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.

 

TWA 800 shot down? YES. With a missile? Maybe not.

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Originally posted by PhotonEffect


You did mention that residue was found on a seat, and I remember hearing something about that also. BUt what kind of residue was it? Do we know?




In his book, "The Downing Of TWA Flight 800" James Sanders related the story of how one of the TWA employees working in the Calverton hanger became so disgusted with what he saw as a deliberate cover-up that he provided to James Sanders two samples of cloth from seats from TWA 800, to be tested by an outside, NON-government linked laboratory.

On the seat fabric samples was a bright red residue which had stained three rows of seats in the aircraft, rows 17-19.

Tests on the first sample revealed elements which experts confirmed were consistent with the combustion byproducts of a military solid fuel rocket motor of the powdered aluminum and perchlorate type.

James Sanders then gave his second and last sample to CBS news for them to have tested. CBS promptly turned around and gave the sample back to the government.

Once the sample had been returned, the government declared that the red residue was seat glue, choosing to simply ignore the fact that it has been seen on only three adjacent rows of seats out of the entire aircraft.

The FBI, showing a double standard, then went after James Sanders for theft of part of the airplane, even though the FBI's man in charge, James Kallstrom, had removed a souvenir from the aircraft himself.

Meanwhile, tests conducted on the glue used on the seats and the Atlantic seawater in the area proved once and for all that the red residue was not glue, and yet another of the government's lies stood revealed.



www.whatreallyhappened.com...




John what are your thoughts about the possibility that's presented in the above study of a directed-energy weapon of some kind (like a particle beam) being the cause of the explosion? It's a doozy of a theory but after reading it something about it seems entirely plausible.



TWA Flight 800 was not brought down my any DEW. The U.S. Navy keeps circlating those rumers to get the heat off of themselves.




posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


Have you looked at the page? Do you realize that his calculations are thoroughly screwed up? Yet another reason to look another way when you see the word "electrogravitics". Unless you like science pr0n.



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Thanks,

That's an interesting read.


Originally posted by johnlear
TWA Flight 800 was not brought down my any DEW. The U.S. Navy keeps circlating those rumers to get the heat off of themselves.


Maybe. But either way the government knows (and is covering up) something, eh...



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by PhotonEffect
 


Have you looked at the page? Do you realize that his calculations are thoroughly screwed up? Yet another reason to look another way when you see the word "electrogravitics". Unless you like science pr0n.


Thanks Buddha,

Yes, I read it a few times actually. To the layman like me I couldn't know the difference quite frankly, although the calculations he provided seemed a bit simplified for a physics formula. I like to keep an open mind about some stuff...


But what's so thoroughly screwed up about them if I may ask?



posted on Jan, 25 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 



Thank you for your summation Mr. Lear.

I subscribe to this conclusion 100%.



new topics

top topics
 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join