Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

John McCain Killed 167 US Navy sailors?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 11 2008 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by robwerden


McCain crashed 5 jets, plus was responsible for the Forrestal fire. Something made the plane behind McCain fired a rocket, which hit McCain's external center fuel tank, and caused a fire. McCain panicked, and dropped two bombs into the fire.


[edit on 7-3-2008 by robwerden]


Aside from the bad grammar of "something made the plane behind McCain fired a rocket", who, exactly, are you quoting here?

Something? Yes, indeed, the US Navy investigation found that "something" was a faulty safety pin that allowed an electrical charge to travel the full length of the launch circuit on power-up.

The US Navy investigation also found that the bombs that exploded, causing the damage to Foreestal's flight deck and allowing burning JP8 into the hangar deck were in fact older models that had been released from storage because the navy had all but expended its newer, safer ordinance.

The causes of the accident were both systemic and human. But the human cause was back in Washington. Not sitting on deck in the cat' queue.

And I got all that from barely taking any notice of a Nat Geo special. At no time was McCain, a fairly significant personage by any reckoning, even mentioned that I can remember.




posted on Mar, 11 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Folks, puke.

This is the worst single topic I have ever read on all of ATS.

The video of the incident exists and is shown to everyone in the Navy. In the video you can clearly see his A-4 with it's tail out over the water.

The F-4 was on the other side of the flight deck, so I guess it would be possible if the heat from McCain's exhaust was able to travel around the world (in about a second) and not loose its high temp.

The fact that people immediately jump on McCain's case and do not bother to research has me worried. Please tell me you are all not registered voters.



posted on Mar, 13 2008 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
The fact that people immediately jump on McCain's case and do not bother to research has me worried. Please tell me you are all not registered voters.


What amuses me about this, is that those who like call others "sheeple" sure are quick to believe anything on the internet...



posted on Mar, 14 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
What an absolute pack of unmitigated LIES.

The F-4s were on one side of the deck and the A4s were on the other, both sets of jets had their tailpipes pointing outboard.

The armorers had previously asked for permission to connect the Zuni rocket packs on the F-4s prior to start up as it was safer for them to do so, they were granted blanket permission to do so. This removed safety factor #1, the connector leashes on the packs had an interruptor switch that also had to be removed before flight. The leash was connected to a large red tag that was easily caught by the breeze and had been accidentally pulled out before in that way, or at least pulled out far enough to enable the firing circuit, goodbye safety factor #2.

When the F-4 pilot switched from external to internal power, there was a surge through the firing circuit, the weapons mode selector was set to the starboard Zuni pack, and it fired the first rocket in sequence. This travelled across the deck and hit the drop tank of an A-4 PARKED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DECK knocking it loose, the pilot of that aircraft was either John McCain or Fred White, it has never been determined which one. The impact also knocked 2 x 1000lb bombs loose. This spilled fuel which was ignited either by sparks or the rocket motor, the rocket itself didn't fuse, so no bang - yet. The bombs were old WWII weapons filled with the unstable explosive Composition B, and had only just been delivered to the ship from the armaments vessel USS Diamond Head. The armorers were nervous, so they were loaded on the first available mission. The bombs had increased sensitivity to heat compared to newer weapons, and detonated very soon after the fire began. Other mistakes were made, water was hosed onto the flames instead of foam, causing it to spread etc, and the blast from the bombs blew a hole in the deck into which the burning fuel poured.

End of story.

Personally I'd ban you for posting blatant falsehoods like this, quite frankly, it's disgusting.



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
I don't get it. Why look at something that happened 41 years ago to judge a man's ability to take office today?

Not that I support him, though.

Because he seems to be a murderer, and a liar, who killed people for no good reason(s), and he seems to want to do it again:



[edit on 03/15/2008 by Chad Andrew]



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chad AndrewBecause he seems to be a murderer, and a liar, who killed people for no good reason(s),


Provide your evidence or post a retraction. Come on, if you call someone a murderer you'd better be able to prove it.



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by heliosprime
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


Because just as with John Kerry, he is a fake.


And your proof that Kerry is a fake is what? The swiftboatfortruth liars? The ones who were proven never to have served on boats with Kerry? The ones who were proved not to have been present at the actions for which he was awarded the Silver Star?

Oh, looks like that is who you were listening to, 'cause you're waiting for a repeat...


As this goes forth you can expect many former POW's to come out against this idiot.


Which is exactly what won't happen.

For a couple of reasons:

1. Kerry was attacked because he was a Democrat.
Kerry was attacked because he was a Democrat who served.
Kerry was attacked because he was a decorated veteran Democrat facing off against a Republican draft-dodger who was claiming to be stronger on "National Security". The only way for W to beat Kerry was to call Kerry a liar so loudly you drowned out the truth.

2. McCain is a Republican.
McCain is a Republican who not only flew jets, but who volunteered to do so, who turned up to all his parades and also did it in a warzone. McCain is a Republican who flew jets in a warzone and was shot down and injured and refused to jump the queue to return home.
Because he refused to jump the queue to return home McCain is permanently crippled.

So, therefore, 1) Let's see you spin that.

and 2) the other guests at the Hanoi Hilton have had years to blacken McCain's name, they could have done it eight years ago. They didn't then, which means they won't now.

Regardless of the truth or not (absolute crap as we know it is) of this particular "McCain Caused Forrestal Fire" story, you'll be waiting a long, long time for any USN or USAF POWs to publicly accuse McCain of lying about his service.

But, hey, that's okay. You bought the crap about Kerry and you've bought this bull# about McCain without even checking if there was a warranty or a cooling-off period. Even after others have debunked it. Good to see you reading a few replies before jumping in and posting...



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 10:17 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Wow, that clears up a lot of things. Here I was, thinking it was the faulty switch on the F4 that fired a Zuni in error and hit McCain's aircraft (or the one next to him).

Guess the Navy investigation was all wrong, and some crackpot on the Internet has the real truth.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by RexxCrow
I bet that he was made into a POW in order to bury this story so that his Political career could be ushed back from what would otherwise have been utter death. I always felt his POW story was BS.


WTF?

You are saying he purposely got himself shot down to be tortured by the North Vietnamese to escape punishment? You have to be yanking me!



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Mccain looks so different as a young man, he look's pretty handsome actually.

Anyway I hope he doesn't become president.

[edit on 21-6-2008 by _Phoenix_]



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Can anyone tell me if crashing (or otherwise losing) multiple planes is normal? I don't know -- it is an honest question for information.

Although it seems pretty high to me, it might be a reasonable number.

Also, is it even true that McCain crashed five different planes? I see on the web that there isn't any agreement to the actual number. It looks like he was shot at twice, the final time being when he was taken as a POW.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Funny how many people are accepting this at face value without bothering checking the source. If it's on the internet, it must be true!


But everything on the internet IS true...



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Buck Division
Is it even true that McCain crashed five different planes? I see on the web that there isn't any agreement to the actual number. It looks like he was shot at twice, the final time being when he was taken as a POW.


Okay -- there is a great and objective article on McCain on Wikipedia. (I should have known that.)

en.wikipedia.org...

According to that article, he crashed two planes and almost crashed a third by flying it into power lines. That was on the USS Intrepid, and USS Enterprise.

Then he had the USS Forrestal incident. This was not really a crash, but his plane was destroyed. Another Wikipedia article addresses this, and doesn't implicate McCain.

en.wikipedia.org...

Finally, he was shot down and captured, flying is 23rd mission over Vietnam, approximately four months after the Forrestal incident.

So it is a stretch to say he lost five planes, but there is some basis for truth (and room for exaggeration also.)

Edit: Still looking for information on air crash numbers per Navy pilot. Any help here would be appreciated.

[edit on 21-6-2008 by Buck Division]



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
This thread is true. I was taught about this incident during shipboard Damage Control training in 1984. I watched a training film called the USS Forrestal Incident. I could not find that film available on the internet, but I did find this clip that shows the tragedy unfolding....



Though one can argue of McCain's guilt... he IS the pilot of the plane that started this entire incident.



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by yankeerose
This thread is true.


Wrong. This thread is wrong.


I was taught about this incident during shipboard Damage Control training in 1984.


And you were taught that John McCain caused the fire?


I watched a training film called the USS Forrestal Incident.


And that film said John McCain caused the Forrestal fire?


I could not find that film available on the internet, but I did find this clip that shows the tragedy unfolding....


Yes, could you please show us which is John McCain's Hot-Rod sitting in the 'cat queue and which is the Phantom behind which he has set on fire...


Though one can argue of McCain's guilt... he IS the pilot of the plane that started this entire incident.


No, one cannot argue about his guilt. Which part of "Zuni Rocket" don't you get?


Originally posted by Retseh
When the F-4 pilot switched from external to internal power, there was a surge through the firing circuit, the weapons mode selector was set to the starboard Zuni pack, and it fired the first rocket in sequence. This travelled across the deck and hit the drop tank of an A-4 PARKED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DECK knocking it loose, the pilot of that aircraft was either John McCain or Fred White, it has never been determined which one. The impact also knocked 2 x 1000lb bombs loose. This spilled fuel which was ignited either by sparks or the rocket motor,


So, HOW is John McCain the pilot that started the entire incident?

AND where in this video does it show McCain setting a Phantom on fire with his re-heater?




posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 08:48 AM
link   


This is part 1 of 5 of a documentary that retells the Forrestal Incident. According to this documentary, John McCain is actually the first victim of a chain of events that resulted in one of the worst maritime incidents involving a shipboard fire. I find this documentary credible because it never even mentions McCain by name, it only references his plane as being the one hit by the Zuni.

As HowlrunnerIV points out... if the aft of his plane was facing outboard, there is no way a wet-start would have resulted in the carnage that followed.

I do find it questionable that McCain was transferred with the wounded so quickly. Perhaps the scuttlebutt aboard the Forrestal was that he was responsible? Perhaps his quick transfer was for his own protection until an investigation could be completed?

Regardless, McCain is a veteran and a deserves to be treated as such. I could find no evidence, other than rumor, to implicate the man of any wrong doing in the Forrestal Incident.

I stand corrected. Or, as a wise Officer once said to me... "I am never wrong, only misinformed".



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Here is the really TRUE part of this whole thing.

During this general election the use of rumors, half truths and out right lies will be used against the 2 candidates to smear them.

So the true part is this story, rumor, lie what ever you choose to label it, will be used against MCcain, and the lay people who do not do any research will take it as truth. They will share the story with others and the older crowd who do not use the internet will to some extent buy it, hook line and sinker.

The veterans will have the mind set "does not surprise me, Ive seen some strange stuff" Some wont care, some will.

We are as some need to be reminded, talking about sheeple. Not everyone is in the research the truth mind set as some of you are.



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Buck Division
Still looking for information on air crash numbers per Navy pilot. Any help here would be appreciated.


Finally, after a lot of searching, I've found this statistic. It looks like the average number of "Class A Mishaps" for the Navy is around 2.5 per 100 thousand flight hours, for "high risk" pilots:

safetycenter.navy.mil...

For all pilots, this drops down to around 1.5 per 100 thousand flight hours. (I guess this includes ALL flights, not just high risk flights.)

safetycenter.navy.mil...

A "Class A Mishap" is where a plane is destroyed.

www.tpub.com...

This statistic is from 2002 to 2007, so it doesn't cover the time that McCain was serving.

#

Bottom line: It appears that McCain may have had a few more Class A Mishaps than normal.

One final comment: Is McCain sloppy? Or is he just a very aggressive guy who pushes the envelope? If you want to criticize and detract from McCain for crashing multiple planes, that seems fair. But you also have to give him credit for surviving these crashes.

McCain DOES appear to be a survivor.






top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join