It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was TWA flight 800 shot down by US Government?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 01:16 AM
link   
I was watching a CNN special investigation and started thinking about it again. Even before 9/11 I always thought the gov. shot that jet down. And if it was a terroist attack why would the gov. cover it up?
Why would the gov. shoot the plane down? Was someone on there that they wanted dead?

Check out this website TWA 800


There was an initial report that something had been picked up on Air Traffic Control radar, but this report was quickly withdraw. Associated Press on (07/19/96) reported " Radar detected a blip merging with the jet shortly before the explosion, something that could indicate a missile hit."


[edit on 29-7-2007 by earth2]




posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 04:28 AM
link   
Is this the one that crashed into the sea? I'm sure I read that it was hit by a missile by accident and it's been covered up. Also read that someone involved in the missile test cried to his father "we did it dad."Is this also the plane that they've pieced together in a hangar like a giant jigsaw?



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 09:07 AM
link   
TWA flight 800 was accidentally shot down by the U.S. Navy. Both Boeing and TWA knew it. In order to keep everybody quiet Boeing was allowed to merge with McDonnell-Douglas which they had been trying to do for years but the merger had been tied up antitrust litigation by the government. TWA was given a private loan of about 360 million to help with the financial problems they were having separate from TWA 800 to keep their mouths shut. Many TWA senior management who knew the real story were livid.

In return for the permission to merge with MCDonnell Douglas TWA had to issue a statement that the center fuel pump had arced and had caused the explosion. Boeing initially balked because the government made them say "All 747's". Boeing negotiated it down to where it only affected the 747-131 which was an early 747 and was no longer in production.

No arcing is possible in any fuel pump in any transport category airplane. It was a scam by the government to cover up the Navy mistake. It was a bitter pill to swallow for Boeing but they had to lie down and take it for many reasons. TWA was in no position to argue either.

I believe that over the years the U.S. Navy has accidentally shot down 5 airliners started with the Flying Tigers Lockheed Constellation that disappeared near Guam in (1963) while transported U.S. soldiers to Viet Nam. A U.S. Navy fighter pilot was using the Flying Tigers airplane for target practice and accidentally shot it down. I worked for Flying Tigers about this time and knew about what really happened. As a matter of fact, at the time, FlyingTigers was struggling for survival and in return for their silence they received the majority of cargo contracts for Viet Nam and approval to start another airline called Flying Tiger Air Services, Inc. which also had large cargo and passenger contracts for Viet Nam but operated between Japan and RVN. I had a list of the 5 airplanes that the U.S. Navy shot down accidentally I will try and find it.

The fuel pump arcing scam directly affected almost every airliner flying. In order to give credibility to the scam the FAA required all U.S. Certificated airliners to limit the fuel in center tanks. I forget exactly how it was worded but it worked out that because of the limitation, the payload was limited and for airliners, particular cargo airlines that worked on a very slim margin of profit it was an economic disaster for absolutely no reason at all.

The bottom line it was shameful conduct by the U.S. Government including the FBI, particularly Kalstrom himself, the NTSB, the FAA, the President and particularly Richard Clarke who, in my opinion, engineered the entire cover-up scam.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Lear is right. i have been certain that a missile took down that flight since the day after it happened. For those that are skeptical of some of Lear's claims, I'd be pretty darn sure that hes on the nose w/ this one.

And heres a hint to any would be investigators-
Start looking up the locations of not just USN vessels but USCG vessels as well, in relation to the crash area.

The part that surprises me is that none of the crew members have come forward to say anything publicly. They must have had the fear of god instilled in them.




[edit on 29-7-2007 by Reality Hurts]



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 09:26 AM
link   
i remember that, i was visiting friends in queens, ny right after that happened. most people said it was a missle. another thing i remember which i thought was strange was right around that time i was watching the news there and a canadian submarine got lost and ended up in the east river, not sure if that counts for anything but it was weird lol. im still curious about flight 587 that crashed right after 9/11, that story kinda came and went. that one is suspicious too.



posted on Jul, 29 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Originally posted by radioactive_liquid





i im still curious about flight 587 that crashed right after 9/11, that story kinda came and went. that one is suspicious too.




American Flight 587 was blown up by a bomb in the right rear cargo compartment. The story about the tail coming off because of the too much rudder pedal after an encounter of wake turbulence from another airplane is pure fantasy.

The government was able to get away with that cover story because of all the hoopla surrounding 911.

I don't know why the Flight 587 was blown up or who did it but ALLEGEDLY there were a number of Puerto Rican workers that had helped in the tower cleanup that were on their way home to San Juan.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Thank you for answering a few of my questions johnlear but i still have another question.

How does the Navy accidentily shoot a loaded jet(TWA flight 800) full of people down?

They have so many safeguards in place preventing any kind of possible accident.
I mean they could have easily detinated the missile in mid-air before it hit flight 800.
Im sure they had guys watching radar on the ship and had to have known that flight 800 was connecting with a missile.
All they had to do was destroy it via radio signal. Dont missiles have that capability?

And if they didnt have that tech in the missiles they still had to have known that flight 800 was in the vicinity, unless the radar men were on break.
Which I kinda doubt concidering they are doing a live missile fire.

I just cant buy the accidently shooting down the jet theory.

edit: Im not saying the Navy didnt shoot TWA flight 800 down, im just saying it was no accident.



[edit on 30-7-2007 by earth2]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Sorry, please delete.




[edit on 30-7-2007 by Sheikh al-Gore]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by earth2
How does the Navy accidentily shoot a loaded jet(TWA flight 800) full of people down?
...
I mean they could have easily detinated the missile in mid-air before it hit flight 800.

Not if it is shoulder fired.

Coastal Patrol boats, being Navy vessels or Navy vessels on loan to the USCG, are by nature and description coastal patrol boats and are tasked with security, patrol, and coastal interdiction-at-sea missions. They are generally not equipped with much in the way of surface to air armament. What they do have are shoulder fired FIM-92 Stinger Surface to Air Missiles, and Stingers are a relatively idiot proof "fire-and-forget" weapon that employs a passive infrared seeking navigation system.

Now, the big question here is, "What the hell was a USN or USCG patrol vessel doing w/ a live Stinger on deck at 8 o clock at night in the middle of summer off the coast of Long Island?"

I'm not a Navy man, but it doesn't strike me as rational that they'd be doing live fire exercises 5 miles off the coast of Mastic Beach Long Island. Could they have been preparing for a low light, i.e. dusk, drill using the shoulder fired weapons? Maybe, don't know if thats a standard practice or not, again, I'm not a USN or USCG guy.

Either way, at some point a shoulder fired surface to air missile was cut loose and immediately got an infrared lock on the nearest object, which happened to be a Boeing 747 that was at that moment ascending from take off.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
In order to keep everybody quiet Boeing was allowed to merge with McDonnell-Douglas which they had been trying to do for years but the merger had been tied up antitrust litigation by the government.


The FTC approved the merger on July 1, 1997.

TWA Flight 800 was shot down on July 17, 1997, so the approval had already gone through two and a half weeks before.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Originally posted by Reality Hurts




The FTC approved the merger on July 1, 1997.

TWA Flight 800 was shot down on July 17, 1997, so the approval had already gone through two and a half weeks before.




I am surprised that its THAT close. Must have had some complications putting it any further back. Either that or there was something in the terms of the merger.

Excellent find.

I will look for my TWA 800 file for the story on the $360 million loan.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

American Flight 587 was blown up by a bomb in the right rear cargo compartment. The story about the tail coming off because of the too much rudder pedal after an encounter of wake turbulence from another airplane is pure fantasy.

The government was able to get away with that cover story because of all the hoopla surrounding 911.

I don't know why the Flight 587 was blown up or who did it but ALLEGEDLY there were a number of Puerto Rican workers that had helped in the tower cleanup that were on their way home to San Juan.


wow, i never heard that. thanks john..im gonna have to do some reading up on that. i wonder if it could of been some sort of witness elimination move.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 07:59 AM
link   
John's and Reality Hurt's information is correct. I have a relative who had a close friend that worked for the government at the time. The navy was indeed conducting tests and drills. He told my relative that the incident was hugely embarrassing and that the Navy was concerned with the public backlash at the idea that they had shot down the plane even though it was an accident. They decided to go a. with the cover up for fear of that reaction. Supposedly, many individuals who were involved with this were quite traumatized by the accident and very upset about the cover up. Many felt the need to confess what really happened which was why the real story leaked out so easily.

I did not know that about the other flight that crashed after 9/11, though I always thought it odd that there should be such an "accident" so close to the 9/11 events. Then again, stranger things have happened and still been accidental. I realize you stated you do not know who was responsible for the bomb John but what are your suspicions or beliefs about it?



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Originally posted by trek315



I realize you stated you do not know who was responsible for the bomb John but what are your suspicions or beliefs about it?




I suspect that a group pf PR's were used in the cleanup and had acquired, probably accidentally, information that could compromise the governments story. The plane was blown up to get rid of the liability.

The reason I did not state this particular line of suspicion is because I don't know what the PR's could have known that couldn't have been handled in another way. Also I can't understand why at the height of the 911 frenzy why the government wouldn't have blamed OBL. And why Airbus rolled over on the "Tail shaking loose" fantasy. This is not like the French. Several cameras plainly showed the explosion in the aft cargo compartment and witnesses clearly saw debris falling from the airplane. It was clearly a bomb.



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Check this one out guys. This documentary about TWA 800 will make your jaw drop. It shows irrefutable testimonials from many eyewitnesses and aviation experts that PROVE BEYOND DOUBT that the FBI and CIA LIED about what the witnesses said and also FAKED testimonials to support its predetermined conclusion. It is IRREFUTABLE! Those of you who deny conspiracies will have no excuse to deny conspiracies and cover ups now. This video proves with certainty that COVER UPS and LIES by the government DO happen. Even you hard nosed deniers would have to concede after seeing this documentary. Watch it! Everything is clearly explained and your jaw will drop at the mass level of deception. Warning: You will never trust your government again after seeing this film!

Silenced - TWA 800 and the Subversion of Justice



Description by video uploader:


"This documentary proves that the U.S. government-including the FBI and DOJ-are totally corrupt and involved in serious felony crime and the outrageous cover-up of truth concerning the mysterious crash of TWA Flight 800 on July 17, 1996.

As you will see, Flight 800 was actually destroyed by a surface-to-air missile. Every allegation made in this film is backed up with facts-none more dramatic than those that come from the Federal government itself.

You'll learn what the 736 official eyewitnesses actually saw; why aviators reject the CIA "cartoon" explanation; how the Feds criminally suppressed reporting; the critical witness drawings; the rigged NTSB hearings; the damning radar data and documentation; the altered physical evidence; undeniable proof of explosive residue proving a missile strike; the stinging report from the machinist union; and much more!"

edit on 13-3-2011 by WWu777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by earth2
 

Was TWA 800 Shot Down By a Military Missile? (yeah, another rhetorical question)

When Captain Weed stops by for an obligatory appearance, I have a commercial pilot friend who says, "if the center fuel tank in TWA 800 actually detonated, you'd see 747s falling from the sky every day."


edit on 3/13/2011 by GoldenFleece because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
2

log in

join