Group of aviation professionals say Flt. 800 was shot down

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by thisnumbersdisconnected, Jun 19, 2013.

  1. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/1...w-documentary-claim-original/?test=latestnews

    A handful of aviation experts, including a number of investigators who were part of the original probe of TWA Flight 800, have come forward in a new documentary to say evidence points to a missile as the cause of the crash off the coast of Long Island 17 years ago.

    The New York-to-Paris flight crashed July 17, 1996, just minutes after takeoff from JFK Airport, killing all 230 people aboard. In the weeks that followed, the plane was reassembled in a hangar from parts retrieved from the sea. But the cause of the crash was not identified immediately, and after authorities said the crash was caused by static electricity ignited fuel fumes, many skeptics cast doubt on the theory. Adding to the controversy were multiple eyewitness accounts of a fireball going up from the ground and hitting the plane before it went down, accounts which the FBI dismissed at the time.

    Was it A) a horrific accident caused by our own military? B) Islamic (or other) terrorists committing the first "act of war" against the US two years before the WTC bombings (to which Clinton responded by firing some $3 million worth of Cruise missiles into the Afghan desert to strike a[n abandoned] camp of tents worth a total of about a buck-seventy-five)? Or C) do seventeen eyewitness accounts and the current testimony of these six experts get swept under the rug?

    The "C's" have it.
     
  2. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,161
    Likes Received:
    368
    I believe it is a small number of people who believe that. I worked the Flight 800 crash and saw the plane being brought into the Moriches Coast Guard Station where I was stationed and saw the bodies and twisted wreckage. I followed the information for years and there was no evidence at all for an outside projectile. The explosion and force came from inside the plane and there were no bomb parts found. I do not believe it was shot down at all.
     
  3. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    How come the FBI would not let anyone take pictures. Very unusual
     
  4. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you discount the seemingly unshakable testimony of the eyewitnesses who are certain they saw a "ball of fire" rise from the ground and strike the plane?

    As to the contention that the explosion and force came from inside the plane, that is not inconsistent with a missile strike. The primary damage down to an aircraft struck by a missile is from the force of impact, not the relatively small explosive charge in the warhead. In fact, if you've ever see actual combat footage, the explosion is always from the interior outward. Usually the fuel ignites and/or the weapons systems aboard the stricken aircraft explode from impact simultaneous to or even a bit before the missile detonating. Quite naturally, if the missile makes a hole in a fuel tank, the explosion is going to go back out through that same hole first, destroying any evidence of the missile strike. In fact, it now occurs to me that few of the FAA and NTSB investigators are likely to have military aircraft post-combat crash investigation experience so would have opportunity to know that.
     
    #4 thisnumbersdisconnected, Jun 20, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 20, 2013
  5. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd gather that one must be an expert to make a final determination whether or not the explosion came from within or without.

    Some claim it was from terrorists. If that is the case, why didn't an terrorist organization claim responsibility? It seems they like to taunt when they do these things -- they want others to know it came from them and strike terror in the hearts of others.

    If it came from a US source, I can't see or fathom such a thing as being true. Then again I've read somewhere where there were I I believe 17 eyewitnesses saying they saw a fire ball come from the ground and go up and hit the plane.

    I don't know what to think about it all. I also heard the plane split in two from an inner explosion, and it was horrendous to think about the cockpit area coming off the plane and the other section being open in the front on its descent.

    This whole thing is tragic to say the least.
     
  6. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    This is the biggest issue. By and large terrorist organizations want to take credit and want the world to fear them. With no public pronouncements nor anyone taking credit immediately (or subsequently) it makes the idea of a terrorist facilitated attack dubious.

    There are plenty of things about this tragedy that don't make sense. But wild speculation by some doesn't help. Besides, this was 15 years ago.
     
  7. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,161
    Likes Received:
    368
    Yep - and that is just what the vast majority of experts have done - made a final determination that the explosion was accidental inside the plane.
     

Share This Page

Loading...