TWA Flight 800

25 posts / 0 new
Last post
bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture
TWA Flight 800

I have been arguing for years that TWA 800 was brought down by one of our own Navy's missles back in '96. As usual, I was scoffed and blown off as the paranoid, ex-cop [that I am]. But now I get to say "I told you so" as new testimony by six retired members of the original investigation now allege they were not allowed to pursue logical steps during their investigation.

Is it so hard to believe that our government would cover up such a horrendous military blunder? I think not! So listen with an open mind, oh yea skeptic sheeple and be prepared...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/18/twa-flight-800-investigators-break-silence-in-new-documentary-claim-original/

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/19/us/twa-crash-claim/index.html

Stay tuned for more information from the grassy knoll...

field_vote: 
0
No votes yet
Anonymous (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Nonsense! Do you really believe the U.S. Military did this and has been able to keep the secret for so long? Amusing. In spite of overwhelming physical evidence of a center fuel tank exploding outwards and no physical evidence of a missile strike, the conspiracy theories abound for the gullible.

You might want to authenticate the credentials of the " 6 retired members of the original investigation."

Also check into the motivations of those behind the documentary production.

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

I have a different idea Mr. Anonymous, pay attention to what these former investigators have to say. If you're so knowledgeable in aviation, tell me how many times has the FBI commandeered a plane crash investigation? The answer is never. Even Pan Am 103 wasn't investigated until requested by Scotland's constabulary! And that was only AFTER the Libyians claimed responsibility.

Explain why eye witness accounts of a trail coming from the ocean to the plane have been omitted from the FBI's witness report? Why were these same witnesses banned from the NTSB Public Hearing? Excerpt from that hearing; "the FBI… objects to requests to disclose or include in the public docket of any FBI FD-302s or summaries of FD-302s prepared by the NTSB that report the results of any interviews or reinterviews of the 244 eyewitnesses whose reports were examined by the CIA in connection with it's analysis and to calling any eyewitnesses to testify at the public hearing."

O.K. Mr. Anonymous, please explain why a 1997 NTSB study showed that 94% of the witnesses interviewed claimed the streak rose from the surface? Another study completed after the 2nd NTSB Hearing in 2000 posted a 93% number and the witnesses were again banned from the hearing.

You want me to authenticate? I'd like you to refute ANY of the statistics I just gave you! As for motivation, it's obvious! You say conspiracy theories are for the gullible but I say those who accept conclusions that contradict overwhelming eye witness accounts are sheeple left over from Jonestown... Care for some Koolaide?

Anonymous (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Sigh, all of the so called "statistics" that you cite have been previously debunked and explained by persons more familiar with the details than both you and I. Of course, I'm sure you will tell us that they are also in on the coverup with the thousands of others who have been able to miraculously keep the "secret".

Indeed, standing by for more from the grassy knoll, put the tin foil hats on and watch out for those chemtrails!

Anonymous (not verified)
Anonymous's picture
bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

That's a strong retort! I guess the quotation marks make it so? While you stand idley by with your head in the sand and wearing your tin foil hat, learn how to spell your name...

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Hey no name, another quality retort! With all due respect to John, what answer would you expect from him? He sez in the article the CVR is partly a reason to conclude it's an accident.

Well, the CVR shuts off instantaineously with no comments from the crew, I say an indication of external causes cuz mechanical fuel problems would have had a reaction from any competant crew.

Furthermore, the FDR shows no anomolies NOW but read this:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/TWA/OVERPRESSURE/overpress.html

Predictably, the change is found at the very end of the data record. The data lines which indicate the existence of an overpressure wave from the outside environment, the data lines the NTSB cannot explain, have been deleted.

In addition, the FDR info shows the aircraft dropped 4k' in altitude and 198 kts in a fraction of a second - a physical impossibility! But an extertnal air pressure change, like an explosion, could cause those readings to change like that. Given the fact that the NTSB has removed the ending data, I say a more likely explanation.

So far the score is Bob 3, no name zero! Try producing some FACTS to back up your position pal. "Because I say so" worked for my father but then I grew up...

Anonymous (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Your source is http://whatreallyhappened.com? Very credible, score another one for yourself. There is a reason that police departments task detectives and not cops with investigating.

JB (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Hey Anonymous,
Your utter refusal to consider the possibility of an alternate scenario to the government explanation shows your inability to not only think outside the box, but also your inability to think and analyze with subjective reasoning. Your responses are the same concisely scripted generic responses that I see all the time these days. This leads me to believe that you are either one of the governments traitorous minions that are paid food stamps to further propagate the governments lies and deception, or more likely a weak and scared coward, never questioning your Masters with your blind Allegiance, loyalty and unwavering obedience. You probably believe Superman is real and run around flapping your arms and have a screaming orgasm when you hear the “Truth, Justice and the American Way” part. Which, in case you did not know, ended in 1913 when Woodrow Wilson secretly let the Feds sneak back in at the Jekyll Island meeting over Christmas break..
A missile took out TWA 800. The warning area was hot and the Navy had war games going on underneath the flight path. Close to a 100 witnesses from different locations and perspectives all described the same basic scene, a bright streak of light went up from the ocean and hit the plane. Why is so hard to conclude it was hit by a missile. The FBI discredits every single one of those 100 witnesses that describe the same scene. Why would DoD take charge of the recovery effort and only release the salvage to the NTSB AFTER they inspected it. Why did President Clinton sign an executive order 13039 to withdraw the protection provided by the Whistleblower Protection Act to the Navy divers who recovered the wreckage? 13039 was issued with no public announcement, and it was quickly removed from the White House Web site. HMMMMM what’s up with that?

Is it just a coincidence that every American president assassinated was opposed to or stood in the way of the Federal Reserve Bank? Andrew Jackson did not renew the charter and survived two assassination attempts. Then Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley (to get Teddy R. in) and Kennedy (Exec Order 11110)
Don’t believe in conspiracies? This is from President Kennedy’s speech at the Waldoff-Astoria Hotel April 27, 1961:
"For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence — on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
"Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War; in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match….

Consider that the Pentagon is probably has the best surveillance in the world. Cameras everywhere at every angle and guess what? The only video the public was allowed to view was from a stop and rob across the street that had a sign that blocked the view of the plane. Not one of the pentagon’s numerous cameras was released because of a "national security concern". Yea uh huh Okay right. But then again it would be a national security concern when the world saw it was something other than a 757.
I do not have a tin foil hat; It is not that difficult to use subjective reasoning to see through the continual deception and lies of the government. Ever notice that so many things are called the opposite of what it really is. Patriot Act? Is it patriotic to have a police state with the cops shooting innocence people with utter impunity? Recording and storing all of our communications? The terrorist of the world is the US government using drones to bomb and kill people in sovereign nations. The Iraq war was justified by fraudulent means and Saddam was not hostile to the USA. Proactive wars? When did it become okay to take out someone because they may, might, could or have the means to possibly hurt you. The Patriot Act is authorization for our perpetual war on everything. Homeland Security? Thousands of illegals (oh wait I mean undocumented workers) running across the border? Federal Reserve when it is the Federal depletion of our monetary system? I am ready for the battle when it comes and it will be interesting to see how the cops act when they have return fire instead of the one sided system they have now. Anonymous will be hiding in his cellar trembling with his keyboard, wet pants and a cell phone set on redial for 911.
Good luck.

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Hey, anonymous I'm upgrading your argument to ignoramus status mostly cuz your facts argue my case, but keep trying. FACT one, detectives ARE cops!

Now, in your factual article it reads '...any air traffic without a transponder will not be seen.' is not true by any stretch of even your imagination. Any student pilot can tell you that ATC gives you traffic alerts ANY TIME you're on a flight plan and conflict is a possibility even if the other aircraft [or object] is not txp equipped.

The 1st hyperlink takes you to a quote from James Kallstrom, FBI lead investigator; ""We do have information that there was something in the sky. A number of people have seen it. A number of people have described it similarly. It was ascending."The Washington Times, NY Times, NY Post and AP all echoed the same thing.

"Almost immediately, information was leaked by the FBI and the Navy which implied that there was an object of extreme biological danger aboard Flight 800, one which posed a serious risk to anyone who picked it up." according to your factual article. Really? Something so dangerous to cause the US Navy to expand the search area TWENTY MILES further than the plane could have glided if it were still in tact? Yet it was safe to expose 230 pax and crew to this same extreme biological danger?

And why did the US Navy become so involved in a civilial accident? Why did they lie initially saying no ships were anywhere near that area when, in fact, 3 subs and the Big Stick were all there? Why did the Wyoming, a nuclear ballistic missile sub just out of Groton on sea trials fail the trials and its skipper and XO get relieved of command immediately thereafter?

Your factual article has so much fodder for my cannons that I can't thank you enough! I could go on and on but I'll sum up with these quotes; "The assumption is that almost 200 people who were actually there don't know what they saw, but that a bunch of bureaucrats who were not there do!...There are, needless to say, many problems with this story." That, sir, succinctly indicates the tenure of the entire investigation.

Come back again when you have more FACTS...

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Moe, Larry... the cheese! Get 'em JB...

Anonymous (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Negative sir, I do not utterly refuse to consider the possibility of an alternate scenario, just not the scenarios that you two plebes postulate.

And you are led to believe that because I refuse to believe the preposterous USN shootdown scenario, I am one of the "traitorous minions" and I have "blind allegiance" and "unwavering obedience"
to my "masters?"

So I can only assume that you would use the same terminology when describing the thousands of participating USN personnel who would have full knowledge of this coverup and who also have "unwavering obedience? and "blind allegiance" for keeping the secret and not coming forward to expose the "coverup."

Thanks for the unrelated Federal Reserve, Iraq war and Patriot Act history lesson rant, I'm sure it somehow makes sense in your mind. Do you somehow connect them to the TWA event?

AN ON (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Okay, you're correct, detectives are cops, but my point was, you have no job history as a detective. Leave the sleuthing to the trained sleuths.

Now then, you'll notice I used my initials, just like your anonymous pal JB did. I noticed that you didn't berate him for not using his name as you frequently do others for the same offense. Perhaps it is because he agrees with you? Are you exhibiting a double standard here? Anonymous is OK with you as long as they agree with you. Right then, next item.

You associate the large NAVY involvement in the search for TWA debris as somehow implicating them in causing and, or covering up the incident. You ask, "why did the US Navy become so involved in a civilian accident?" Gee, political pressure perhaps?

I'm sure you recall the huge involvement of US military assets, including the US NAVY in the JFK Jr. civilian accident?

Are we to now believe that his aircraft was shot down also based on the involvement of the military? Your logic is absurd.

Finally, your misunderstanding of ATC radar capabilities is comical.

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Hey Anonymous, I'm feeling left out! You respond to JB but don't have any comments on the FACTS that I gave you! Why is that? Ooh, ooh, I know! It's because you don't have any legitimate answers to dispute those facts.

You aske JB; "And you are led to believe that because I refuse to believe the preposterous USN shootdown scenario, I am one of the "traitorous minions" and I have "blind allegiance" and "unwavering obedience" to my "masters?" Ooh, ooh I know that answer too! I say no, you're just a very ignorant civilian. You're one of the 96.4% of the US population who have NEVER SERVED this country nor NEVER will! You're one of the 96.4% who have the ability to speak openly regardless of the garbage you spew because of those who serve to protect that right!

You're also one of the multitude who have no idea what the military machine can do to a young man or woman serving this country. Over 70% of those who serve are under 30 years old and less than 10% of enlisted personnel have more than a high school diploma. So if you ask this veteran 'is it possible to subdue or contain people with DIRECT KNOWLEDGE of this incident'? The overwhelming answer is, as we said back in my day, YOU'RE F---ING "A" TWEEDY they can! Go back to my USS Wyoming example.

And that doesn't mean they're "traitorous minions" or have "blind allegiance" and "unwavering obedience" to any "masters". They're the elite few who raise their right hand and promise to give all, including their lives, so the rights of anonymous, ignorant civilians are protected.

And that brings me back to your title, anonymous. If you have ANY self-esteem, post your name. If you're that smart and/or knowledgeable, post your name. If you truly believe that what you say is accurate, post your name. If you believe that your opinion is something of value, post your name. But on the other hand if, like the other 96.4% of this population, your gonads are tucked neatly in your anal aperture then continue to post anonymously. I'll just call you Vagina Wolfe...

AN ON (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Well of course you're feeling left out. Because you have no worthwhile personal relationships, your life is spent spewing your misguided views on all sorts of subjects of which you have minimal knowledge. When others dispute your foolishness, you resort to childish attacks on their character, another subject of which you have no knowledge.

For the record, I did serve and have considerably more than a high school diploma.

Also for the record, I did respond to your previous barely coherent rant, the moderator has not posted it as of this writing. In that post, I noted your double standard regarding posting of names. I suspect you also apply similar double standards to other areas of morals, ethics, and generally accepted civil behavior.

It is pointless for me to comment on your poorly presented "facts" as they are from questionable sources that obviously you trust implicitly. (Insert quote regarding blind trust).

I'm not impressed by your vile choice of expletives, but I'm sure some of your like minded minions will be. May I suggest some anger management assistance, perhaps a mental health assessment?

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Hmmm... AN ON? As in ANONymous? How brilliant for an ostrich! I see my last blog was a direct hit. Tell me, does it hurt when you sit down? [insert quote for gonad location] BTW, when I referred to those who serve I didn't mean 'Welcome to Burger King, may I take your order'. Have a great day Ms Wolfe [insert quote for naming anonymous]...

An On (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Yes, you scored a direct hit. Whatever feeds your exceedingly unhealthy need to be correct. Your posts have all the indicators of one with several personality disorders.

Trying to get back on topic, your original post asks whether the government would attempt to cover up a military blunder such as the alleged shoot down of TWA 800. The answer of course is yes, they have shown the aptitude to do such.

However the real question is; Does the government have the ability and competency to pull off such a massive coverup involving huge amounts of physical evidence, multiple government agencies, multiple manufacturers of the hardware involved, academic experts and finally, the ability to silence the thousands of persons who were directly involved? Both yourself and JB have already attested to government incompetentcy in other matters and somehow you believe they were able to pull this one off???

Yet another indicator of mental irregularity

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

O.K. "AN ON", I guess I'm relegated to debating a nameless Asian short order cook cuz you sure as hell don't know aviation! Take the chop stix out of your ears and listen! In America, we respond to questions [问题] with answers [答案]. So instead of blithering randomly, retaliate to questions with DIRECT answers [直接的答案]!

1-How many times has the FBI commandeered a civilian plane crash investigation?

2-Explain why eye witness accounts of a trail coming from the ocean to the plane have been omitted from the FBI's witness report? Why were these same witnesses banned from the NTSB Public Hearing?

3-Explain why a 1997 NTSB study showed that 94% of the witnesses interviewed claimed the streak rose from the surface? Another study completed after the 2nd NTSB Hearing in 2000 posted a 93% number and the witnesses were again banned from the hearing?

4-Explain why the CVR shuts off instantaineously with no comments from the crew?

5-Explain how the FDR info shows the aircraft dropped 4k' in altitude and 198 kts in a fraction of a second? And why was that data changed in the official report?

6-Explain why radar data showed vehicle and/or object tracks within 10 nm of TWA flight 800 just before the accident? And 3 sequences of primary returns near TWA 800 that were only recorded by the Islip radar?

7-Explain why trace amounts of explosive residue were detected on three samples of material from three separate locations of the recovered airplane wreckage?

8-Explain why the testing of that trace evidence was done by Brookhaven National Laboratory whose initial report said no evidence of explosives yet the doctor performing the tests said his results were positive? This same Brookhaven funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science.

9-Explain how a single spark could ignite 17,000+ gallons of jet fuel with such a low vapor pressure?

Do I believe the gov't is capable of a cover-up and able to continue that cover-up in perpetuity? The answer is in JFK & JFK Jr., MLK, the USS Eldridge, Project Phoenix, MK Delta and many, many more FACTS about government cover-ups.

Now sir, trying to get back on topic as well, answer ANY 5 of these 9 questions with FACTS to refute them and we can continue this debate. That does not mean the use of quotation marks questioning origin.

FYI, for your edification, all cops are investigators; airborne objects do not require a txp [transponder] to be detected; and mental health assessment gives you an overall picture of how well you feel emotionally and how well you are able to think, reason, and remember. BOB PASCH is alive and well! How you doing?

http://www.towleroad.com/2013/06/flight800.html

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Consider this alternative:

(1) The site at which all particle beam accelerator technologies are
being developed and tested is the Brookhaven National Laboratories on Long Island - parallel to the flight path of TWA 800 and 12 miles
distant.

(2) The witnesses who reported seeing the "missile tail" almost
universally reported that the light path was illuminated in a searing
blue-green color. No rocket fuel ever employed by US military arsenals creates a blue green exhaust stream.

(3) For years, every night three 747's depart from Kennedy on their
way across the Atlantic. They are headed for Tel Aviv, Paris and
London, in that order, within 15 minutes of each other. This flight
schedule has not varied for more than 7 years. On the night TWA 800 was felled from the sky, the Tel Aviv flight was diverted at the last minute from its takeoff position - the official report says that the flight engineer advised the pilot that he had a red system warning light come on just as this plane was about to take off. Flight 800 was two planes behind. When it took off, it was in the airspace which would ordinarily have been occupied by the Tel Aviv flight on its normal run.

(4) The flight manifest for the Tel Aviv flight was seized within
minutes after the downing of TWA 800 - someone was standing at the console in the control center with their finger on the button, waiting for a signal. The flight manifest for the Tel Aviv flight has never been released - the odds are that it was destroyed and no longer exists.

One of the planes that went down in the air corridor in the so called Block Island Triangle was Swissair Flight 111. The plane left from New York and started reporting problems soon after the plane went down Sept. 2, 1998 . After the black boxes were recovered it was interesting to note that both tapes went blank before the plane crashed. As if they had been erased or shut off. Out of the 229 people who perished two of them were important figures at Brookhaven National Labs.

Is it coincidence that Brookhaven is entwined with all these events TWA 800, JFK Jr., Swiss Air 111, 1943 Philadelphia Experiment & 1980 Phoenix Project, Deep Sleep & Pandora in the 60's? Raise your eye brows if you will but I believe it is the sign of a healthy society that so many people are asking so many really tough questions.

John Goglia (not verified)
Anonymous's picture
AN ON (not verified)
Anonymous's picture

Thank you Mr. Goglia. Here is another commentary that I feel very accurately captures the mental state of the the self described, paranoid, former cop.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissus-in-all-us/200809/paran...

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

With all due respect John, Pappalardo has a lot of misinformation in his article. Under the Radar paragraph he states "...deployment records indicate there were none [warships] around that night..." which is not accurate. In fact there were four Navy vessels, three nuclear submarines [of varying classes] and an aircraft carrier, the Teddy Roosevelt, conducting 'classified' operations one of which, the Wyoming, was directly below 800. Not to mention that area is a MOA.

He fails to note a Navy P3 with state-of-the art airborne radar and all sorts of top secret gear, surveilance and acoustic gear that was almost directly above 800 and amazingly has nothing pertinent to add [one way or the other].

He also fails to mention the other radar hits near 800 with the profile of a Teledyne-Ryan surface launched drone that the Navy uses as target practice and a request from the FBI to Teledyne-Ryan to identify debris found in the wreckage believed to be a drone.

Sorry John, there's still just too many unanswered questions and facts that were blown off or ignored by the FBI & NTSB to make this a closed case, BTW, thanks for jumping in here [seriously!]

AN ON (not verified)
Anonymous's picture
bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Ouch! I'm crying inside...

bob.pasch
bob.pasch's picture

Yeah? Come on Pot Luc, do you call that a DIRECT ANSWER? Even this story asks some of the same questions YOU refuse to address! Unlike your last post where you simply insert links, I have given you the opportunity to refute FACTS from the investigation and cover-up, yes I said COVER-UP, that you are unable, incapable or just too damned ignorant to refute with YOUR OWN FACTS! I'll make it easier, answer just THREE of the questions from earlier.

The difference between you and me is that I am capable of thinking independantly and you cannot fathom anything on your own. You're an 18th century jester in a 21st century reality. A hundred years ago people laughed at flying machines and the man on the moon. But all the people with your tin hats have brought us to this level of technology. The next invention should enable time travel... so we can ship you back to 1705...

Log in or register to post comments