they cover up the murder of four Americans.

 

[SteadyMercury]

If you're brave enough and believe that Obama is not spying on you --- go do a search on Stinger missiles or man-launched surface to air.. If you're not in Guantanamo tomorrow, then the NSA took the day off.

A small arms case is all you need to take aboard. There WERE prelim reports of a rented boat out in the approx area.. Don't remember what happened to that..

We gave TONS of these to Mujahadeen fighters and AL QUEDA when they were "our buds" fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.. Really caused Russia that defeat..

Fail.

USA Stinger FIM-92
The Stinger is a passive IR homing surface-to-air missile designed to counter low altitude, short range aircraft Max. Altitude: 9,500 feet (2,900 m)


TWA 800 exploded at 13,800 Feet

 

[flacaltenn]

I have the same skepticism here I have for 911 conspiracies.....


look, the aircraft was at 13.760 feet and traveling at approx. 450 to 500 mph, so you would need a missile that can catch it, from a dead stand still.

Then you need the guidance equipment, that doesn't just come in a suitcase, you need the fire contl. apparatus, the radar mechanism so you can start with a 'lock', you just don't fire a missile into the air and expect it to pick up a heat signature from 10 miles away in the dark, (which it was when it was hit) from the Long Island shoreline.....a stinger for instance or any man-pack does not utilize that type of fire control and its combo of playing catch up, sighting, range and speed would make it the greatest shot since william tell.

It had to be something bigger with a large footprint or a lot closer, if its shipboard, then you're talking about how they handle the backblast, sighting in the dark of night and with the same speed and height/speed tail chase factors...


So, in the end, it has to be military, and? I just don't see a US naval ship mistakingly firing a missile that took it down and that remaining a secret for all these years, the cover up would be IMMENSE.....

I don't buy it.

If they were in between JFK and the intercept site, the plane is climbing out rapidly.. Even at 2000ft/min -- It was at 10,000ft when the missile gets fired maybe a minute before impact. Certainly, those small missiles have a 1 minute runtime...

The flight data was released YEARS later -- another "confidence" problem here.
If you need NSA to produce a CARTOON version of the plane's flight path rather than the actual recorder data --- all bets are off.

So any accuracy of WHERE the impact occurred is seriously in doubt. If they went to these extremes to cover up --- they really cooked the data recorder. Don't think the voice recorder was ever released?