<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110642656.38d09483d4a6d54f50ab8ddb8ccbf067@teranews...
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110544815.21225b56592edcc9d08b3fd66ce10ebb@teranews...
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<1110479972.817643.93170@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>...
tw wrote:
I also remember the State department saying that they thought 10
stingers were smuggled into the country across the Mexican
boarder
-
THIS WAS about a week before the fatal F800 episode. Possibly
they
were leftovers from Afghanistan/Russia war.
Michael, TWA800 was 14 miles off shore at 13,700 feet. There is NO
WAY a
stinger fired from the shore coudl have got anywhere near it. It
woudl be an
incredible flujke if someone stood in a boat directly underneath
TWA800
could hit it.
According the the FBI the missile range was plausible.
Nope,. or do you have a cite? The FBI TREATED it as a missile attack
from the beginning, and coached the witnesses accordingly.
Of course, what the witnesses described was not any known MANPAD
missile because every witness who mentions a "flare", "streak of
light" etc says they saw it rise, then come down as a fireball. Now,
WE KNOW TWA800 was at 13,700 feet, and in order for what teh witnesses
saw to have been a missile, itwoul have to have been a missile in
boost at 13,700 feet. Only very big missiles are still in boost (i.e.
produceing a "flare" or "streak of light" at that altitude.
Hence, it was not a stinger. Or do you have a rational argument
against that?
Hey Goony, no one said they saw a "flare" or "streak of light" at the
level of the plane, they saw those things down near the surface on
it's way up,
Really? Got a cite?
Micahel posted plenty of site that told what the witnesses saw, I
remember them cleary
LOL! Obviously you remember wrong, seeing as I can produce cites from
witnesses who describe the "flare" as being at the same height as the
aircraft. (hardly surprising as the "flare" was alomst certainly the burning
aircraft)
as reporters questioned people live on the local
news for hours after the event.
Ah, so you don't have a cite, why not simply say so? Wheras I DO have a
cite, three in fact, from witnesses saying it WAS at the level of the plane,
so you lose again! (no wonder you snipped it, you fucking lying coward)
WRONG: http://www.ntsb.gov/events/TWA800/exhibits/Ex_4B.pdf
Witness 243
"the flyingobject was relatively slow in flying up and took about four or
five seconds before hitting.."
Witness 216
"observed a flare going vertically down and a horizontal explosion about 1/2
way down"
Witness 562
First observed the flare "15 degrees above the horizon" at 13,700 feet,
TWA800 appeared to be about 14.6 degrees above the horizon.
Before you said "many witnesses" claimed to see a "projectile". Of
course, no such witness says any such thing (and I leave it up to the reader
to decide if a "projectile" 5 feet long would be visible from 12 miles
away..)
Stop distorting things to fit you story.
I'm not, you are. You have a load of "half remembered" CNN reports to go
on - I, on the other hand, choose to examine the actual witness reports
No one saw a flare up at the planes level.
WRONG: http://www.ntsb.gov/events/TWA800/exhibits/Ex_4B.pdf
Witness 243
"the flyingobject was relatively slow in flying up and took about four or
five seconds before hitting.."
Witness 216
"observed a flare going vertically down and a horizontal explosion about 1/2
way down"
Witness 562
First observed the flare "15 degrees above the horizon" at 13,700 feet,
TWA800 appeared to be about 14.6 degrees above the horizon.
So there's three witnesses how either claim to have seen the "flare" go up
to
the aircraft's altitude or who witnessed the "flare" at the same elveation
above the horizon as the aircraft.
There are no doubt many more, but that's enough to contradict you, so I'll
stop there.
.
