http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
Explosive Evidence in Wreckage
PETN and RDX
The explosives PETN and RDX were detected[6] and confirmed to exist by
the FBI between rows 15 and 25. Later, however, the FBI stated[7] that
these traces were consistent with explosives allegedly spilled during
a canine training exercise a few weeks before the crash.
This explosives "spill" was not reported until after[8] the detection
of PETN and RDX within the wreckage of F800, and the area of the spill
was inconsistent with the explosive traces detected in the wreckage.
Officer Burnette of the St. Louis Police Department, carrying out the
bomb sniffing exercise, failed to record the tail number of the wide
body plane in question, while two such TWA planes existed in close
proximity during the exercise. Burnette testified that he neither saw
nor heard any individuals aboard the plane during the exercise which
ended no earlier than 12:15 PM[9]. The wide body plane which later
flew as TWA Flight 800 left its St. Louis gate for Honolulu at 12:35
PM[10], fully catered, with all of its passengers and crew aboard.
Could officer Burnette neither see nor hear any passengers, crew, or
caterers 20 minutes before the plane left its gate? Did Burnette
conduct his exercise on a nearby, nearly identical TWA 747 which left
its gate at 1:30 PM[11]? Compounding this investigative error, if
Burnette did conduct his explosive training exercise on the 747 which
later flew as TWA Flight 800, why did the locations of the alleged
spills conflict with the traces detected with the F800 wreckage? The
questions raised by these lapses must be answered before any
investigating agency can attribute the PETN and RDX traces found
within the F800 wreckage to the above mentioned spill.
As it stands we are left with a glaringly well documented trail of
explosive residue throughout the body of the 747. Worse, the NTSB
inexplicably accepted the inadequate attempts by the FBI to explain
away this trail.
.
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
08 Mar 2005 08:22:29 AM |
|
|
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110291041.579a0942eeb7434ea51d5cb030a9474e@teranews...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
Explosive Evidence in Wreckage
Please indicate how a surface to air missile would leave explosive residue
on the airframe.
Please indicate what SAM are still in boost phase at 13,700 feet
Please indicate what platforms such missiles can be launched from
Please indicate how nobody noticed the musch greater pyrotechnics which
woudl accompany such a launch compared to a missile in flight.
PETN and RDX
...are PLASTIC explosives. Missile warheads don't use plastic explosives.LOL
The explosives PETN and RDX were detected[6] and confirmed to exist by
the FBI between rows 15 and 25. Later, however, the FBI stated[7] that
these traces were consistent with explosives allegedly spilled during
a canine training exercise a few weeks before the crash.
Sounds likely enough. After all, you want sniffer dogs to be able to find
plastic explosives don't you?
This explosives "spill" was not reported until after[8] the detection
of PETN and RDX within the wreckage of F800, and the area of the spill
was inconsistent with the explosive traces detected in the wreckage.
Says who?
Officer Burnette of the St. Louis Police Department, carrying out the
bomb sniffing exercise, failed to record the tail number of the wide
body plane in question, while two such TWA planes existed in close
proximity during the exercise. Burnette testified that he neither saw
nor heard any individuals aboard the plane during the exercise which
ended no earlier than 12:15 PM[9]. The wide body plane which later
flew as TWA Flight 800 left its St. Louis gate for Honolulu at 12:35
PM[10], fully catered, with all of its passengers and crew aboard.
Could officer Burnette neither see nor hear any passengers, crew, or
caterers 20 minutes before the plane left its gate? Did Burnette
conduct his exercise on a nearby, nearly identical TWA 747 which left
its gate at 1:30 PM[11]? Compounding this investigative error, if
Burnette did conduct his explosive training exercise on the 747 which
later flew as TWA Flight 800, why did the locations of the alleged
spills conflict with the traces detected with the F800 wreckage? The
questions raised by these lapses must be answered before any
investigating agency can attribute the PETN and RDX traces found
within the F800 wreckage to the above mentioned spill.
As it stands we are left with a glaringly well documented trail of
explosive residue throughout the body of the 747. Worse, the NTSB
inexplicably accepted the inadequate attempts by the FBI to explain
away this trail.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gob" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
08 Mar 2005 01:24:49 PM |
|
|
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:d0kc67$6c2$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110291041.579a0942eeb7434ea51d5cb030a9474e@teranews...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
Explosive Evidence in Wreckage
" Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Cmdr. William S. Donaldson,
III - USN, Ret. Aviation Mishap Analyst P.O. Box 90, Clements, Maryland
20624
April 5, 1999 Mr. Philip M. Condit The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707, Mail
Code 10-10 Seattle, WA 98124-2207
Mr. Gerald L. Gitner Trans World Airlines One City Center 515 North Sixth
St. St. Louis, MO 63101
Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Gentlemen, Over the last four
months our investigation into the loss of TWA Flight 800 has produced
information far surpassing that contained in our July 20, 1998 Interim
Report to Congress. We can now prove, before a jury or other independent
fact-finding body, that the aircraft was shot down. We can also explain why
the Administration covered it up and expose some of the methods they
employed to do so.
Your corporations are being scapegoated and defrauded by Administration
officials because, had the truth about this incident been reported before
November of 1996, it could have derailed the reelection of Clinton/Gore.
Exposed now, it could send guilty parties to jail for Misprision of Felony
Homicide. We can provide your attorney's with witnesses, documents, or
reference material that will support the following text: White House
knowledge of a threat prior to the loss of TWA Flight 800.
1. The Administration knew that in 1996, surrogates from rogue states had
access to MANPADS (Man Portable Air Defense Systems) or shoulder-fired
missiles in mid-eastern weapons bazaars. $5,000 would acquire the least
capable model, the Russian SA-7. $50,000 would buy the most capable, the
Chinese Vanguard, a deadly new missile upgraded from US Stinger technology
transferred to the Chinese in the early 90's. Superior to the Stinger, this
missile has a much longer range. The Administration also knew Iran had a
limited number of US Stinger missiles in inventory.
2. The Administration was aware that, worldwide, MANPADS missiles had
already claimed 26 civil transport aircraft and was only a matter of time
before a U.S. Flag carrier would be targeted and hit. They knew the
Administration had dodged a bullet in 1994 when Maryland State Police found
a fully armed French Mistral MANPADS missile ready to fire on its tripod
directly under a busy northeastern air route.
3. In response to sanctions unilaterally levied against Iran by Mr. Clinton
in 1995, Iranian surrogate's car bombed US troops in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
and later smuggled MANPADS missiles into the US from across the Canadian
border. Iranian officials warned the Administration that they considered
enactment of the Iran/Libya Sanctions Act tantamount to an act of war!
4. When Mr. Clinton signed the Iran, Libya Sanctions Act of 1996, a decision
was made by the Iranian Supreme Council to approve attacks on major American
targets. Terrorist surrogate groups from nine countries were summoned to
Tehran to meet with Iranian officials in June of 1996. Later that month, a
huge truck bomb was deployed against the US Air Force barracks complex at
Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. Three weeks later, TWA Flight 800 was shot
down only hours after an explicit warning of an attack was received in
London and Washington that taunted the President.
5. The White House, the CIA and the FBI were aware of the threat and they
knew preventing that attack was their primary responsibility.
6. We can show the Administration anticipated incorrectly that, if the
missiles were used, they would be targeted against Olympic air traffic
landing or taking off in the Atlanta area.
7. We can provide testimony that immediately after Flight 800 was shot down,
Mr. Clinton called an FBI command post supporting the Olympics and informed
them Flight 800 was downed with shoulder-fired missiles.
8. The White House, the CIA and the FBI political leadership have waged an
unrelenting disinformation campaign from the onset. This has ranged from the
White House spokesman stating, "Anyone in government that says this was a
missile only has half a brain", and to the CIA cartoon that libeled hundreds
of eyewitnesses.
Witnesses or "Untouchables"?
1. The day after Flight 800 was shot down, the Justice Department, helped by
1,000 FBI agents, began the process of converting hundreds of witnesses into
the first American "untouchable cast". The political leadership of the NTSB
aborted its mission in one surrender of its responsibilities after another.
When the Justice Department illegally ordered the NTSB crash investigators
to have no contact with witnesses or their statements, and the NTSB
complied, the investigation was over, the cover-up and Misprision of Felony
Homicide had begun.
2. At the NTSB Public Hearing in December of 1997, the word "witnesses" was
not even mentioned. Before and since, they have been ridiculed, slandered
and liabled in official videotapes and statements made by government
spokesmen.
3. On March 15, 1999 the derailment of the Spirit of New Orleans after she
hit a steel truck at a railroad crossing in Bourbonnaise IL, prompted a
media wide call for witnesses by NTSB officials. It seems a witness was
needed to prove the truck had driven around the safety gate. Apparently,
investigations are much simpler and witnesses more creditable for the NTSB
when there is no White House interest.
4. We have access to 107 witnesses on 4 aircraft, 19 boats, and 31 locations
ashore. They were located in a 360 circle around the missile engagement.
Their live testimony alone will prove the aircraft was shot down. This is
why the Justice Department has kept air crash investigators away from
witnesses for 2 1/2 years and also one reason they are conducting a
malicious show-trial prosecution of author and outside investigator James
Sanders and his wife. It's hard to interview witnesses from a Federal
prison. The FBI failed to identify and interview 17 of these people. Among
these 17 are witnesses on a boat who may have seen the escaping shooter.
Justice Department suppression of Missile Evidence
1. It appears, aggressive FBI missile-team field agents eventually solved
the problem as to the cause of the crash, but had no support in the FBI
leadership. In fact, the FBI leadership seems to have deliberately withheld
vital information from their own agents.
2. George Gabrial, the senior FBI Agent on Long Island and personal friend
of Mr. Kalstrom, was a close witness on his boat. We can provide witnesses
who overheard him say he believed what he observed was a missile. FBI
missile-team members did not know he was a witness until we informed them.
3. The FBI has videotape that was shown to military experts of a missile
shot from off the coast of Long Island that failed to engage a target. This
first attempt was nearly coincidental to the Khobar Towers attack 3 weeks
before Flight 800's loss.
4. By late September, 1996, FBI missile-team members had established
informal liaison with military missile guidance experts. By that time the
FBI knew witnesses at sea on all sides were pointing to a missile launch a
few miles southeast of Flight 800's explosion point. What they observed fit
the profile of a MANPADS missile engagement.
5. In December 1996, FBI missile team members told military experts that two
separate commercial fishermen dredged up and threw back a MANPADS first
stage, the missile ejector-motor can. The ejector motor, about the size of a
Coke can, fires in the tube, ejecting the missile, then drops in the water
when the missile 2nd stage booster ignites.
6. The fishing vessel Alpha Omega recovered one of these motor cans in early
October, 1996, while trawling for scallops about 2 nautical miles from
Flight 800's explosion point. The crewman, not realizing the importance of
his find, noted the two distinctive ignition wires attached to the can
before he threw it overboard.
7. Despite overwhelming forensic evidence of a weapon impact in the number 2
main tank of the left wing and witness testimony of a missile attack, the
Administration would not fund military missile experts or allow the FBI to
trawl for missile parts until after the November 1996 elections.
8. The Alpha Omega was one of five trawlers contracted by the Navy
Supervisor of Salvage for trawler operations. When FBI agents finally came
aboard in November 1996 to begin trawling and brought pictures of three
objects they were looking for, it was that point the crewman told them they
were too late, he had already found and discarded an ejector can!
9. Responding to the previous findings, Special Agents Bongardt and Otto
took a live ejector motor can from a Stinger missile aboard all the trawlers
under contract, showing it to captain and crew.
10. Interrogated for hours, the Alpha Omega crewman insisted the can he
found had the same features, ignition wires, etc. but was somehow different.
11. That interrogation should have prompted the FBI leadership to suspect
they may have been dealing with the longer-range Chinese Vanguard or Russian
SA16/18 missiles.
12. It is clear from the Supervisor of Salvage's operational trawling maps
depicting "missile firing zones" and the FBI Trawling Operations Manual in
our possession, that the Justice Department's intent was to find and hide
from "other Interested Parties", missile ejector cans, missile battery
cooling units and the last Flight 800 Scavenge Pump the NTSB was trying to
blame as a source of a spark.
13. The $5 million trawling operation was funded by NTSB, contracted to
civilian scallop boats through the Navy Supervisor of Salvage from 4
November 1996 until it was suddenly terminated on 30 April 1997, yet the
trawlers were manned 24 hours a day by teams of FBI agents. Up until 30
April 1997 the scallop boat captains had been told the operation would
continue indefinitely for months or even years. FBI agents got the word via
cell phone to shut down the operations. On two of the boats, when the
captains refused to stop until the Navy contractor on board told them to,
the agents threatened force to make the captains shut down. The first agent
backed down when the captain told him he would go anywhere at gunpoint, but
the agent could expect to be charged with piracy on the high seas when they
got ashore. The second agent backed down when the captain informed him that
he was armed also and he was the captain and they weren't going anywhere!
14. The FBI's trawling plan was flawed in the following ways.
a. The missile firing zones depicted on the charts were 1.75 NM and 2.7 NM
radius circles. These distances are accurate for two types of MANPADS but
the Chinese Vanguard exceeds those ranges.
b. They used the last transponder response from the aircraft as the aircraft
explosion point. The aircraft was travelling east over 2,900 feet between
each transponder response. A two-second error would move the trawling off by
1/4 mile.
c. They failed to notice, until December 1996, a recorded surface radar
contact only 2.9 NM from Flight 800 when it exploded!
d. They failed to identify that boat!
e. They failed to adjust the trawling lines to cover that boat's surface
track while it was in range of TWA Flight 800.
15. The FBI told military experts they had a witness who perfectly described
a MANPADS engagement terminating in an impact on Flight 800's left wing
root. It includes boost; sustainer-motor burn and total missile fly-out time
typical of the US Stinger and its copies.
16. Military thermal imaging of B747-100's provided to the FBI by China Lake
Naval Air Weapons Facility, indicate a MANPADS missile fired from a low
forward quarter would guide toward the three air pack exhaust ports,
directly under the center wing tank and not, as publicly stated for the
engine nacelles. See attached Thermal Imaging.
17. Military computer modeling of the TWA 800 engagement, using Stinger
data, shows the missile's velocity would degrade to 400 meters per second as
it climbed through 13,700 ft. This would cause the circular error
probability (CEP) to expand to 20 ft. or more, allowing an impact almost
anywhere on the aircraft.
18. Stinger guidance technology provides a last instant steer- forward
command to avoid a miss by flying through an engine exhaust plume. Such a
command would explain a missile, fired from in front, steering for the air
pack exhausts under the center wing, impacting forward on the left wing root
leading edge.
19. The Stinger, for example, has a two-pound warhead with three fusing
options, contact, penetration and time-out.
20. Using stinger missile fly-out data provided to the FBI by military
experts, the combined velocity of missile body and aircraft at impact would
be 1950 ft/sec.
21. If the cockpit voice recorder hasn't been tampered with, an audio
laboratory should be able to discern this velocity through its analysis of
recorded frequencies. This may be why the NTSB has refused to allow the
Cockpit Voice Recorder group to convene and study the data generated from
the Bruntingthorpe tests done in England.
22. E = ½ MV2 would predict kinetic energy available at impact of over 1.2
million foot pounds.
23. The kinetic energy from a missile body entering the number two main, ¾
full of fuel, at mach 1.8 would cause the tank to burst from hydraulic
overpressurization.
24. Fused for penetration, the two-pound high explosive warhead, bursting in
the fuel could impart an additional 200-PSI spike of hydraulic ram
overpressure.
25. Jet fuel is over 700 times the density of air. A MANPADS missile warhead's
fragments would be stopped in a few feet of fuel, negating high velocity
fragment damage to aircraft components. Mr. Kalstrom's public statements
repeatedly used the lack of high velocity fragment damage as an excuse to
ignore witnesses and shutdown the investigation.
26. The Navy China Lake missile impact "Quick Look Engineering Study"
identified 4 criteria for expected damage if a shoulder fired missile hit a
747-100 inboard main fuel tank. All four are caused by hydraulic over
pressurization of fuel tanks. All four are in evidence on the left wing.
None of these criteria have ever been seen in previous air crashes.
27. The China Lake report's first two recommendations were to detonate
shoulder-fired missile warheads in fuel tanks to determine if the fragments
would be trapped and to do live firing of these missiles at inboard main
tanks to compare to left wing damage on Flight 800.
28. Mr. Kalstrom ignored all seven recommendations; cherry picked statements
out of the China Lake report and used them out of context in the media to
argue the aircraft was not shot down.
29. When Mr. Kalstrom was faced with having to take action on the China Lake
report he chose to shut down the investigation.
30. At the time the FBI investigation was prematurely shut down in November
of 1997, the FBI had failed to identify a fast moving boat captured on radar
only 2.9 nautical miles from Flight 800 when it exploded. Mr. Schirilo, who
replaced Mr. Kalstrom, admitted that fact in a letter to Congressman
Traficant.
31. After his retirement, Mr. Kalstrom was taped stating the boat captured
on radar was really a helicopter. Considering the radar target was
non-transponder and was tracked on the surface at speed below 36 knots for
35 minutes prior to disappearing over the horizon, even FBI agents have
acknowledged Mr. Kalstrom's excuse is nonsense.
32. Witnesses afloat and ashore observed a six second missile burn (Stinger
rocket burn is 6 ½ seconds) coming from the near vicinity of the
unidentified boat.
33. Senior Justice Department officials need to be compelled to answer under
oath why testing essential to determine if Flight 800 was brought down by a
shoulder fired missile was not funded and why they ignored the forensic
evidence, military experts, witnesses and their own FBI field agents.
The search for the Black Boxes
1. Discovery of the plight of the Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit Voice
Recorder and their two Ducane pingers, after water entry, may be the key to
unlocking the cover-up. We can show a Grand Jury how Mr. Clinton personally
involved himself.
2. The NTSB is extremely sensitive to the subject of Black Boxes. They
opened the boxes without any investigators from the Interested Parties
present. They refused to allow TWA's investigator to listen to the voice
recorder more than once.
3. The Voice Recorder has a "sound like damaged tape" precisely seven
seconds prior to its end. Seven seconds prior to missile impact would be
coincidental to MANPADS booster ignition. A visually bright event that could
be seen by the First Officer.
4. Dr. Loeb has refused to release Addendum number two to the Flight Data
Recorder Analysis that was written to rebut our interpretation of the last
data line. The NTSB even refuses to let the Voice Recorder Analysis group
reconvene!
5. The Administration's explanation of the circumstances under which the USS
Grasp" divers found the Digital Flight Data Recorder and the Cockpit Voice
Recorder is highly questionable.
6. According to divers we interviewed and the Navy Supervisor of Salvage
Report, Navy divers from the USS Grasp found the recorders during Dive #2
and Dive #3 on the evening of 23 July 1996. The Administration maintains
these same divers found them more than 24 hours later at 2330 hours on 24
July 1996. East coast TV news coverage ends at 23:30.
7. The most probable motive for this deception was to ensure investigators,
who are Parties to the Investigation, were not witnesses when NTSB/FBI
officials were alleged to have first opened the boxes in Washington during
the early morning hours of 25 July 1996.
8. The boxes should have been found in the aircraft tail cone section, or
within its debris. Instead, divers from the Grasp found each box 30 feet
apart on a hard sand bottom, devoid of any attached debris and neither
Ducane Pinger was operating. They appeared just as they would if dropped
overboard from a boat!
9. Somehow both Ducane Systems fixed themselves while in FBI custody. They
were found to be fault-free in laboratory test days later.
10. The small cylindrical Ducane Pingers are mounted on the narrow front
face of each oblong rectangular box. They are protected from damage because
they are bolted firmly to the inside angle of a short piece of angle iron.
Because of their shape, the probability of either free falling box landing
on the bottom with the pinger stuck in the sand, would be akin to a free
falling domino landing on it's end and remaining standing in that position.
11. The only way Ducane Pingers can be silenced under water without evidence
of damage is by partly unscrewing the battery connection.
12. The probability of both undamaged Ducane Pingers failing simultaneously
in a shallow open ocean environment, on top of a hard sand bottom,
approaches that of a spontaneous aviation kerosene explosion in an
ignition-free Boeing 747-100 fuel tank.
13. We consider the fact the NTSB has remained mute about these alleged
Ducane failures is Prima Facie evidence of either abject incompetence on the
part of the NTSB who should have opened an inquiry into the cause, or proof
of a cover-up of NTSB misconduct.
14. Weeks Marine, Inc. was verbally contracted by both the Coast Guard and
FAA officials the night of the crash to position for salvage operations.
They were on site the next morning with the best salvage equipment available
in the Atlantic. It was superior to Navy assets, but Weeks Marine was stood
down by the NTSB. It would be five more days before Navy divers would be on
scene to recover recorders, bodies, etc! Why the forced wait?
15. Holding Weeks Marine, Inc. to standby while ordering Navy assets to
respond from far away points deliberately condemned victims trapped in
bottom wreckage to five additional days of ravage by natural elements. This
grossly compounded the grief of the families and put at risk the ability of
medical examiners to identify all remains. The White House was responsible
for this order.
16. Circumstantial evidence indicates the Administration, knowing the
aircraft to be shot down, may have ordered a covert recovery, laboratory
examination and reinsertion of the recorders to ensure the aircrew did not
describe the attack on audio tape. Scuba divers could have recovered the
recorders on the afternoon of 18 July and dropped them back overboard after
10 am 22 July, before the USS Grasp and Navy divers were on scene. During
that period of time NOAA research vessel Rude and the motor vessel Pirouette
were simultaneously sent 5 miles off the main debris field on a "wild goose
chase" by the NTSB. Both ships had been mapping that field with side scan
sonar!
17. Properly done, a scuba team equipped with a Ducane locator amplifier
tube, held over the side, could position a small boat directly over active
Pingers, dive and recover the boxes in a single effort. Active pingers can
be detected by divers300 yards away.
18. We have a witness that has passed a polygraph test and has provided a
sworn affidavit that a member of the NTSB leadership told him the recorders
were found and examined by 20 July. The Coast Guard told both TWA
maintenance and Congressman Forbes that the recorders were found on 18 July.
The next day, 19 July, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was told
the aircraft was shot down by terrorists. Senators Hatch and D'Amato made
public statements to the same effect.
19. White House, NTSB and Justice Department officials need to be compelled
to explain these events and their actions under oath. We also have other
individuals who have asked to remain anonymous who should be questioned
under oath.
20. Despite a steep learning curve and the best efforts of some if its most
aggressive field agents, FBI leadership has demonstrated itself to be
functionally illiterate in the critical areas of; military weapons and
tactics, radar interpretation and air crash investigation. The fact the
White House failed to immediately assign appropriate elements of the
Department of Defense as lead investigators in the missile inquiry is
inculpatory.
21. Gentlemen, we have the "FBI Trawler Operations Manual" and Operations
Order as well as other documents left behind aboard a contract boat by FBI
agents. If found, the Justice Department intended to hide from your
companies; the last fuel scavenge pump, a missile ejector can and the
missile battery cooling unit!
TWA Flight 800 was the 27th civil aircraft shot down worldwide by shoulder
fired missiles. The Administration's actions have greatly increased the
danger of a recurrence, not only because of the deception of this case but
because administration policy deliberately fails to link any terrorist act
to the government of the Sponsor State. This provides political cover for
the Administration's lack of action and sanctuary to deadly enemies. I will
point out the coincidence of the Clinton Administration's pro Arab, anti
Israeli policy shift and the arrival on our shores of a creditable
anti-aircraft threat under the control of rogue states. In 1994, the
Maryland State Police found a fully armed French MANPADS missile, the
Mistral, ready to fire on its tripod, directly under a heavily used air
corridor near Westminster Maryland. Our research also found U.S. Stinger
technology transferred to China in the early 90's enabling them to produce
the Vanguard, a quality shoulder fired Chinese missile. It was deployed
first in 1996. If past history is an indicator, the China / Iran weapons
transfer link bodes ill for future air commerce.
In a worse case scenario, absent a respected American Commander-in-Chief,
Iran's Supreme Council, or other rogue state, could successfully shutdown or
disrupt major traffic hubs worldwide by activating surrogate cells armed
with Vanguard. If they can shoot down one, why not a half dozen on a single
day? Gentlemen, the time to act is now, regardless of any arrangements you
may or may not have had to accept. Once the American people understand the
truth, your corporations will be indemnified against any further political
extortion from this administration. We would ask, in the interest of long
term air safety, that you take an aggressive and public pro-active stance.
Challenge the Administration; educate the media and the electorate.
Severance from a politicized and fraudulent Federal investigation is no
penalty and maintenance of the status quo is certainly no prize.
Sincerely, William S. Donaldson
"
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 01:55:51 AM |
|
|
"Gob" <nospam@spamnot.net> wrote in message
news:d0ku60$buu$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:d0kc67$6c2$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110291041.579a0942eeb7434ea51d5cb030a9474e@teranews...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
Explosive Evidence in Wreckage
" Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Cmdr. William S. Donaldson,
III - USN, Ret. Aviation Mishap Analyst P.O. Box 90, Clements, Maryland
20624
April 5, 1999 Mr. Philip M. Condit The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707, Mail
Code 10-10 Seattle, WA 98124-2207
Mr. Gerald L. Gitner Trans World Airlines One City Center 515 North Sixth
St. St. Louis, MO 63101
Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Gentlemen, Over the last four
months our investigation into the loss of TWA Flight 800 has produced
information far surpassing that contained in our July 20, 1998 Interim
Report to Congress. We can now prove, before a jury or other independent
fact-finding body, that the aircraft was shot down. We can also explain
why
the Administration covered it up and expose some of the methods they
employed to do so.
Your corporations are being scapegoated and defrauded by Administration
officials because, had the truth about this incident been reported before
November of 1996, it could have derailed the reelection of Clinton/Gore.
Exposed now, it could send guilty parties to jail for Misprision of Felony
Homicide. We can provide your attorney's with witnesses, documents, or
reference material that will support the following text: White House
knowledge of a threat prior to the loss of TWA Flight 800.
1. The Administration knew that in 1996, surrogates from rogue states had
access to MANPADS (Man Portable Air Defense Systems) or shoulder-fired
missiles in mid-eastern weapons bazaars.
TWA800 wasout of MANPAD range. What teh eyewitnessses decribe does not
correpsond to a MANPAD. Oh, a Donaldson was a publicity seeking buffoon. End
of story.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 09:48:36 AM |
|
|
"Gob" <nospam@spamnot.net> wrote in message
news:d0ku60$buu$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:d0kc67$6c2$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110291041.579a0942eeb7434ea51d5cb030a9474e@teranews...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
Explosive Evidence in Wreckage
" Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Cmdr. William S. Donaldson,
III - USN, Ret. Aviation Mishap Analyst P.O. Box 90, Clements, Maryland
20624
April 5, 1999 Mr. Philip M. Condit The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707, Mail
Code 10-10 Seattle, WA 98124-2207
Mr. Gerald L. Gitner Trans World Airlines One City Center 515 North Sixth
St. St. Louis, MO 63101
Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Gentlemen, Over the last four
months our investigation into the loss of TWA Flight 800 has produced
information far surpassing that contained in our July 20, 1998 Interim
Report to Congress. We can now prove, before a jury or other independent
fact-finding body, that the aircraft was shot down. We can also explain
why
the Administration covered it up and expose some of the methods they
employed to do so.
Your corporations are being scapegoated and defrauded by Administration
officials because, had the truth about this incident been reported before
November of 1996, it could have derailed the reelection of Clinton/Gore.
Exposed now, it could send guilty parties to jail for Misprision of Felony
Homicide. We can provide your attorney's with witnesses, documents, or
reference material that will support the following text: White House
knowledge of a threat prior to the loss of TWA Flight 800.
1. The Administration knew that in 1996, surrogates from rogue states had
access to MANPADS (Man Portable Air Defense Systems) or shoulder-fired
missiles in mid-eastern weapons bazaars.
TWA800 wasout of MANPAD range
Right, because Tommy Boy was there and saw everything, even measured
the distance I heard. (NOT)
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 10:02:18 AM |
|
|
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110383248.f4d19603b8b0e7eb7a5948b1c815310b@teranews...
"Gob" <nospam@spamnot.net> wrote in message
news:d0ku60$buu$1@hercules.btinternet.com...
"tw" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:d0kc67$6c2$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se...
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110291041.579a0942eeb7434ea51d5cb030a9474e@teranews...
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
Explosive Evidence in Wreckage
" Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Cmdr. William S.
Donaldson,
III - USN, Ret. Aviation Mishap Analyst P.O. Box 90, Clements, Maryland
20624
April 5, 1999 Mr. Philip M. Condit The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707,
Mail
Code 10-10 Seattle, WA 98124-2207
Mr. Gerald L. Gitner Trans World Airlines One City Center 515 North
Sixth
St. St. Louis, MO 63101
Re: The unexplained loss of TWA Flight 800 Gentlemen, Over the last
four
months our investigation into the loss of TWA Flight 800 has produced
information far surpassing that contained in our July 20, 1998 Interim
Report to Congress. We can now prove, before a jury or other
independent
fact-finding body, that the aircraft was shot down. We can also explain
why
the Administration covered it up and expose some of the methods they
employed to do so.
Your corporations are being scapegoated and defrauded by Administration
officials because, had the truth about this incident been reported
before
November of 1996, it could have derailed the reelection of
Clinton/Gore.
Exposed now, it could send guilty parties to jail for Misprision of
Felony
Homicide. We can provide your attorney's with witnesses, documents, or
reference material that will support the following text: White House
knowledge of a threat prior to the loss of TWA Flight 800.
1. The Administration knew that in 1996, surrogates from rogue states
had
access to MANPADS (Man Portable Air Defense Systems) or shoulder-fired
missiles in mid-eastern weapons bazaars.
TWA800 wasout of MANPAD range
Right, because Tommy Boy was there and saw everything,
Nope, because it is an established fact it was at 13,700 feet as the
transponder returns clearly showed. You fucking numbskull. Oh, and it was 14
miles out to sea as well, and you recently claimed the missile came from the
shoreline.LOL
even measured
the distance I heard. (NOT)
You're an ignorant monkey brained fool. Please keep on amusing me.
Tony
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Absolute Zero" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
08 Mar 2005 08:31:49 AM |
|
|
wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
ENRON-BUSH-WTC-OIL-CONNECTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/enron_bush.htm
WTC: A History of US Complicity
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_history.htm
EVIDENCE OF U.S. CORPORATION EXECUTIVE S' GUILT IN WTC DESTRUCTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/evidence.htm
Bush and Cheny in intimate business contact with the real prime
suspects of the WTC/Pentagon crashbombing frame-up
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_frameup.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
-A
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tony deny evidence found ? |
08 Mar 2005 08:59:34 AM |
|
|
"Absolute Zero" <amycaton@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d0kcor$ga$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
itwill@happen.com wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
ENRON-BUSH-WTC-OIL-CONNECTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/enron_bush.htm
WTC: A History of US Complicity
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_history.htm
EVIDENCE OF U.S. CORPORATION EXECUTIVE S' GUILT IN WTC DESTRUCTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/evidence.htm
Bush and Cheny in intimate business contact with the real prime
suspects of the WTC/Pentagon crashbombing frame-up
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_frameup.htm
Irony of ironies.. thanks for proving my point, Tony! (Thanks for flaggin it
AZ)
Now then Tone, as for your assertion that no Boeing aircraft (which all have
very similar CWT degsigns, by the way), especially no 747 has ever suffered
a catastrophic fuel/air explosion in teh CWT, are you going to retract it in
the light of :
http://www.caasd.org/atsrac/FAA_PI-Engineer_Workshop/2002/SFAR-88-Related-Op
erating-Rules-and-Special-lMaintenance-Requirements.pdf
"Since 1959 there have been 17 fuel tank ignition events"
Causes -
3 UNKNOWN
4 external wing fires
4 ELECTROSTATICS
2 Lightning
2 PUMPS OR WIRING SUSPECTED
1 small bomb
1 maintenance action
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tony deny evidence found ? |
08 Mar 2005 05:16:58 PM |
|
|
tw wrote:
Irony of ironies.. thanks for proving my point, Tony! (Thanks for
flaggin it
AZ)
Stand up comedy today tw?
Now then Tone, as for your assertion that no Boeing aircraft (which
all have
very similar CWT degsigns, by the way), especially no 747 has ever
suffered
a catastrophic fuel/air explosion in teh CWT, are you going to
retract it in
the light of :
http://www.caasd.org/atsrac/FAA_PI-Engineer_Workshop/2002/SFAR-88-Related-Op
erating-Rules-and-Special-lMaintenance-Requirements.pdf
"Since 1959 there have been 17 fuel tank ignition events"
Causes -
OK 17 fuel tank ignition events.
I think this is what the defense said on the history channel ( minus
the specifics you stated here)
One caused by a bomb
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Three unknown
unknownn what? Bombs? ;)
Bwahahahahahahahaha
two by lightening?
Bwahahahahahaha!
lightening not good. ;)
3 UNKNOWN
4 external wing fires
4 external wing fires?
I don't remember reading F800 having wing fires?
4 ELECTROSTATICS
2 Lightning
2 PUMPS OR WIRING SUSPECTED
Until reasonable doubt we ***** U ME eh?
1 small bomb
1 maintenance action
did s/he the maintenance person flick her/is cigarette into the gas
tank?
Can I be your agent for the laugh-factories around the world - we could
make lots of dough ;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tony deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 02:03:22 AM |
|
|
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110323818.738371.13980@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
tw wrote:
Irony of ironies.. thanks for proving my point, Tony! (Thanks for
flaggin it
AZ)
Stand up comedy today tw?
I coud never match the hilarity you provide.
Now then Tone, as for your assertion that no Boeing aircraft (which
all have
very similar CWT degsigns, by the way), especially no 747 has ever
suffered
a catastrophic fuel/air explosion in teh CWT, are you going to
retract it in
the light of :
http://www.caasd.org/atsrac/FAA_PI-Engineer_Workshop/2002/SFAR-88-Related-Op
erating-Rules-and-Special-lMaintenance-Requirements.pdf
"Since 1959 there have been 17 fuel tank ignition events"
Causes -
OK 17 fuel tank ignition events.
Correct. Tonty claimed there were none.
I think this is what the defense said on the history channel ( minus
the specifics you stated here)
One caused by a bomb
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Huh?
Three unknown
unknownn what? Bombs? ;)
Do you have a point?
Bwahahahahahahahaha
two by lightening?
Bwahahahahahaha!
lightening not good. ;)
You'd be surprised how many aircraft get hit by light*n*ing and don't
explode... of course, getting hit by lightning might well cause a power
surge in the low-violtage cable that feed the savenger pumps (inside the
tank) this would cause the (decaying kapton) wires to arc and set off the
fuel/air mixture. Exactly what the NTSB think probably happened in TWA800
except it was a short in high-voltage cables outside the tank instead of
lightning.
3 UNKNOWN
4 external wing fires
4 external wing fires?
I don't remember reading F800 having wing fires?
I don't remeber Tonty specifying this when he claimed no CWT had ever
exploded..
4 ELECTROSTATICS
As may have been the case in TWA800
2 Lightning
2 PUMPS OR WIRING SUSPECTED
As almost certainly happened in TWA800
Until reasonable doubt we ***** U ME eh?
No assumptions above Mikey. Perhaps you simply don't understand the issues
involved?
Go here www.ntsb.gov and star edjumakatin' yerself if you want to carry on
thsi discussion.
1 small bomb
1 maintenance action
did s/he the maintenance person flick her/is cigarette into the gas
tank?
Can I be your agent for the laugh-factories around the world - we could
make lots of dough ;)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
08 Mar 2005 04:55:06 PM |
|
|
Absolute Zero wrote:
itwill@happen.com wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
I Saw it on many sites you missed to mention the source.
http://flight800.org/
http://flight800.org/HAS_fol.htm
http://flight800.org/sub_rep.htm
..
I saw the History Channel program, [I believe it was the HC this year ]
had a two hour documentary ( I guess this is another Kook TV site too
ya) and it was balanced program, but what intrigued me were the many
eye witnesses who said they say what appeared to be missiles launched
from buildings close [ or on ] to the beach.
"During the investigation, the FBI unlawfully denied the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) access to forensic results and
eyewitness interview documents. "
Also If the empty gas tank was the cause of the explosion ( It had
happened before, the defense claims) then more planes should be falling
out of the sky - almost daily. Because ACCORDING THE PROGRAM BOEING AND
OTHER AIRPLANE AGENCIES DID NOT FIX THIS WITH INERT GAS UNTIL AT LEAST
YEAR 2000. tHIS SAID TO ME AND THE OTHERS THAT THIS WAS NOT A CONCERN
to them.
THAT TO ME IS POINT BLANK EVIDENCE THAT THE CIA WAS NOT TELLING ALL OF
THE STORY.
I typed in caps because this is the root of the investigation and the
solution to the claim - as nothing was ever done till many years
later. Many planes flew with empty gas tanks sinse, but they didn't
just blow up. Many planes flew, but are not expressed with many eye
witnesses saying they saw what appeared to be rockets launched at them.
****** Here is the real truth. The CIA, Boeing, FBI and the Clinton
Administration ( top people) knew it was the terrorists, but Clinton
was having the time of his life with his girly friends in the Oval
Office and getting his ***** kicked all around the world by the
terrorists and, so, he was a scared little president who loved his poll
numbers more than putting- it too the terrorists around the world.
ENRON-BUSH-WTC-OIL-CONNECTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/enron_bush.htm
Wrong site?
WTC: A History of US Complicity
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_history.htm
Wrong site again?
EVIDENCE OF U.S. CORPORATION EXECUTIVE S' GUILT IN WTC DESTRUCTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/evidence.htm
Wrong site, yet again?
Bush and Cheny in intimate business contact with the real prime
suspects of the WTC/Pentagon crashbombing frame-up
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_frameup.htm
Wrong site, yet, yet again?
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
Ironic. :(
-A
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 02:14:27 AM |
|
|
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110322506.196057.151420@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Absolute Zero wrote:
itwill@happen.com wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
I Saw it on many sites you missed to mention the source.
http://flight800.org/
Kooksite
http://flight800.org/HAS_fol.htm
Kooksite
http://flight800.org/sub_rep.htm
Surpirse, surprise, another koookite.
Now, please tell me which missiles use plastic explosive in their warheads.
.
I saw the History Channel program,
Jesus fucking wept. Why dopn't you read the actual investigation you
brain-dead fucking sheep? Do you hav to have everything spoon fed to you by
people of only slightly greater intellect than your sorry self?!
[I believe it was the HC this year ]
had a two hour documentary ( I guess this is another Kook TV site too
ya) and it was balanced program, but what intrigued me were the many
eye witnesses who said they say what appeared to be missiles launched
from buildings close [ or on ] to the beach.
Read the eyewitness reports - especially the ones that mention "missiles" or
"flares". They do not agree on where the flare comae from, which direction
it was travelling etc etc. This was not helped by the FBI assuming it was a
missile from day one and saying things to witnesses like "which direction
did you see the missile come from?"
"During the investigation, the FBI unlawfully denied the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) access to forensic results and
eyewitness interview documents. "
See above - the FBI fucked the investigation. The NTSB however, had acces to
the wreckage. If the pathologist says the victim died of stab wounds, what
credence do you give to a few witnesse who swear they heard gunshots around
the same time?
Also If the empty gas tank was the cause of the explosion ( It had
happened before, the defense claims)
It has, I gave you a list
then more planes should be falling
out of the sky - almost daily.
Nope, you don't understand the issues involved, as usual. The CWT was only
flammable over a certain portion of the flight, and was only initially
dangeroud because the aircraft had been sittingon teh tarmac for a while
with the a/c running (the a/c heat exchagers are in the CWT, a good design
choice if the CWT is full of fuel, a bad one if it is full of fuel/air
mixture as it just heats that up to a flammable point. Similarly, ambient
pressure plays a role too. TWA800 was unlucky - houghj the raft of remedial
measures that were introduced as a result of teh NTSB investigation show
that this problem was taken seriously.
Because ACCORDING THE PROGRAM BOEING AND
OTHER AIRPLANE AGENCIES DID NOT FIX THIS WITH INERT GAS UNTIL AT LEAST
YEAR 2000.
Civilian airliners don't (and still don't) fly with nitrogen in the tanks
because it is too expensive, although the military decided it was a good
idea long ago.
The bottom line is a human life is worth about 500,000 dollars to the
airlines, and everything is odne on a strict cost/benefit analysis. They'd
rather have seat back LCD screens than nitrogen in teh empty tanks.
tHIS SAID TO ME AND THE OTHERS THAT THIS WAS NOT A CONCERN
to them.
THAT TO ME IS POINT BLANK EVIDENCE THAT THE CIA WAS NOT TELLING ALL OF
THE STORY.
What the ***** do the CIA have to do with aircrash investigations?
I typed in caps because this is the root of the investigation and the
solution to the claim -
You don't have a clue, son.
as nothing was ever done till many years
later. Many planes flew with empty gas tanks sinse, but they didn't
just blow up. Many planes flew, but are not expressed with many eye
witnesses saying they saw what appeared to be rockets launched at them.
****** Here is the real truth. The CIA, Boeing, FBI and the Clinton
Administration ( top people) knew it was the terrorists, but Clinton
was having the time of his life with his girly friends in the Oval
Office and getting his ***** kicked all around the world by the
terrorists and, so, he was a scared little president who loved his poll
numbers more than putting- it too the terrorists around the world.
Kook.
ENRON-BUSH-WTC-OIL-CONNECTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/enron_bush.htm
Wrong site?
WTC: A History of US Complicity
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_history.htm
Wrong site again?
EVIDENCE OF U.S. CORPORATION EXECUTIVE S' GUILT IN WTC DESTRUCTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/evidence.htm
Wrong site, yet again?
Bush and Cheny in intimate business contact with the real prime
suspects of the WTC/Pentagon crashbombing frame-up
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_frameup.htm
Wrong site, yet, yet again?
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
Ironic. :(
-A
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 03:35:27 PM |
|
|
tw wrote:
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Snip - no time to reply in full:
What the ***** do the CIA have to do with aircrash investigations?
If you have no idea that the CIA was heavily involved from day one
[F800] and made the final case film about the crash as the final say
for all lawsuit [ involved] cases in this regard, then you have no
right into discussing this matter further.
Kook.
I prefer to call you by your other name tw.
Thankx ;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
10 Mar 2005 02:57:38 AM |
|
|
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110404127.035594.32610@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
tw wrote:
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Snip - no time to reply in full:
What the ***** do the CIA have to do with aircrash investigations?
If you have no idea that the CIA was heavily involved from day one
[F800] and made the final case film about the crash as the final say
for all lawsuit [ involved] cases in this regard, then you have no
right into discussing this matter further.
You're a fucking idiot Mikey. The CIA film had nothing to do with
investigating the reasons for the crash, that is the NTSB's job.
It is quite clear I know far more about this subject than you do, so perhaps
your taci tadmissino of defeat is a good idea for now.
Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110322506.196057.151420@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Absolute Zero wrote:
itwill@happen.com wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
I Saw it on many sites you missed to mention the source.
http://flight800.org/
Kooksite
http://flight800.org/HAS_fol.htm
Kooksite
http://flight800.org/sub_rep.htm
Surpirse, surprise, another koookite.
Now, please tell me which missiles use plastic explosive in their warheads.
.
I saw the History Channel program,
Jesus fucking wept. Why dopn't you read the actual investigation you
brain-dead fucking sheep? Do you hav to have everything spoon fed to you by
people of only slightly greater intellect than your sorry self?!
[I believe it was the HC this year ]
had a two hour documentary ( I guess this is another Kook TV site too
ya) and it was balanced program, but what intrigued me were the many
eye witnesses who said they say what appeared to be missiles launched
from buildings close [ or on ] to the beach.
Read the eyewitness reports - especially the ones that mention "missiles" or
"flares". They do not agree on where the flare comae from, which direction
it was travelling etc etc. This was not helped by the FBI assuming it was a
missile from day one and saying things to witnesses like "which direction
did you see the missile come from?"
"During the investigation, the FBI unlawfully denied the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) access to forensic results and
eyewitness interview documents. "
See above - the FBI fucked the investigation. The NTSB however, had acces to
the wreckage. If the pathologist says the victim died of stab wounds, what
credence do you give to a few witnesse who swear they heard gunshots around
the same time?
Also If the empty gas tank was the cause of the explosion ( It had
happened before, the defense claims)
It has, I gave you a list
then more planes should be falling
out of the sky - almost daily.
Nope, you don't understand the issues involved, as usual. The CWT was only
flammable over a certain portion of the flight, and was only initially
dangeroud because the aircraft had been sittingon teh tarmac for a while
with the a/c running (the a/c heat exchagers are in the CWT, a good design
choice if the CWT is full of fuel, a bad one if it is full of fuel/air
mixture as it just heats that up to a flammable point. Similarly, ambient
pressure plays a role too. TWA800 was unlucky - houghj the raft of remedial
measures that were introduced as a result of teh NTSB investigation show
that this problem was taken seriously.
Because ACCORDING THE PROGRAM BOEING AND
OTHER AIRPLANE AGENCIES DID NOT FIX THIS WITH INERT GAS UNTIL AT LEAST
YEAR 2000.
Civilian airliners don't (and still don't) fly with nitrogen in the tanks
because it is too expensive, although the military decided it was a good
idea long ago.
The bottom line is a human life is worth about 500,000 dollars to the
airlines, and everything is odne on a strict cost/benefit analysis. They'd
rather have seat back LCD screens than nitrogen in teh empty tanks.
tHIS SAID TO ME AND THE OTHERS THAT THIS WAS NOT A CONCERN
to them.
THAT TO ME IS POINT BLANK EVIDENCE THAT THE CIA WAS NOT TELLING ALL OF
THE STORY.
What the ***** do the CIA have to do with aircrash investigations?
I typed in caps because this is the root of the investigation and the
solution to the claim -
You don't have a clue, son.
as nothing was ever done till many years
later. Many planes flew with empty gas tanks sinse, but they didn't
just blow up. Many planes flew, but are not expressed with many eye
witnesses saying they saw what appeared to be rockets launched at them.
****** Here is the real truth. The CIA, Boeing, FBI and the Clinton
Administration ( top people) knew it was the terrorists, but Clinton
was having the time of his life with his girly friends in the Oval
Office and getting his ***** kicked all around the world by the
terrorists and, so, he was a scared little president who loved his poll
numbers more than putting- it too the terrorists around the world.
Kook.
ENRON-BUSH-WTC-OIL-CONNECTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/enron_bush.htm
Wrong site?
WTC: A History of US Complicity
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_history.htm
Wrong site again?
EVIDENCE OF U.S. CORPORATION EXECUTIVE S' GUILT IN WTC DESTRUCTION
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/evidence.htm
Wrong site, yet again?
Bush and Cheny in intimate business contact with the real prime
suspects of the WTC/Pentagon crashbombing frame-up
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_frameup.htm
Wrong site, yet, yet again?
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
Ironic. :(
-A
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 09:56:16 AM |
|
|
Absolute Zero wrote:
itwill@happen.com wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
I Saw it on many sites you missed to mention the source.
http://flight800.org/
http://flight800.org/HAS_fol.htm
http://flight800.org/sub_rep.htm
I saw the History Channel program, [I believe it was the HC this year ]
had a two hour documentary ( I guess this is another Kook TV site too
ya) and it was balanced program, but what intrigued me were the many
eye witnesses who said they say what appeared to be missiles launched
from buildings close [ or on ] to the beach.
Exactly Michael, right after it happened there were scores of people
who were out along the shore on a beautiful Summer night enjoying the
weather who saw what happened, but they have all beem dismissed
because it was covered up to help Clinton avoid having to go to war
against the terrorists.
"During the investigation, the FBI unlawfully denied the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) access to forensic results and
eyewitness interview documents. "
Shhhhhhh.
Also If the empty gas tank was the cause of the explosion ( It had
happened before, the defense claims) then more planes should be falling
out of the sky - almost daily. Because ACCORDING THE PROGRAM BOEING AND
OTHER AIRPLANE AGENCIES DID NOT FIX THIS WITH INERT GAS UNTIL AT LEAST
YEAR 2000. tHIS SAID TO ME AND THE OTHERS THAT THIS WAS NOT A CONCERN
to them.
Of course, it was pure BS.
THAT TO ME IS POINT BLANK EVIDENCE THAT THE CIA WAS NOT TELLING ALL OF
THE STORY.
I typed in caps because this is the root of the investigation and the
solution to the claim - as nothing was ever done till many years
later. Many planes flew with empty gas tanks sinse, but they didn't
just blow up. Many planes flew, but are not expressed with many eye
witnesses saying they saw what appeared to be rockets launched at them.
Yep.
****** Here is the real truth. The CIA, Boeing, FBI and the Clinton
Administration ( top people) knew it was the terrorists, but Clinton
was having the time of his life with his girly friends in the Oval
Office and getting his ***** kicked all around the world by the
terrorists and, so, he was a scared little president who loved his poll
numbers more than putting- it too the terrorists around the world.
So true.
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 10:03:59 AM |
|
|
<itwill@happen.com> wrote in message
news:1110383710.e99ef80a84d2500411b5e493d4d9a8bd@teranews...
Absolute Zero wrote:
itwill@happen.com wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
I Saw it on many sites you missed to mention the source.
http://flight800.org/
http://flight800.org/HAS_fol.htm
http://flight800.org/sub_rep.htm
I saw the History Channel program, [I believe it was the HC this year ]
had a two hour documentary ( I guess this is another Kook TV site too
ya) and it was balanced program, but what intrigued me were the many
eye witnesses who said they say what appeared to be missiles launched
from buildings close [ or on ] to the beach.
Which woudl have been 14 miles away and 13,700 feet lower than TWA 800.
That must have been one hell of a big MANPAD! LOL
Exactly Michael, right after it happened there were scores of people
who were out along the shore on a beautiful Summer night enjoying the
weather who saw what happened, but they have all beem dismissed
because it was covered up to help Clinton avoid having to go to war
against the terrorists.
KOOOOOOK!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
09 Mar 2005 03:28:55 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Absolute Zero wrote:
wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
I Saw it on many sites you missed to mention the source.
http://flight800.org/
http://flight800.org/HAS_fol.htm
http://flight800.org/sub_rep.htm
I saw the History Channel program, [I believe it was the HC this
year ]
had a two hour documentary ( I guess this is another Kook TV site
too
ya) and it was balanced program, but what intrigued me were the many
eye witnesses who said they say what appeared to be missiles
launched
from buildings close [ or on ] to the beach.
Exactly Michael, right after it happened there were scores of people
who were out along the shore on a beautiful Summer night enjoying the
weather who saw what happened, but they have all beem dismissed
because it was covered up to help Clinton avoid having to go to war
against the terrorists.
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.
"During the investigation, the FBI unlawfully denied the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) access to forensic results and
eyewitness interview documents. "
Shhhhhhh.
Also If the empty gas tank was the cause of the explosion ( It had
happened before, the defense claims) then more planes should be
falling
out of the sky - almost daily. Because ACCORDING THE PROGRAM BOEING
AND
OTHER AIRPLANE AGENCIES DID NOT FIX THIS WITH INERT GAS UNTIL AT
LEAST
YEAR 2000. tHIS SAID TO ME AND THE OTHERS THAT THIS WAS NOT A
CONCERN
to them.
Of course, it was pure BS.
THAT TO ME IS POINT BLANK EVIDENCE THAT THE CIA WAS NOT TELLING ALL
OF
THE STORY.
I typed in caps because this is the root of the investigation and
the
solution to the claim - as nothing was ever done till many years
later. Many planes flew with empty gas tanks sinse, but they didn't
just blow up. Many planes flew, but are not expressed with many eye
witnesses saying they saw what appeared to be rockets launched at
them.
Yep.
****** Here is the real truth. The CIA, Boeing, FBI and the Clinton
Administration ( top people) knew it was the terrorists, but Clinton
was having the time of his life with his girly friends in the Oval
Office and getting his ***** kicked all around the world by the
terrorists and, so, he was a scared little president who loved his
poll
numbers more than putting- it too the terrorists around the world.
So true.
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "tw" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
10 Mar 2005 02:54:56 AM |
|
|
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1110403735.126330.280780@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
itwill@happen.com wrote:
Absolute Zero wrote:
itwill@happen.com wrote:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/TWA800.htm
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
It's a KOOK SITE, you MORON!
I Saw it on many sites you missed to mention the source.
http://flight800.org/
http://flight800.org/HAS_fol.htm
http://flight800.org/sub_rep.htm
I saw the History Channel program, [I believe it was the HC this
year ]
had a two hour documentary ( I guess this is another Kook TV site
too
ya) and it was balanced program, but what intrigued me were the many
eye witnesses who said they say what appeared to be missiles
launched
from buildings close [ or on ] to the beach.
Exactly Michael, right after it happened there were scores of people
who were out along the shore on a beautiful Summer night enjoying the
weather who saw what happened, but they have all beem dismissed
because it was covered up to help Clinton avoid having to go to war
against the terrorists.
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.
"During the investigation, the FBI unlawfully denied the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) access to forensic results and
eyewitness interview documents. "
Shhhhhhh.
Also If the empty gas tank was the cause of the explosion ( It had
happened before, the defense claims) then more planes should be
falling
out of the sky - almost daily. Because ACCORDING THE PROGRAM BOEING
AND
OTHER AIRPLANE AGENCIES DID NOT FIX THIS WITH INERT GAS UNTIL AT
LEAST
YEAR 2000. tHIS SAID TO ME AND THE OTHERS THAT THIS WAS NOT A
CONCERN
to them.
Of course, it was pure BS.
THAT TO ME IS POINT BLANK EVIDENCE THAT THE CIA WAS NOT TELLING ALL
OF
THE STORY.
I typed in caps because this is the root of the investigation and
the
solution to the claim - as nothing was ever done till many years
later. Many planes flew with empty gas tanks sinse, but they didn't
just blow up. Many planes flew, but are not expressed with many eye
witnesses saying they saw what appeared to be rockets launched at
them.
Yep.
****** Here is the real truth. The CIA, Boeing, FBI and the Clinton
Administration ( top people) knew it was the terrorists, but Clinton
was having the time of his life with his girly friends in the Oval
Office and getting his ***** kicked all around the world by the
terrorists and, so, he was a scared little president who loved his
poll
numbers more than putting- it too the terrorists around the world.
So true.
Tony
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Johnathan McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
10 Mar 2005 12:39:32 PM |
|
|
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.
Also, EXPLAIN the * graph below. Are you going to tell that for a few
minuets, that hundred + of people whom didn't know each other and never
meet even afterwards all made up simultaneously eye witnessed- stories
to something that looked like missiles that shot down the plane? I have
seen some of the people testify on video and their eyes showed horror
of their remembrance. This was not a plane that just blew it self up
out of the sky.
FBI: possible missle launch zone 5
http://twa800.com/dredge/launchzone.gif
http://twa800.com/dredge/search.gif
Also according the report the some 'other FBI' people lied about stuff.
Why would they lie?
When you overlay the FBI trawling area of 2.7 NM, (gif format), to
recover parts of the aircraft and on the larger Search Area Diagram you
can clearly see the purpose of the trawling effort was not bodies as
claimed by the NTSB and FBI. It was focused only on the 2.7 NM radius
of a possible MANPADS missile. Most of the search area was north and
west of the flight path, areas where there was no expected .....
The China Lake Naval Warfare Center report on the possibility of a
MANPADS missile impact is inconclusive with respect to whether or not a
shoulder-fired missile could have penetrated the wing tank adjacent to
the CWT and exploded in the fuel. However, all of the damage to the
left wing and left CWT side wall is consistent with this type of
impact.
A Thermal Imaging photograph provided by military experts shows that a
MANPADS missile would guide on the three Air Packs located directly
below the Center Fuel Tank.
The Stinger Man Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS) is representative
of many such systems available to terrorists groups.
Check out triangulation of witnesses to the missile[s]:
NOTE: The below link is only a small sample of the information
collected from hundreds of witnesses
http://twa800.com/images/triangulation_update.gif
*
107 witnesses on 4 aircraft, 19 boats, and 31 locations ashore. They
were located in a 360=B0 circle around the missile engagement. Their
live testimony alone will prove the aircraft was shot down. This is why
the Justice Department has kept air crash investigators away from
witnesses for 2 1/2 years and also one reason they are conducting a
malicious show-trial prosecution of author and outside investigator
James Sanders and his wife. We now believe there is sufficient evidence
for a Grand Jury to bring indictments for a cover-up of the Felony
Murder of 230 innocent people.
Note: Sounds like money issues to me. Billions in cash pay-outs not a
desired thing by the government.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Perseid" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
10 Mar 2005 05:24:27 PM |
|
|
"Michael Johnathan McDonald" <abookoflife@yahoo.com> Spat the Words
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.
Also, EXPLAIN the * graph below. Are you going to tell that for a few
minuets, that hundred + of people whom didn't know each other and never
meet even afterwards all made up simultaneously eye witnessed- stories
to something that looked like missiles that shot down the plane? I have
seen some of the people testify on video and their eyes showed horror
of their remembrance. This was not a plane that just blew it self up
out of the sky.
FBI: possible missle launch zone 5
http://twa800.com/dredge/launchzone.gif
http://twa800.com/dredge/search.gif
Also according the report the some 'other FBI' people lied about stuff.
Why would they lie?
When you overlay the FBI trawling area of 2.7 NM, (gif format), to
recover parts of the aircraft and on the larger Search Area Diagram you
can clearly see the purpose of the trawling effort was not bodies as
claimed by the NTSB and FBI. It was focused only on the 2.7 NM radius
of a possible MANPADS missile. Most of the search area was north and
west of the flight path, areas where there was no expected .....
The China Lake Naval Warfare Center report on the possibility of a
MANPADS missile impact is inconclusive with respect to whether or not a
shoulder-fired missile could have penetrated the wing tank adjacent to
the CWT and exploded in the fuel. However, all of the damage to the
left wing and left CWT side wall is consistent with this type of
impact.
A Thermal Imaging photograph provided by military experts shows that a
MANPADS missile would guide on the three Air Packs located directly
below the Center Fuel Tank.
The Stinger Man Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS) is representative
of many such systems available to terrorists groups.
Check out triangulation of witnesses to the missile[s]:
NOTE: The below link is only a small sample of the information
collected from hundreds of witnesses
http://twa800.com/images/triangulation_update.gif
*
107 witnesses on 4 aircraft, 19 boats, and 31 locations ashore. They
were located in a 360° circle around the missile engagement. Their
live testimony alone will prove the aircraft was shot down. This is why
the Justice Department has kept air crash investigators away from
witnesses for 2 1/2 years and also one reason they are conducting a
malicious show-trial prosecution of author and outside investigator
James Sanders and his wife. We now believe there is sufficient evidence
for a Grand Jury to bring indictments for a cover-up of the Felony
Murder of 230 innocent people.
Note: Sounds like money issues to me. Billions in cash pay-outs not a
desired thing by the government.
Crimes usually involve motive, means, and opportunity. I see
you're trying to establish means and opportunity. What would
have been the motive to shoot down that airliner ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
11 Mar 2005 03:38:29 AM |
|
|
"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?
Also, EXPLAIN the * graph below.
Why? It's from a KOOKSITE. But anyway - the FBI though it was a
missile from day one - that's why they wer involved, you see. What
that "graph" is, is an attempt to plot possible missile engagements
zones ON THE SEA! NOT from the land.
Are you going to tell that for a few
minuets, that hundred + of people whom didn't know each other and never
meet even afterwards all made up simultaneously eye witnessed- stories
to something that looked like missiles that shot down the plane?
Most peope have never seen a missile launch, therfore they don't knwo
what it looks like. I believe they saw what they saw, the trouble is,
as I have been patiently trying to explain to you for a while now, is
that what they saw is not consistent with any missile attack other
than by a very large missile requiring a very large launch platfom
which would produce a launch event SEVERAL TIMES more obvious than the
flight of the missile itself.
I have
seen some of the people testify on video and their eyes showed horror
of their remembrance. This was not a plane that just blew it self up
out of the sky.
Unfortunately, that's exactly what it is. That you choose to not
believe this because you'd rather blame Clinton puts you firmly in teh
same camp as Zal and his WTC kooks.
FBI: possible missle launch zone 5
http://twa800.com/dredge/launchzone.gif
http://twa800.com/dredge/search.gif
Also according the report
The kook report..
the some 'other FBI' people lied about stuff.
Why would they lie?
Again, what teh ***** do the FBI have to do with accident
investigations? It was the NTSB who examined the wreckage, foudn no
evidence of a missile strike, identified where the airframe failed
after the initail explosion etc etc.
When you overlay the FBI trawling area of 2.7 NM, (gif format), to
recover parts of the aircraft and on the larger Search Area Diagram you
can clearly see the purpose of the trawling effort was not bodies as
claimed by the NTSB and FBI. It was focused only on the 2.7 NM radius
of a possible MANPADS missile. Most of the search area was north and
west of the flight path, areas where there was no expected .....
As I said, the FBI were working on the probability of it being a
missile, hence they looked for evidence for it. One the wreckage had
been recovered, however, ot became obvious it wasn't a missile, due to
the lack of shrapnel damage.
The China Lake Naval Warfare Center report on the possibility of a
MANPADS missile impact is inconclusive with respect to whether or not a
shoulder-fired missile could have penetrated the wing tank adjacent to
the CWT and exploded in the fuel. However, all of the damage to the
left wing and left CWT side wall is consistent with this type of
impact.
That is an interpretation from a kook site. Same as Zak and his WTC
*****...
A Thermal Imaging photograph provided by military experts shows that a
MANPADS missile would guide on the three Air Packs located directly
below the Center Fuel Tank.
That is an interpretation from a kook site. Same as Zak and his WTC
*****...
The Stinger Man Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS) is representative
of many such systems available to terrorists groups.
Hello, Mikey?! It has a ceiling of 10,000 feet, TWA800 was at 13,700
feet, Stingers aren't in boost at 13,700 feet, what the eyewitnesses
kooks like you always bang on about saw is NOT CONSISTENT WITH A
MANPAD MISSILE. How many mroe times?
Check out triangulation of witnesses to the missile[s]:
That is an interpretation from a kook site. Same as Zak and his WTC
*****...
NOTE: The below link is only a small sample of the information
collected from hundreds of witnesses
That is an interpretation from a kook site. Same as Zak and his WTC
*****...
http://twa800.com/images/triangulation_update.gif
*
107 witnesses on 4 aircraft, 19 boats, and 31 locations ashore. They
were located in a 360=B0 circle around the missile engagement. Their
live testimony alone will prove the aircraft was shot down. This is why
the Justice Department has kept air crash investigators away from
witnesses for 2 1/2 years and also one reason they are conducting a
malicious show-trial prosecution of author and outside investigator
James Sanders and his wife. We now believe there is sufficient evidence
for a Grand Jury to bring indictments for a cover-up of the Felony
Murder of 230 innocent people.
Note: Sounds like money issues to me. Billions in cash pay-outs not a
desired thing by the government.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! YOu fucking utter, total incredible idiot. If it WAS a
terrorist attack, who woudl get sued? No one, you can't reasonably
protect against someone shooting your aircraft down. However, TWA 800
WENT BUST shortly after 1996 because they got sued to buggery. Hell,
one of the suits even mentiones the design of the CWT fuel pump (which
was identified as causing a fuel/air explosion in another Boeing
aircraft previously)
http://www.cnn.com/US/9612/26/twa.fuel.pump/
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Why does Tommy deny evidence found ? |
11 Mar 2005 06:41:24 AM |
|
|
"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
| | | | | | | | |
