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.

 

Did U.S. Gov’t Lie about TWA Flight 800 Crash?

page: 1
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Ex-Investigators Seek Probe as New Evidence Emerges

Democracy Now! Interview with Investigators.


Seventeen years ago, TWA Flight 800 crashed off Long Island, killing all 230 people aboard. The official government investigation blamed mechanical failure, but now a group of former investigators are petitioning the National Transportation Safety Board to reopen the probe, saying the original report was falsified. Was the plane accidentally shot down by the U.S. Navy conducting a nearby exercise, or was it a terrorist attack? We speak to the filmmakers behind a new documentary on the crash, "TWA Flight 800," former CBS News producer Kristina Borjesson and Tom Stalcup, a physicist and co-founder of Flight 800 Independent Researchers Organization. We also play an extended excerpt of the film "Shadows of Liberty," which also explores the controversy.


Take a look at the video before you comment.

TWA 800 is an old conspiracy theory. Witnesses on the ground reported seeing a streak of light heading toward TWA 800 before the crash. The Navy was holding live fire exercises the night of the crash and actually ran off in the opposite direction after the crash. They also were not forthcoming with information, only providing half of the radar information. A large corridor near the ships had been restricted airspace. Perhaps TWA 800 didn't get the message? The theory for years has been that TWA was shot down by three missiles.

I'm sure many ATS members can talk about this subject at length and I would like to hear what you think about it.




posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Great catch and good topic to reconsider.

I'd throw another thought on the fire like a log to ponder.

I came to understand that at least earlier series of the Stinger man-portable Anti-Air missile had a very special feature to it. It may not be that way now..I just don't know. I know what I read and heard many years ago...

The special feature, as I understood it, was the ability to launch with an unprimed/unarmed warhead by design. The end result? It's not a missile anymore ...it's a rocket assisted bullet of BIG caliber.

So..what would it look like if a missile in kinetic mode punched an Airliner through and through, passing through some nasty things as it went? Might look a lot like TWA 800..huh?



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   
I think it's a crying shame.
History shows us that if enough time passes between the 'lie' and the 'truth' it lessons the impact to a negligible level.
The 'PTB' don't even have to worry about monetary compensation....since any funds would come out of the tax-payers pockets.
Any 'sins' of the past can ( and are) always be blamed on past administrations, and 'their' corruption.
Fake shock and outrage, a few carefully worded announcements, and 'Damage Control' takes care of the majority of public opinion.
edit on 20000001010America/Chicago311 by nugget1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   


Old doc about 800 covering Sanders and witness testimony. The most disturbing part for me is the involvement of the CIA. After the NTSB determined it was mechanical failure there was simply no need for the CIA to be involved,



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   
So I guess I've been a conspiracy nut for 17 years now. This tragedy was my eye-opener.

Before that, I was a hard boiled, Fox News kool-aid drinking, government-is-good-as-long-as-it-is-republican-only sheeple.
That doesn't mean I'm a democrat now by any means. I'm just not a sheeple anymore.

I think it was shot down by us or the Israelis or the two together because what's-his-name was on board.
Seriously, I can't remember his name.



posted on Dec, 24 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Yup the government shot it down that's why Boeing gets some pretty good contracts to help cover the cost of the false blame. Ask anybody who was an airline mechanic back then they all knew but couldn't talk.



posted on Dec, 25 2013 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 

I have been interested in air crash investigations. I found a youtube of the NTSB report of TWA 800. It concluded explosion from electrical spark in the center fuel tank. You know I bought the whole thing. Looked like all the other careful NTSB investigations. Then I read the book by James Sanders. Sad to say it was another cover up in the long list of misdeeds of the government. I already knew the navy had a history of lying.



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Deliberate disinformation. The witnesses claim to see streaks of light going forward and going away from the airliner along with the explosion. At 16 miles down range it would be impossible to hear and see at the same time due to the fact that light travels much faster than sound.

Forensic radar data shows plainly that nothing crossed the jets flight path any closer than 5 miles.

Hundreds of people on board any Navy ship would have seen the deployment of the missile. The Navy can only discipline officers when it comes to any kind of coverup. Enlisted men and non commissioned officers can't be barred from any type of investigation. Not to mention the millions of dollars they would be offered by sleazy tabloids.



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


I have enjoyed this site for the last 15+ years and never joined but wanted to voice my opinion on Flight 800.

I was one of the vessels that responded that night, spending almost 18 hours on site and to this day, I do not believe the official report.

Rik



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 




If this is true dear readers what else would the PTB hide and cover up. The PTB have so many skeletons in the closet it is only a matter of time.



Good thing for them we are weak of mind and heart and nothing I mean nothing will come of it. We will talk it over and debate the finer points and then forget it in a week or two.




Remember the embassy in Libya...............This is the new way of things apathy has a tight hold on everyone.
edit on 26-12-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
Great catch and good topic to reconsider.

I'd throw another thought on the fire like a log to ponder.

I came to understand that at least earlier series of the Stinger man-portable Anti-Air missile had a very special feature to it. It may not be that way now..I just don't know. I know what I read and heard many years ago...

The special feature, as I understood it, was the ability to launch with an unprimed/unarmed warhead by design. The end result? It's not a missile anymore ...it's a rocket assisted bullet of BIG caliber.

So..what would it look like if a missile in kinetic mode punched an Airliner through and through, passing through some nasty things as it went? Might look a lot like TWA 800..huh?


I think that this 'bullet' round, or 'shabat' as it was called, was for extremely close range. The guidance system on these things were really designed to fly the warhead up a tailpipe, or explode extremely close to the fuselage if it could not make a direct hit. That would have been a rather long range shot, and doubt that a solid round would bring a plane like that down, however, i guess it all depends on where it was hit.

BTW: Also, in retrospect, I believe these kinds of solid rounds were tipped with depleted uranium, as they were designed to penetrate armor. Probably would have just gone cleanly right through, if it hit a soft target. Also, material like this leaves a residue which would probably have been easy to trace.
edit on 26-12-2013 by charlyv because: another thought



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by charlyv
 

I gotta mention on this.. Disregard all I said above for an alternative firing mode for the Stinger. I'm digging into the field manuals and training material for the system circa mid 80's and not finding it. I'm 99% certain it was as I described for the demo I saw. I recall precisely which switch is supposed to disarm the explosive warhead for a kinetic shot ..

Still.. 99.99999% is still not sure and without proof I thought I'd easily find? Well.... It's opinion and bad form. So never mind.. I appear to have been wrong here. Heck.. it happens..

(sheepish smile)



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   

spooky24
Deliberate disinformation.


If you will only take the time to watch this entire documentary, I think you'll easily gain a different point of view.

When you have FBI men caught on camera sneaking into a crime scene reconstruction and moving color-coded & cataloged pieces of wreckage to fit the "official" story, something is very, very wrong.

Very well made. I would have paid to see it in the theater. Done with class, too. They don't mention it happened during the lead up to an election. The only mention of Clinton is in the credits at the end of the movie. His administration declined comment on the incident...




posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by RikRudd
 


Would be real nice of you to expand on that a bit!

Thanks in advance



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by charlyv
 

I gotta mention on this.. Disregard all I said above for an alternative firing mode for the Stinger. I'm digging into the field manuals and training material for the system circa mid 80's and not finding it. I'm 99% certain it was as I described for the demo I saw. I recall precisely which switch is supposed to disarm the explosive warhead for a kinetic shot ..

Still.. 99.99999% is still not sure and without proof I thought I'd easily find? Well.... It's opinion and bad form. So never mind.. I appear to have been wrong here. Heck.. it happens..

(sheepish smile)


I don't think you were wrong. The official "Stinger" is a heat seeker, but it's early roots came from basically the same launching package used as a tank buster and also used against low flying helicopters.



posted on Dec, 26 2013 @ 11:56 PM
link   
I wasn't into stuff deeply enough to be in the know about TWA 800, but if I had to guess that our government could cover up wrong-doing or an attack they didn't want to let get out, I'd say it's far more likely this one could be covered over than ever 9/11 could be.

After all, look how well they're clamping down on Benghazi, and you would have similar personnel management issues here.



posted on Dec, 27 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Flight 800 represents to me that time just before the internet when the corrupt elements within our Gov. could spin an event to achieve a goal way more easily than they can today,... they could have taken out that jet just to kill one person who knows...

Knowing what we know today,... these were the early days of getting away with horrendous stuff that has emboldened them so much ...

And now more than a decade after their biggest con-job (9/11) they are pretty much untouchable so now they really only have to be afraid of themselves...



posted on Dec, 27 2013 @ 07:21 AM
link   
There is so much there that to hazard a guess without watching puts you at a disadvantage...

The absurdity of the spark & fuel tank is addressed in the documentary, pure bunk. The pattern of melted exterior wing covering would kill that theory in a truly objective investigation.

As we were watching the medical examiner give that highly unusual press conference after Sandy Hook, I told my wife that the last time I'd seen a man that uncomfortable was when the guy had to give the "findings" of the Flight 800 investigation with all those armed FBI agents lined up in back of him.



posted on Dec, 27 2013 @ 07:37 AM
link   
The only ship anywhere near the planes flight path, and would have any chance at all of attacking the aircraft was USS Albuquerque. It is a Angeles-class attack submarine that fires Cruse missiles and attack anti-surface Harpoon missiles. It doesn't even have radar capable of locking firing sequences on any airplane.

It must have a super secret nano thermite guided robotic direct energy weapon taken from the pages of Red She Hulk.



posted on Dec, 27 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Someone please explain to me why the Navy would be shooting down a passenger airline?



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join