The Missiles That Brought Down TWA Flight 800

If the U.S. public began to raise a fuss about U.S. missile strikes that blow up large numbers of civilians at wedding parties abroad, it’s not beyond the realm of the imaginable that the U.S. government would begin blaming the explosions on faulty candles in the wedding cakes.  A similarly implausible excuse was used to explain the 1996 explosion of TWA flight 800 off Long Island, New York, and the U.S. public has thus far either swallowed the story whole or ignored the matter.

If you watch Kristina Borjesson’s new film, TWA Flight 800, you’ll see a highly persuasive case that this passenger jet full of passengers was brought down by missiles, killing all on board.

A CIA propaganda video aired by U.S. television networks fits with none of the known facts, makes the claim that there were no missiles, and offers no theory as to what then did cause the explosion(s) and crash into the sea.

A coverup by the FBI and the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) was blatant and extensive, involving intimidation of witnesses and investigators, tampering with evidence, false testimony before Congress, censoring reports, and numerous violations of normal protocols.  Some of the government’s own official investigators concluded that the explosion(s) occurred outside the airplane.  They were not permitted to write analyses in their reports, as in every other investigation.  Their reports were censored.  They were forbidden to testify.  Some 200 eyewitnesses — people on the ground and in other planes, at least many of whom described seeing one or more missiles rising from the ground to the airplane — were censored as well.  Not a single witness was permitted to testify at the public hearing.

The military staged a test firing of missiles with witnesses, in an attempt to prove that the witnesses would either not see the missiles or testify inaccurately about what they saw.  However, the witnesses all reported seeing the missiles well.  The report on this test came to the opposite conclusion of what had been hoped for, but the government fed the original, hoped-for line to the media, which dutifully reported it.

Investigators thought and still think a missile or missiles brought down the plane.  Eye-witnesses thought and still think the same.  Explosives residue in the plane wreckage and other physical evidence in the wreckage suggests missile(s).  Data from several different radars at the time of the disaster show pieces of the plane being blown off at speeds that could only have been generated by high explosives, not by a fuel tank exploding.  Radar data also show the plane falling, not rising.  (The CIA claimed, without offering any evidence, that the plane rose into the sky as it was exploding, thus accounting for witnesses’ reports of seeing objects rising.)  The damage to the seats and passengers in the plane was random, not greater closer to a fuel tank.

No more evidence was ever offered for a fuel tank exploding than could be offered in the theoretical fiction of a wedding cake exploding, or — for that matter — was ever offered for the Maine having been attacked by the Spanish in Havana harbor or for the Gulf of Tonkin incident having occurred or for the WMDs piling up in Iraq, or than has been offered thus far for the dreaded Iranian nuclear bomb program.  There was no wiring near the fuel tank that could have caused it to explode and no other explanation than faulty wiring even hypothesized.

The film concludes that likely three missiles were shot from near the Long Island coast, including at least one from a ship at sea.  The film does not address the question of who did this or why.  But it presents the evidence that it happened, and that the coverup began immediately, with the disaster site being quickly closed off and guarded by roughly 1,000 police officers, roughly half of them FBI — not the normal procedure for a plane crash.  The likely speculation is, of course, that the U.S. military committed this crime.  Was someone on the plane targeted for murder, and everyone else killed in the process?  Was this a test of technology?  Was it a mistake?  Was it part of some larger plot that failed to develop?  I don’t know.

But I do know that the nation didn’t go into a collective state of vicious rabid insanity, demanding vengeance against evildoers who hate us for our freedoms.  No nations were destroyed in a sick parody of justice following the destruction of TWA flight 800.  But neither were those responsible held publicly accountable in any way.

The New York Times seems impressed by the film and favors a new investigation but laments the supposed lack of any entity that could credibly perform an investigation.  Think about that.  The U.S. government comes off as so untrustworthy in the film that it can’t be trusted to re-investigate itself.  And a leading newspaper, whose job it ought to be to investigate the government, feels at a loss for what to do without a government that can credibly and voluntarily perform the media’s own job for it and hold itself accountable.

The New York Post, too, takes the film quite seriously, and simply recounts its arguments without adding any commentary other than agreement.  But the Daily News offers instead a textbook example of how self-censorship and obedience to authoritarianism work.  Here’s the complete Daily News review with my comments inserted:

“If you need to get a person’s attention fast, just whisper, ‘There’s something the government isn’t telling you.’

“Works every time.”

Like the time the NSA claimed to be complying with the Fourth Amendment? Like the time nobody was being tortured in Iraq? Like the time the fracking studies showed no damage to ground water? Like the time drones weren’t killing any civilians with their missile strikes?

Sure, there are bound to be times when the government is honest with us. I can’t think of any off the top of my head, but it stands to reason that there are.  Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.  And it’s certainly possible to invent all sorts of fantasies to allege the government to be lying about.  I’m not convinced Obama was born in Africa, aliens visited New Mexico, the World Trade Center was blown up from within, or every person who emails me to complain about it is really being zapped with invisible mind-control weapons (for all I know they just watch television and come away feeling like that).  But shouldn’t we take claims of government deception as possibly right and possibly wrong and follow the evidence where it leads? I’m not willing to swear any of the things I list here isn’t true unless evidence establishes that.

“In this case, filmmakers Kristina Borjesson and Tom Stalcup are convinced that ill-fated TWA Flight 800, which exploded over Great South Bay on July 17, 1996, was shot down by a missile.”

And does the evidence suggest that they are right or wrong?  Should we just pretend to know that they’re wrong because the government says so?  Yep:

“The original government investigation and later a second probe by the National Transportation Safety Board disagreed. Both concluded the explosion was caused by a spark in the center fuel tank.”

Yet they offered no explanation for where such a spark might have come from, or why so many airplanes have been permitted to fly since, in danger of falling victim to such a spark.

“So someone is wrong. But ‘TWA Flight 800′ says it’s more insidious than that. The government also knows it was a missile, the film strongly suggests, and simply chooses to lie.  Charges of conspiratorial coverups are as common as jaywalking, of course, but ‘TWA Flight 800′ has more evidence than most. The advocates here include several original investigators as well as aircraft engineers, transportation and safety experts. There also are a half dozen people, civilians with no agendas, who all say they saw something streaking across the sky toward the plane before it exploded.”

Why is that insidious?  You don’t know whether all these people are right, but the suggestion that they might be is insidious?  The film in fact doesn’t say the government “simply” chooses to lie.  In fact, many in the government choose to speak out, forming much of the basis for the film.  Others choose to cover up what happened.  Most of them are clearly just following orders.  Others must have motivations, but whether those motivations are simple or complex is not touched on in the film — as this review goes on to acknowledge:

“The film doesn’t really address two of the biggest questions raised by most conspiracy charges. First, why would someone cover up the truth, and second, given the number of people involved in this investigation, could they all keep a secret this big for 17 years?”

In fact, they aren’t all keeping it secret.  Many have been shouting the truth, as they see it, from the rooftops.  Others recount why they’ve kept quiet.  One woman explains that she was applying for U.S. citizenship and was threatened that her application would be rejected if she spoke out.  The film does not address motivations for the coverup, but let me take a wild stab at doing so: If the U.S. military blew up a passenger jet full of passengers, including U.S. citizens, for no damn good reason, wouldn’t we need an explanation for its wanting to go public with that?  Doesn’t the military’s wanting to keep that quiet require no explanation at all?  When the Joint Special Operations Command murders Afghan women in a night raid and then digs bullets out of their bodies with knives and claims that they were killed by their families, and then later admits the truth, are we shocked by the routine lies or by the vicious crime?  Wouldn’t we be more seriously shocked if the U.S. military gratuitously blurted out something true?  Wouldn’t taking responsibility for TWA 800 be a remarkable act of civic virtue worthy of the record books?

“But the film isn’t after ‘why.’ It just wants to say that a lot of physical and circumstantial evidence points to a missile.

“Toward that goal, it’s on target.”

It is indeed, though one wouldn’t have guessed that from the beginning of this newspaper’s review, from media coverage in general, from history books, or from how most people have been conditioned to react to the next suspicious disaster yet to come.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • LeftoverHuman

    If the federal government is not doing anything wrong, it must welcome all inquiries and lay open all its proceedings.

    • Emu Cat

      There would be no doubt if the FBI did not lie about everything and cover and alter evidence. The Navy had more trouble lying. Maybe a little more ethical.

  • Charlie Primero

    “Like the time the NSA claimed to be complying with the Fourth Amendment?
    Like the time nobody was being tortured in Iraq? Like the time the
    fracking studies showed no damage to ground water? Like the time drones
    weren’t killing any civilians with their missile strikes?”

    +1

  • human

    In reference to your current ambivalence concerning what brought down the WTC towers, please consider that the only reason we ostensibly know what happened aboard the jetliners is due to phone conversations that the FBI admitted during the Zacarious Moussaoui (20th hijacker) trial never happened.

    • Guest
  • gozounlimited

    Interesting to me that the explosion was blamed on fuel originating in the wing… yet the wing was never retrieved, only the fuselage was reconstructed during investigation and one can see a big gaping hole in the side caused by a missile…. kind of a no-brainier.

    Another no-brainier……

    Climate change is as natural as the differences in seasons. The increasing earth changes of the last several years are primarily due to changes in the sun and in the position of our solar system in the
    galaxy. There is valid suspicion that the elite powers may be intensifying disasters to raise fear and embed their fraudulent paradigm.

    Weather events can be manipulated by stratospheric aerosol geo-engineering, a quiet patented project rationalized by the false carbon emissions concept. Chemical sprays are widely sprayed in the skies several days a week. The sprays include aluminum, cadmium, radioactive barium and thorium, as well as polymer fibers and biological components.

    It is important to realize that there actually is a secretive cabal of global powers who have worked gradually and incrementally to orchestrate financial, government, military, intelligence, corporate,
    technological, pharmaceutical, media and security policies to consolidate their control of humanity.
    http://www.activistpost.com/2013/08/carbon-fraud-deniers.html

  • Eric Hollingsworth

    There is a connection between TWA 800 and 9/11: FBI agent John O’Neill.

    I had worked as a guard in a high-rise so I knew if there had been charges in the WTC buildings, they only could have been set with the complicity of building security. A web search led me to John O’Neill, who had become head of WTC security three weeks before 9/11. He had recently retired from the FBI, apparently to avoid a second investigation into how, while in Florida, he temporarily lost information about the counterterrorism plans for NYC, which should not have been taken from the FBI’s NYC office. He died, nearly $300,000 in debt, in the collapse of the South Tower.

    I’m not sure what O’Neill’s exact role in the TWA 800 investigation was, but according to the New Yorker, “[O'Neill] proposed that the flare could have been caused by the ignition of
    leaking fuel from the aircraft, and he persuaded the C.I.A. to do a
    video simulation of this scenario, which proved to be strikingly similar
    to the witnesses’ accounts.” http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2002/01/14/020114fa_fact_wright

    So here’s a person that figures prominently in two of the most controversial events in recent history, a person who was apparently very controversial himself. He’s surrounded by a mass of contradictory recollections, opinions, theories, and speculation. Some people think he’s a hero, some think he was set up, some even think he’s still alive. Me, I’m not sure, but I’m convinced that any re-investigation into TWA 800 or 9/11 would be incomplete without an exhaustive investigation of who O’Neill really was and what he really did.

    The Complete 911 Timeline is a good source for objective information about O’Neill: http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=john_o_neill

    This Esquire article is somewhat of a hit piece and a little arty for my taste, but it’s definitely worth reading (the author suggests a mystery surrounding O’Neill’s death):
    http://web.archive.org/web/20090629154705/http://www.esquire.com/ESQ0302-MAR_ANTITERROR

    It’s interesting that the person who is often praised for his constant warnings about Al Qaeda should have been the same person who came up with the scenario the government used to show that the downing of TWA 800 was not terrorism.

    • Mannoman

      Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

      ae911truth.org

      For facts about this particularly criminal murderous false flag operation

      • Delbert Lammers

        I fear the day may be quickly approaching whereby posting on a site of this type maybe labeled as a treasonous’ offense.

  • FranklinBeenz

    http://theyflyblog.com/the-truth-about-twa-flight-800-almost/06/19/2013

    http://www.theyfly.com/newsflash4/twa800.htm

    http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Contact_Report_258

    Contact Report 258 Translation

    TWA Flight 800 – Part One

    Billy

    Now the next question: On the 17th of July 1996 a jumbo jet, a
    Boeing 747, shortly after it’s start in New York exploded and fell into
    the sea, whereupon there were approximately 230 people killed. Do you
    know anything about it?

    Ptaah

    56. Certainly, because such instruments are registered by our airborne monitoring devices.

    57. Furthermore, Florena also informed me about this regrettable incident.

    58. But why do you ask?

    Billy

    Quite simply, it interests me why the plane exploded. The Americans
    have given various explanations but one doesn’t know which one is
    applicable.

    Ptaah

    59. About this, I can give you information.

    60. Naturally the Americans want to conceal the truth and act by
    some flimsy explanation because it is their own fault that the disaster
    happened.

    61. The truth is that the U.S. Navy shot an attack missile on their
    airplane where it was met by this and brought to an explosion.

    62. Whether this happened intentionally or unintentionally could
    not yet be clarified by us. However it seems to us after the previous
    examinatinos that two possibilities must be taken into consideration.

    Billy

    Why is that?

    Ptaah

    63. To speak about it is actually still too early.

    64. To our knowledge, an espionage-engaged person was on the
    airplane and was carrying important data that had been stolen from the
    American Secret Service.

    65. That this person was on board is without question, but whether a
    deliberate launching took place regarding this is still unclear.

    66. The possibility exists that many people were sacrificed because of a single spy.

    67. Our investigations will show whether this really happened.

    Billy

    That would really be something if it actually happened. However, in
    political, military and secret service intelligence circle, much worse
    crimes were already committed, by which thousands and even umpteen
    thousands of people had to lose their lives. One only has to think of
    the contaminative radioactive tests of the Americans and the English
    etc., where thousands of people fell victim, which was concealed of
    course. And I have written an article here regarding this concealment if
    you want to read it shortly…oh yeah, but first one asks again about
    the suspected spy in the downed airplane whose data was marked as “TWA
    800″ to my knowledge and, to be precise, fell into Moriches Bay off the
    coast of Long Island, where UFO activity has been recorded over and over
    for a long time, which I read in my notes here. It interests me now
    into which context the espionage activity took place, military or
    economic?

    Ptaah

    68. Our previous realisations yielded that the concerning person
    possessed secret information of a military kind concerning, various
    occurrences in relation to extraterrestrial flying objects in the area
    of Moriches Bay etc., as well as concerning so-called Brookhaven “SDI”
    (Strategic Defense Initiative or ‘Star Wars’) experiments.

    69. Whether this missile was consciously launched because of this
    espionage person, in order to bring them to silence this way, is only
    one possibility because another possibility is taht it was all a tragic
    accident, though it is certain beyond a doubt that the U.S. Navy did
    launch the missile.

    70. However, there is another possibility that we must also take
    into account, that the airplane was recorded and spotted on the radar of
    the U.S. Navy as a so-called “UFO”, whereupon the mistaken launching of
    the rocket took place.

    71. And we must take this possibility exactly into consideration even sooner, just as with the espionage-activity person.

    72. However, I can report to you nothing further about it still but
    must wait what the investigations of Florena’s Group yields who are
    handling everything in this connection.

    Billy

    That’s good. May one know what their analysis yielded when she knows the facts?

    Ptaah

    73. Of course, because from this no secret should be made since it
    is about an event that, if our previous analysis should be completely
    true, has criminal backgrounds.

    Billy

    Now a question regarding the further secrecy of certain facts or
    events that you have explained to me over the corse of the years and
    have prevented me from making them public so that I would be silent. May
    I actually speak freely about these things now or not?

    Ptaah

    74. You may speak freely about all those matters, data and facts that we have allowed you to identify.

    75. All other facts you should keep in you under lock and key.

    Billy

    Therefore everything remains under time. And of course I will stick
    to your instructions and only speak about things that I may quite
    safely identify.

    TWA Flight 800 – Part Two

    Billy

    I would immediately like to ask you about your investigations
    concerning the drama in the USA where a passenger plane exploded in
    Moriches Bay and fell. You promised you would immediately inform me if
    something had happened there after you had completed your investigation.
    This is probably the reason why you are now here.

    Ptaah

    5. That is right.

    6. Now, our supposition regarding the circumstances of the crash of
    TWA Flight-800 on the 17th of July 1996 in the area of Moriches Bay was
    correct.

    7. The cause of the disaster was a rocket-missile from the U.S.
    Navy that erroneously positioned the aircraft on its equipment as an
    unknown, foreign missile and identified therefore as a UFO whereupon the
    command went out to launch this missile without excuse because through
    ihe haste and great carelessness the airplane was classified as an
    unknown flying object and in certain respects the national security of
    the USA had supposedly been threatened.

    8. This fact has now become concealed of course and run by all the
    government, the Secret Services and the Navy with the methods standing
    at their disposal.

    Billy

    That is really something. However you earlier said that yo are not
    contravening against your directives with this explanation because you
    know that I would like to bring such matters publicly into the open
    through the Contact Reports.

    Ptaah

    9. We have also had thoughts about this and have therefore asked the High Council if the explanation may be made public or not.

    10. The opinion of the High Council was that this event was a crime so human-unworthy, that this should be publicly announced.

    11. Under the cloak of National Security, namely, as explained by
    the High Council, the U.S Military as well as the U S. Secret Services
    and their Government have committed human-shameful crimes in secret
    missions so that the world-wide public should be informed about it in
    order to denounce the whole human-unworthy machinations and in time to
    make them succumb.

    12. This however we must not ourselves and not publicly do as we
    may only give the necessarv information through which it is then left up
    to you and other persons to spread these in useful form.

    Billy

    These crimes also fall under secrecy in America, however.

    Ptaah

    13. That is correct, however through the assent of the High Council
    we may give you this piece of information in this particular case for
    public use.

    Billy

    I would like to thank the High Council. And of course thanks to all
    of you for clarifying the circumstances of these criminal events.

  • America’s Native Son

    I did not have sex with this woman. no americans are being spied on. if I had a son, he would be treybro martin

    • JackThomasAZ

      If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan, period. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. The attack on Benghazi was due to spontaneous anger over a YouTube video insulting the false prophet mohamed.

      • How did you get in my room!?

        The CIA weapon experts have concluded that it was NOT A MISSLE. Repeat. it was NOT, A, MISSILE. If you saw a flash in the sky. YOU SAW NOTHING, GO HOME, YOU ARE DRUNK. *FBI and CIA in a Nutshell*

  • ASK THE NSA WHO I AM

    OF COURSE IF I HAD ANOTHER DAUGHTER SHE WOULD BE RACHAEL JENTEL

  • SteveVictor1

    Personally, I don’t believe a single word the government says. If a government official said “the sky is blue,” I’d call him a liar.

    • Quickledo

      I would at least confirm the claim, independently, before calling him a liar. Even government toads tell the truth on occasion.

      • Guest

        So, we all know that all governments lie for whatever reason. Perhaps the arguments would be better supported if we knew exactly how a government holds such power over an individual to suppress deathbed confessions or how they keep the disenfranchised from spilling the beans on such cover ups?

        • wingzone

          I believe Flt 800 was a tragic and unintended target – the cover-up was deemed necessary for purposes of National Security. For that reason, people (especially active duty military) would rationalize the need to remain silent Think about what we might be doing that we would not want other nations to know about.

          • Anon

            All of my research points to your conclusion as well.

          • wenwen69

            Then again, it could have been some morally bankrupt secret organization who wanted to send an unmistakable message to the Military and Government that they are not on top of their game as they would have themselves believe.

      • Guest

        The sky only appears blue, so yes to say the sky is blue is to lie.

        • wenwen69

          …But that is Steve Victori’s point- It is a lie.

      • wenwen69

        ….But that is Steve Vicotir’s point- It is a lie

      • Jay_Sherman

        Yeah, good liars tell the truth 95% of the time. It’s the 5% they distort; and they’re then most effective and dangerous- unlike someone who lies constantly- who is easily caught in their lies because they tell almost no truth.

    • DevaintDamien

      The sky is not blue, the true color is dark, the hue of space

      • Chris Perricone

        Nitrogen causes the sky to *appear* blue to the eye – certain people (including myself) with head/eye injuries can detect different wavelengths of light such as UV…. the sky can then look much lighter, such as pale blue…..

        • Fiyero109

          sorry Chris, but unless your eyes somehow mutated and developed cones to detect UV light I doubt you are seeing it

      • Dave Sunhammer

        Sorry, but space is not our sky. The color of our sky varies greatly depending one where the sun is. At times our sky is even rainbow-ed (sunrise and sunset),

  • Bill Ross
  • NVN777

    This is America. The greatest democracy in the world, the government would never tell lies. Only commie and fascist pinkos would do something that dastardly.

    • Quickledo

      Your answer is in your statement — Bill Clinton and his minions ran the investigation, directed by Jamie Gorelick. You remember Jamie Gorelick, don’t you?

    • Sheldon Cierley

      Riiggghhhttt…

  • wootendw

    TWA flight 800 was most likely brought down by a sophisticated IED that was placed in its fuel tank at its last stop before New York – which was Athens, Greece. The device could have been triggered by a cell phone or similar transmission instrument from the shore as the plane was taking off.

    The missile theory is every bit as ludicrous as the government’s claim that the crash was caused by an unspecified electrical malfunction. A missile fired to a height of over 10000 feet would have been easily and instantly recognizable to tens of thousands of people with very little discrepancy among all the witnesses.

    • Mike

      Well, a missile was seen by about seven hundred people-from the ground and in the air, with very little discrepancy. So there is that.

    • Mannoman

      Ah, another ‘expert’ who doesn’t know that the fuel tank recovered showed that it was blown in and not out by an internal explosion.

  • Anthony Hall
  • Frdmftr

    The TWA 800 shoot down occurred shortly after a Stinger missile was stolen from a military supply depot and agents provocateurs tried to sell it to the New Hampshire Militia, who said ‘NOT ON YOUR FREAKING TIN-TYPE!” and were subsequently framed and sent to prison for the theft of military night vision devices by an agent provocateur. The purpose of the TWA 800 shoot down was to give the government justification, supported by public outrage, to go after the militias around the country that were beginning to give government thugs the heebie-jeebies.

    • Lohocla

      If that was the case, why not admit that the plane was brought down by a missile? Logic would dictate that for your scenario to work, as you stated yourself, there needed to be public outrage but since they denied it was a missile, no outrage occurred.

      Personally I believe the missile theory, I watched the movie and was convinced just by the radar showing the debris and the fact that while jet fuel does indeed burn, it’s difficult to make it go “boom” w/out some compression. So, please don’t think I’m going after you as a nut, even though you appear to be, I’m just wondering how your logic fits the chain of events.

    • Dave Sunhammer

      800 occurred during a planned military war games with the scenario of an east coast invasion. Radar footage shows that for a short time 800 entered the restricted space. One scenario offered is that 800 was mistaken for a drone and therefore a live-fire target. (believe what you want) – - – This is all based on 1996 information from different sources at the time, and not retrospect.

      • Barry Leslie

        Dave you are dead on the 747 put out more heat and was a larger target…when the heat seeking missile was launched it was suppose to hit its designated target but it was smaller so that backs up the sightings that saw the missile turn towards flt 800 it was just a matter of physics that the missile went to the hotter larger target ….thats what it is made to do…flt 800 was in the wrong place at the wrong time…since this was a true FUBAR for the govt. the coverup ….

  • Grampa Dave

    At the time that TWA was in the news the government told us that the empty fuel tahks were emitting bad fumes that were ignited by a short………….why was the airline flying to Europe with empty fuel tanks??????????????hmmmmmmmmmmmm

    • dallas1138

      It’s all about weight.
      Planes only put enough fuel in the tanks to get them where their going. Fuel is heavy so if you fill up the spare tanks it’s actually way more expensive to fly the plane to it’s destination.

      • Guest

        Your are correct! Also, the fuel tanks in the wings were fully fueled. That would be all they needed to get to Paris. The center fuel tank did not need fuel for this flight.

        • silver_aquarian52

          Wrong

      • Yabuddy

        That’s wrong. Planes are loaded with enough fuel to circle for a few hours or to travel to other airports in case of bad weather or otherwise inability to land. It would’ve likely had all of its tanks full.

      • silver_aquarian52

        Incorrect. !!
        All international flights leave loaded to the gunwals.
        Fact.

  • Paladin13

    Jack Cashill has produced DVD’s and a book about Flight 800 (Mega Fix, Silenced, and First Strike):

    http://www.cashill.com.

    Several years ago, one of the cable networks (it my have been the History Channel) produced a program trying to prove that the center tank such as on Flight 800 could explode according to the government’s theory. They couldn’t get the tank to explode.

  • 63Marine

    I would love to see the passenger list for flight 800. I wonder who was on board the wonderful government needed to remove…..HMMMM! Also, who was behind giving the order to fire……

    • Tom

      Check the memorial all the names are there

      • gappmaster

        If it was a “who” then we can be guaranteed that person has been “removed” from the passenger list. It could also be a “what” was on that plane as well.

        • dosfad

          but what could have been so precious that this event was called forth. or “planned”

      • guru dogg

        People, any government does not give a hoot about who was is or will be on a plane. They will play with their explosive toys as they please. And if accidents happen, too bad!

    • wingzone

      Use this Facebook link for the passenger list – or just google – google has several links.
      https://www.facebook.com/notes/twa/twa-flight-800-passenger-list/407921551333

    • Barry Leslie

      There was a naval training exercise going on in the area…the USS Normandy and the USS
      Alburqurque were in the area the Normandy is a guided missile destroyer a surface to air heat
      seeking missile was launched and a dummy missile was launched that was suppose to have enough heat for the actual missile should have taken it out ….instead the heat seeking missile changed direction and headed towards a larger heated target TWA flight 800 this was friendly fire taking down a civilian aircraft…at the time the Clinton administration did not want this embarassing fiasco to become public knowledge….so the cover up story began and once it was started there was no going back … if the good lord would have come forward and gave his account the FBI would have discredited him…..if it walks like a duck… quacks like a duck it is most likely a duck in this case it was a chicken……

      • lemmsoil

        That would be Albuquerque

      • Jay_Sherman

        The projectile came from LAND- not a ship; the vicinity of the old(defunct) Grumman aerospace facility in Calverton, NY. to be exact. (I know an eyewitness, who spilled the beans initially- before being bribed by the Feds to keep his mouth shut in exchange for a nice job in gov’t “security”)

  • Anthony Hall

    Please see my “TWA Flight 800 and 9/11″ at

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/27/twa-flight-800-and-911/

  • Anthony Hall
  • bobussery

    The greatest modern day lie ever sold to Joe public. Flight 800 was taken down by multiple missles probably from our own government due to a software glitch in a new program. Clinton could not risk the election by having this mistake exposed, and so the string of lies begin.

    • Andrew Brinkman

      Someone still pulled the trigger

      • Lohocla

        Could have been automated, tho you would hope that the ultimate decision to kill people, even enemies, required a human to pull said trigger.

        • Ray, Cancer Survivor

          Actually when the Aegis system is set to operate in full defense mode a human operator is not needed to fire. The computer can track, ID, then decide what to destroy. One thing for sure is a stinger missile could not have hit flight 800. It was beyond the range of the Aim 92.

          • Lohocla

            interesting that you bring up Aegis….look up “Iran Air flight 655. Mistakes happened and all that happy crappy. :)

          • Barry Leslie

            The USS Vincennes is another guided missile cruiser that has surface to air missiles on board in July 1988 a sailor on board accidently hit the launch button and an Iranian civilian airbus A300 with 290 souls on board was shot down..the US govt accepted responsibility for this screw up not so the case in Flt 800….

    • wingzone

      Possible, but unlikely since I don’t see why a President would be held responsible for a mistake or malfunction of military equipment being tested. More likely we were violating international treaty agreements….. for that the President would certainly be held responsible.

      • Anon

        Look how the opposition responded with Benghazi. No way Clinton would have been re-elected if the military accidentally killed US and French citizens. The President is the commander in chief of the military. When a company screws up bad accident or not the CEO always steps down. Well Clinton was the CEO.

        • WhatWouldJesusDu

          Please show me who stepped down after the deep horizon.

          • Ciampino

            The British CEO (or whatever title he had) since BP is British.

    • Anon

      Yup just like when Aegis accidentally shot down the Iranian Airbus. The Navy’s first response to that incident was to try and cover it up!

      • Ray, Cancer Survivor

        That was no accident, that shoot down was deliberate and Justified.

        • Anon

          Sorry but a glitchy piece of software misidentifying a civilian airliner, followed by a trigger happy admiral murdering civilians outside of an act of war isn’t “Justified”! If it was on purpose that makes it even worse. Stupid actions like that start world wars.

    • wenwen69

      It is perhaps ONE of greatest modern day lies- It is right up there with the lie that the WTC was brought down by commercial aircraft; that personal Federal Income Tax goes to fund Government services and that the Gulf of Tonkin incident actually happened.

  • Rodney Stich

    Former federal airlines safety inspector provides in his book, History of Aviation Disasters: 1950 to 9/11, information on the downing of TWA Flight 800 that has never before been revealed. That information includes pilots in the vicinity, and includes the mole in the al Qaeda cell that provided advance information of several of the planned al Qaeda attacks to FBI agents, the first in the list being the downing of a U.S. airliner departing a local New York City airport. That book, nearly 700 pages, goes far beyond just the downing of TWA Flight 800. Available at amazon.com and other Internet locations,

  • Ignorance Is A Choice

    Every day, more and more conspiracies turn out to be facts of reality. Conspiracies are the story of history.

    • zanzen

      Hey you stole my line. I have been saying that for years and it’s true. LOL

  • Ignorance Is A Choice

    The Scientific Evidence proves 9/11 was orchestrated by elements of our government and that the Twin Towers and WTC 7 were destroyed with controlled demolitions. The SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE proves it.

    • The man with no name

      Not necessarily, but no one from the “official side of the story” has ever been able to definitely PROVE why the most sophisticated air defense system in the world failed at the Pentagon. This is the real smoking gun of 9/11. It if in fact was a commercial airliner and not a military aircraft, a drone or a missile, the attack would have most certainly also involved a sophisticated jamming attack or electronic warfare to fool the air defense systems, that were simply not within the capabilities of Al Qaeda. Now if it was carried out by a craft with Wild Weasel or air defense suppression capabilities, it makes sense. There are only a few nations with enough capabilities to defeat the air defense of the pentagon and none of them currently or at that time currently have the ability to project their power to the continental United States. For that scenario, it does strongly point to an inside job.

      • none dare call it

        no plane was ever seen crashing into the pentagon and the explosion site isn’t consistent with a plane crashing into it nor was there any pieces of the plane wreckage found. the site damage is more consistent with a bomb explosion and the pittsburgh site was staged as well no plane wreckage found at the ‘supposed’ crash site

      • Delbert Lammers

        I think a person would have to be in serious denial to think anything less…

        • silver_aquarian52

          Never read so much sheer and utter nonsense in my 62 years..you people are kidding right..or dont you watch the TV, or use the internet to view these events.
          No wonder U.S.A. is struggling.

          • wenwen69

            You are in serious denial.

      • stig781

        That’s not the “most sophisticated air defence system in the world” genius. Even British Chain Home of the 1940s is better. Most sophisticated in America, yes.

    • silver_aquarian52

      GARBAGE!

  • Jeremy Morris

    The review was saying that the film claims there was an insidious cause for the crash. Nobody was calling witnesses or their testimony insidious…

  • Jeremy Morris

    not being argumentative, just asking a question. if it was a missile then why is the damage on the hull of the aircraft blown outward and not inward?

  • drummer

    It was 1996, Clinton was running for reelection and didn’t want a successful terrorist attack on his watch. That’s why the Benghazi coverup is no surprise to me.

    • Delbert Lammers

      Then why did George Bush use 9/11 as a great excuse to go to war with a country that had nothing to do with 9/11?

      • big_conservative

        Seventeen UN Resolutions, that’s why.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Larry-McCammon/1091102883 Larry McCammon

          Right. So, that does logically explain why GWB sent 10 times as many troops to Iraq, then to Afghanistan… the country housing the terrorists planners of 9/11. Because it was clear that the UN Resolutions being violated needed to be addressed… not before 9/11, of course.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Larry-McCammon/1091102883 Larry McCammon

          Right. So, that does logically explain why GWB sent 10 times as many troops to Iraq, then to Afghanistan… the country housing the terrorists planners of 9/11. Because it was clear that the UN Resolutions being violated needed to be addressed… not before 9/11, of course.

        • stig781

          There weren’t any UN Resolutions moron. It was illegal.

          • Ray, Cancer Survivor

            Wrong, the invasion was legal under the terms from Gulf War 1. Iraq by shooting at our aircraft in the no fly zone was legal reason to invade Iraq at anytime. The same circumstances that made Clinton’s missile strikes on Iraq legal made the invasion ordered by Bush legal.

      • Sheldon Cierley

        Oil.

        • wenwen69

          Hellooowww!

      • questioneverything911

        oil and also, right after we went there we just happened to find 3 of the LARGEST lithium output sources in the WORD while lithium was at an all time high on the market……hmmmmmm!!

        • JackThomasAZ

          And of course, with these newly found sources of oil and lithium, the price of both commodities went down. Oops. Doh! Another conspiracy theory shattered.

          • SWalkerTTU

            …unless somebody was shorting both oil and lithium…

          • stig781

            No they didn’t, oops! Another deluded fool’s fantasy shattered. It’s a theory, as in a set of facts.

      • USMC1472

        Oil??? Come on people… it’s not like we went in there and stole all their oil!!!! No, the oil was only insurance that they would be able to pay the destruction aka reconstruction.
        Who was the huge winners in the war???? The govt. contractors (haliburton, etc.) and the military industrial complex!!! A perpetual war is exactly what they wanted and they have created; war is serious business, dunchaknow?

        • USMC1472

          edit:…..pay (for) the destruction aka….

        • stig781

          Yes it WAS for the oil, you dumb military pawn.

        • wenwen69

          It was Oil- can’t have a war without oil and both are big money makers. There’s also talk of some huge pipeline to be constructed that will travel through parts of Iraq.

      • charley

        because we needed to clean the earth to many people here and start another war …
        ww1 ww2 korea vietnam all the others that fall in to place . are not enough.

    • LS12

      If so, terrorist groups would be begging for the blame. There were none that I heard of. I think it was an accident that was then covered up.

  • erik

    it’s sad the the government can do whatever they want and are not held accountable for any of there actions. why should we be held accountable for our actions. we as americans can not trust the government and should do what we must to protect ourselves and families and that is what i will do.(FUCK THE US GOVERNMENT) THEY WILL NEVER TELL ME WHAT TO DO. I will take actions into my own hands.

  • http://www.publicsecurity.us/ Barry R Donadio

    ON SALE TODAY!
    TWA FLIGHT 800 FIRST RESPONDER WITNESS ACCOUNT
    https://www.createspace.com/4421534
    use password: TWA

  • Greenhouse Effect

    Over 100 Witnesses said they saw ‘a thing’ fly up from the ocean towards another thing that was in the sky that was traveling east ,… the thing flew up from the sea vertically ,…

  • Tomas

    Its about paying compensation thats why the coverup simple

  • manic st pete

    The US also shot down KAL-007 – they didnt actually shoot it, but they sent it into USSR air space on purpose and therefore have blood on their hands and those involved should be brought to justice

  • NVN777

    This country deserves to be turn into a fascist state. It’s for the best.

  • Barry Donadio

    Barry R Donadio was a First Responder to the TWA Flight 800 crash. He recently released is account of what happened on July 17th 1997
    http://www.twaflight800.us/TWA-FLIGHT-800.html

  • Josh

    I have a theory, eyewitnesses reports missiles. If so, maybe the missiles exploded just outside of the air plane which had put multiple holes in the plane. thus causing the center tank to ignite then explode. Maybe the military did miss fire a missile and then self destruct it just outside of the air plane, and they are covering it up to protect themselves and admit they are the ones to blame. I could go into more details of my theory. If you have any questions reply to the post and i will check back to answer your questions

    • John

      proximity fuse warheads

    • thinkharderokay

      that sounds likely. i could see an accidental launch, and a last second, split-decision to self destruct in an attempt to minimize impact. interesing.

  • Prudence

    … “a producer at CBS news asked a seasoned remote viewer (formerly for the US government) to investigate the downing of TWA flight 800. A team of six of the top remote viewers in this country was assembled. Five of them saw the same thing. A powerful secret weapon, a microwave energy beam that was intended to destroy a drone missile fired from the USS Normandy 35 miles away. Flight 800 was late taking off, and wasn’t supposed to be in the flight corridor at that time. As a result, the plane flew right in to a weapons test – between a microwave beam and the missile beyond the plane.” …
    – heard today on a CD curriculum on the mind’s abilities

    • silver_aquarian52

      Total rubbish madam…clearly you havent watched those who saw the missile trails giving the info on the documentary.

  • Prudence

    … “a producer at CBS news asked a seasoned remote viewer (formerly for the US government) to investigate the downing of TWA flight 800. A team of six of the top remote viewers in this country was assembled. Five of them saw the same thing. A powerful secret weapon, a microwave energy beam that was intended to destroy a drone missile fired from the USS Normandy 35 miles away. Flight 800 was late taking off, and wasn’t supposed to be in the flight corridor at that time. As a result, the plane flew right in to a weapons test – between a microwave beam and the missile beyond the plane.” …
    - heard today within a CD curriculum of the mind’s abilities

  • el duderino

    Did anyone ever investigate the passenger manifesto (or cargo hold) to determine if there was a meaningful target on board?

    • Delbert Lammers

      That would be a good area to begin a real investigation from….

  • ant

    If you look in the 1986 NFPA fire fighters manual it shows how the flame front of jet A fuel can burn and what it takes to get it to burn. As soon I looked it up I knew it would take a lot more of a burnable mixture to get the fuel to go and take out the plane that fast.

  • Gerry Hazelton

    I TRUST OUR GOVERNMENT ABOUT AS FAR AS I CAN THROW THEM – THE FBI AND CIA ARE FULL OF SHIT… I HOPE THESE CLOWNS GET THROWN IN PRISON, AND FAMILY MEMBERS GET COMPENSATED FOR OUR GOVERNMENT MURDERING THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS… THIS IS PATHETIC… SHAME ON THEM, AND SHAME ON BILL CLINTON, FOR THAT SON-OF-A-BITCH KNEW ALL ABOUT IT, AND DIDN’T DO ANYTHING….

  • Luke

    Where is the black box…I have never heard anything about the black box?

    • Delbert Lammers

      That’s a very good point! The black box never spoken of…..

    • John

      They found it and it does not give much data. Just a sudden cut off. IE. explosion.

  • Luke

    Where is the black box…I have never heard anything about the black box?

  • John Harris

    I think the government doesn’t give a shit about the general population, because they have the ability and clout to pull the wool over our eyes. SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS!

  • Delbert Lammers

    Could this have possibly been a run-up to 9/11, just to see if they could get away with it? If it was, then they accomplished their goal of fooling the majority of the American people! Both had one thing in common, they involved jet airliners. It really does make me wonder what our government is really capable of.

    • blue

      just desensitizing us

    • glock22

      Now that sounds plausible.

      • wenwen69

        Agreed

  • jimmwimm .

    yup. we shoot down our own aircraft all the time. NOT

    • cybersleuth58

      There are a lot of very gullible, low information, poorly educated people who have been manipulated by groups who know this quite well (eg the Koch brothers). They know exactly what buttons to push, how to use fear and anger to get them to do their bidding. They get these people to vote against their own self interests to support candidates who will protect their business interests and keep the money rolling in. Seriously, people, how bright do you have to be to be dependent on Social Security and willing to vote in candidates who promise to gut the Social Security program. These guys only care about themselves – they don’t give a hoot about the poor or the elderly and they hate people (like YOU) on government benefits. Smarten up. No one PATRIOT stands by while his company pollutes the air we breath and the water we drink. This is the only planet we have.

      • pijefariq

        you should write a blog so people can more easily avoid your bumbling rants.

  • jimmwimm .

    I dont get the point about this . The airliner crashed. It happens. OH WAIT- the gov did it. lol crazy peeps

    • thinkharderokay

      lol, have you never heard of the 1988 Iranian passenger jet disaster? A U.S. SAM unit mislabeled an Iranian passenger jet as a MIG fighter, and shot it down. Of course, since tensions were high and relations strained with Iran (one of the U.S. newest enemies, at the time) it didn’t really matter to the American public, right??

  • jimmwimm .

    the gov is gonna get you. dont be paranoid but dont fly in planes! lol

    • JasonL77

      Is there supposed to be a point to your inane attempt at wit?

  • jimmwimm .

    anyone who believes that is just a moron. Pretty sure we have other aircraft to test missles on. morons go to YAAFM to see how moronic you really are.

    • cybersleuth58

      I saw the documentary & wondered if there might be something to this… You know – perhaps a friendly fire Navy training mission accident. Then I started to check on some of the people behind this – wackos like Pat Robertson (Hurricane Katrina was a result of NO holding a gay Pride Parade… Some of the loonie toons that believed the Clintons had Vince Foster killed, and the same cretins still promoting the birther campaign. Even if the evidence in this case were true – I can’t take raving lunatics like that seriously – especially when they’ve been waiting for the black guy in the White House to kick down their door and take their guns and their (white) women. Seriously, people, get a THERAPIST, some good meds, and then get a life!

      • LS12

        Yes, that is what I think. A military training accident. And then a coverup.

      • JasonL77

        If it was a friendly fire accident that happened it was still covered up. Your meandering nonsense withstanding, the official government conclusion is doubtful and not at all credible. But let me digress. You likely have no problem blaming George W Bush for 9-11. The problem with people like you is that your ideology and support for Democrats is no different than being a rabid fan of a sports team. Your side or team can do no wrong. Republicans and Democrats serve the same power elite and their interests.

    • cybersleuth58

      I saw the documentary & wondered if there might be something to this… You know – perhaps a friendly fire Navy training mission accident. Then I started to check on some of the people behind this – wackos like Pat Robertson (Hurricane Katrina was a result of NO holding a gay Pride Parade… Some of the loonie toons that believed the Clintons had Vince Foster killed, and the same cretins still promoting the birther campaign. Even if the evidence in this case were true – I can’t take raving lunatics like that seriously – especially when they’ve been waiting for the black guy in the White House to kick down their door and take their guns and their (white) women. Seriously, people, get a THERAPIST, some good meds, and then get a life!

    • thinkharderokay

      lol, have you never heard of the 1988 Iranian passenger jet disaster? A U.S. SAM unit mislabeled an Iranian passenger jet as a MIG fighter, and shot it down. Of course, since tensions were high and relations strained with Iran (one of the U.S. newest enemies, at the time) it didn’t really matter to the American public, right?

  • stanhope

    The miracle mid air explosion in TWA 800 goes with the miracle bullet in Dallas that went on a trajectory unknown in human history defying all known laws of physics.

  • cjbussey

    My friend committed suicide last week–put a gun in his mouth and blew his brains out. He had no history of depression or any other mental illness. Just killed himself, and of course his friends and family are devastated. Then we found out that there were several police cars in the area at the time he was supposed to have died. Some cops were spotted near his house on a “routine training exercise.” It also came to light that a dozen people who own guns lived within a block or so of him. Since there’s no possible way that my friend would have killed himself, accidentally or on purpose, then it must have been one of those other people in the vicinity that day. Who else had the means and opportunity to kill my friend?

  • Sheldon Cierley

    I am convinced that the Government is hiding something. What, I’m not sure, but it is definitely hiding something. Even if the Navy, or some other Government institution brought it down, why hide it? Admit their fault so we can all move on. ?

    • wingzone

      If we violated international treaty agreements, it would be extremely damaging to admit the truth, and the truth would not bring back the 230 lost souls. I may be wrong, but I believe that is the reason for the cover-up.

    • Guest

      I do not think the Navy nor the government will admit their mistakes. They are too proud of themselves and would like the American citizens to portray them as “role models”, which in fact some are (especially those who knows the values of ethics). Let’s just say the “head honcho’s” should be questioned on their motives. There are clear evidence on this film which supports it’s cause and cover ups are very much present.

  • Christopher Smith

    I watched the film yesterday on Netflix, and it’s damn compelling. It’s states fact, many conclusions realized with the NTSB’s own software (which begs answers to how the NTSB came to the conclusion) ,eye witness testimony and investigators analyses. All of these things are typically part of a crash investigation. Always. …except this time. The film lays it out, there’s no doubt in my mind. When the decision the NTSB came to is explained on camera by a senior NTSB invesigator who says, “that’s how they explained it to me,” something is VERY wrong.

    • glock22

      And why was the CIA creating video propaganda scenarios?

      • Anon

        Great question, why was the CIA involved in a civilian “accident” when they have never been involved with any aircraft accident involving mechanical failure prior to TWA or since?

        • wenwen69

          Maybe because since the aircraft was ‘French’ and not U.S. that fact gave them some kind of ‘jurisdiction’?

          • Anon

            It wasn’t French. The airline was flying to France but it was an American airline with US citizens manning the aircraft.

  • Barry Donadio
  • PinballWizard

    I flew from JFK to Paris
    and then back to JFK in 2011 (my first trip to Europe).
    I thought that it was odd that we did not fly in a straight line from JFK to Europe
    across the Atlantic (flight 800 did) but we flew up through
    Canada before
    crossing the Atlantic and we took a similar path back.
    My wife had the same experience on her flight last year. I guess they are
    making it harder for the snipers to shoot us down if we fly high enough before we cross.

    • Kapricorn4

      TWA was still climbing at 15,000 feet flying in a north easterly direction along the coast of Long Island. This is the normal flight path when crossing the Atlantic Ocean. Presumably this route is taken to take advantage of the jet stream and to minimize the time over water.

  • mike

    the saddest thing is that the government thinks they have to cover-up, people would accept the truth

  • tryagain11

    If anyone would know the answer it is Bill Clinton. Since he is fond of speaking in public, the public should be certain to ask him every time they see him, “What happened to TWA 800?” The first time or two he will blow it off, but after months and years of being hounded he might let go.

  • LS12

    Watched the new movie. I think it was a screw up. The missile got launched accidentally. Then the cover up. I can’t see anyone in our govt deliberately bringing this plane down, not even the CIA – there are far more efficient methods. But without a doubt, a missile brought this down and the FBI and CIA tirelessly worked to cover it up.

    • the_espresso_kid

      I just finished watching it, if it was one missle I would agree, but the radar evidence and forensics indicate three missles were fired from three locations. Explain that.

      • Jim Kramer

        Most likely a terrorist attack. But you guys don’t believe in those so I’m guessing surface to air meteor.

        • Kapricorn4

          I suppose that the FBI could not admit that it was a terrorist attack, since it would indicate that they were asleep at the wheel. Or that it was an Israeli submarine.

    • thinkharderokay

      lol, have you never heard of the 1988 Iranian passenger jet disaster? A U.S. SAM unit mislabeled an Iranian passenger jet as a MIG fighter, and shot it down. Of course, since tensions were high and relations strained with Iran (one of the U.S. newest enemies, at the time) it didn’t really matter to the American public, right???

      • Jim Kramer

        Deliberately means something other than what you think it does.

        Ls12: No way CIA shot down an American plane deliberately.

        Thinkharder: idiot let me tell you about this time that an Iranian plane was accidentally shot down.

        How come you conspiracy guys can’t get basic facts right the plane was shot down by a aegis missile ship not a SAM unit. Studyharderok.

      • Kapricorn4

        And a few months later terrorists (Iran?) placed a bomb on Pan Am 103.

  • JustSomeDude78

    Where can I find a good list of theories addressing the WHO and WHY behind this conspiracy? Please don’t tell me to Google it. I’ve tried and failed.

  • rv

    Charles Beatty was on that flight. Check his credentials.

  • Christa Fournell

    I just watched this today!

  • shtstr

    I believe the U.S. Navy test fired a heat seeking missile which locked one to flight 800 and blew it out of the sky and the government will not acknowledge or appolgise.

    • Kapricorn4

      Test firing missiles on Long Island Sound so close to New York City is quite bizarre.

  • TSempers

    I have researched this story with an open mind for a while now, and was starting to lean towards the missile/conspiracy theory. But I saw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut5HyyfdKeo and am back to the fuel tank ignition trigger. I do think there are explanations for all the other theories and witnesses, ALL things considered.

  • Richard A Greely

    I watched the film about flight 800 for the first time last night, and found it suprising that there were not any comments from the manufacture side, helping to explain why the expolsion occured on one of thier products. Boeing is always involved in a crash investigation of one of thier own, except this time not one word. i do beleive that something other than an electrical malfuntion in the main fuel tank caused this airplane to blow up. anyone out there connected to the investigation care to explain to me why Boeing was not mentionedin the Documentary or the NTSB report….

    • Quickledo

      Any NTSB report would be “for the record” only. The “investigation” was hijacked by DOJ with Jamie Gorelick as lead. Jamie Gorelick — hmmm, where have I heard that name before?

    • Kapricorn4

      Boeing would not wish to lose its military contracts.

  • Emu Cat

    I am positive the Navy screwed up and shot it down and the FBI is lying and trying to keep it a secret. I do not believe 911 stories either. I watched the video on it and everyone saw a missile and the FBI lied and lied throughout. That goes for both.

  • mario russo

    Smith Point Beach MASTIC LINY I lived a mile down the street when this happened. ALOT more then half a dozen people saw a missile !! We seen body parts washed up on the beach…Crazy

  • catmandoo

    I still think George ” Lucifer” Bush was in on 9-11.

    • Jim Kramer

      C’mon that’s child’s play. Show me how GLB was involved in the sinking of the Maine. Realistically there is no evidence on earth that will convince you that George bush wasn’t involved so the “still” is superfluous.

    • Kapricorn4

      Actually, I think that it was Cheney who masterminded the whole thing with some help from rogues within the Secret Service. Bush was probably meant to be taken out, so that Cheney would become President.

  • Russell C.

    This is truly a case of are you going to believe the Government or your lying ass eyes! You have eye witness’s who saw the missiles launched from 2-3 different locations. You have radar data showing objects flying towards and intersecting with the plane. You then have explosions and an airborne debris field indicative of a missile strike all watched by the eye witness’s as well.

  • gappmaster

    For every crime, which this is, there is a common principle….motive. So the real question is not whether someone blew up flight 800, but WHY! So I ask you….who, or what, was on that plane that compelled the “powers that be” to decide it was worth 230 lives?

    • Kapricorn4

      Wrong plane shot down ?

  • Anon

    Dear Author,

    I spent years researching this very topic (while in the Air Force and college) before this documentary ever came to light. Here are some more facts the documentary didn’t have time to mention:

    1. Jet fuel type A can’t be ignited with an open flame or with the highest voltage available on a commercial airliner.
    2. Navy Special Warfare Group was doing top secret exercises (Do some freedom of information act requests on Global Yankee) involving live firing off the coast of Long Island the night TWA 800 went down. This special section of coast line was off limits, yet TWA didn’t get the memo and flew into this restricted airspace accidentally. The Navy was testing their Cooperative Engagement Systems which allowed Aegis Cruisers to send targeting data remotely to other vessels.
    3. During the years twa was shot down the Navy was actively pursuing submarine SAM (surface to Air Missile) systems.
    4. During the night TWA was shot down a firebee drown was photographed accidentally flying through the air. Firebee Drones are built by Ryan Aeronautical and used by the Air Force and Navy for anti-air and live fire drills. The existence of this photographed drown flying off the coast of Long Island proves the Navy were doing exercises that night.
    5. An employee of Ryan Aeronautical sent a fax that was accidentally sent to a civilian fax number. The fax was intended for the FBI. The fax showed that the FBI recovered wreckage of what they thought to be was a firebee drone with the TWA wreckage.
    6. A P-3 Orion was flying in the area TWA was shot down and took live thermal video of the wreckage the night the plane was shot down. The P-3 was also confirmed in FAA Radar. P-3′s are used by the Navy to hunt submarines. Once again more proof the Navy was doing exercises that night.
    6. Navy Aegis destroyers have accidentally shot down civilian aircraft before (see Iranian Airbus incident during the 80′s). This was due to a programming glitch in its software. I know the computer programmer who helped design the software.
    7. During the time of this disaster Bill Clinton signed into effect an act that removed “whistle blower” protection from all Navy Special Warfare Group members that leaked information. I have a copy of this order.
    8. The Air Force has its own radar data that shows at least one object intercepting TWA traveling at speeds greater than mach 2 and it has the same radar signature as a missile. Which collaborates with the FAA radar data shown in the documentary.

    All the evidence I uncovered points to an accidental shoot down by the Navy. I have plenty more information if anyone is interested.

    • Guest

      Dear Anon,

      I think it’s time you give the victims’ families their well earned peace. I advise you to contact the author of this journal in person so you can contact the producers of this film. I’m sure they can provide you some contacts in charge of this case (that is those who represent the victims’ families) The families as well as the citizens reserves the right to know the truth.

      • Anon

        I have tried contacting many individuals but few respond. There are many that have the same physical evidence that I do like Jack Cashill and others. The mainstream media either doesn’t believe or they don’t care. Unlike most conspiracy theorists I have hard documented data proving my statements.

        • Another Guest

          Dear Anon,
          After watching the film, based on the FACTS presented and the totality of all the evidence, my opinion is that it was a missile. But I kept thinking why the massive coverup? If bad guys did this, wouldn’t the gov. say “terrorists did this, we’re going to go get them and make sure this never happens again” (yes, I realize this opens up a whole new topic of: politics, conspiricey, public panic, etc.). So the only thing left, is for me to reason that we shot down our own plane (hopefully accidently).
          Anon, of all the comments, blogs & articles out there that I’ve read, you provided the most fact-based, commen-sense, thought provoking explanation to support this theory. I totally agree with “guest” above that the victims’ families deserve the truth. I think there is an appetite by the american people to hear the truth about this awful tragety. I encourage you to continue to try to contact the media, to get your research heard.

          • Anon

            Thank you for your support. The evidence I listed is really just the tip of the iceberg that myself and others uncovered. In regards to the truth, unfortunately this country is good at turning a blind eye to corruption when it comes to their own political party. That behavior is how we have gotten to where we are now. Many Americans think they want the truth up until the point where they have to take responsibility. Just some food for thought. I will always continue to spread my findings as much as possible despite disbelief and ridicule.

          • Kapricorn4

            In order to sell a terrorist attack, you must have a patsy lined up to take the fall, which suggests by itself that the event was an accident. However, the missiles may have taken out the wrong jet.

          • wenwen69

            I don’t think one must have a patsy lined up.. Like Delbert’s statement questioning whether it was a build-up to 9/11 to see if one could get away with it. In this case it could be there was a question of just how far they could manipulate the investigators and the evidence and the media.

    • Darko714

      Technically, this is the most plausible theory. Its biggest flaw is that too many people would have known. How do you keep all the Navy personnel involved quiet for so long? Some of those NSW guys are hard cases. Lifting “whistle blower” protection wouldn’t necessarily scare them off.

      • Anon

        Well it is pretty simple. When I was in the AF all they had to do was tell us it was “a matter of national security and anyone who breaches this is a traitor”. That kept all of us quiet for the most part. No one wants to go to Leavenworth plain and simple and lose pensions for family members. Also a lot of those individuals wouldn’t talk based purely on the national security aspect. No one joins the military to be a traitor. You are assuming that Navy personnel have stayed quiet. Well not all of them have. There was a Chief Petty Officer aboard the USS Trepang (which was confirmed to be involved in the global yankee exercise so was the Petty Officer via FOIA Requests) who claimed he saw something launch from another sub that night that was involved in the exercise. Unfortunately after promising to go on record he told his interviewer that the Navy found out he was talking and threatened his pension. He hasn’t been heard from since. There was also a Col. in the USAF who did Air Traffic Control for NORAD radar who says the AF had radar data that showed objects intercepting TWA. His testimony is readily available. There is also a retired USAF Brigadier General who examined the wreckage and says that a continuous rod warhead shot TWA down without a doubt. His testimony is also readily available. If you do your research you will find several military experts who were eyewitnesses and examiners of the evidence that all support Navy shoot down.

        • DmaxD

          And it took decades for the crew of the USS Liberty to bring to light the treacherous false flag attack on them, as the entire surviving crew was threatened with court marshal or worse, if they discussed what happened that day. The attack on the USS Liberty was no accident according to testimony of the crew. Who are we to believe, the testimony of the crew or a lying media?

          • Anon

            USS Liberty is an excellent example. Thank you for your post.

      • Kapricorn4

        You mean that unless someone confesses, then one can conclude that no crime has been committed ?

      • Quickledo

        Aren’t we still waiting to hear from the Benghazi survivors? Crickets…………..

    • Ciampino

      Voltage has no bearing on the capability of a spark to ignite a fuel-air mixture. A spark is a spark. Now if you were to say that the available voltages were too low to produce a spark ….

      • Anon

        That is precisely what I was trying to say. The only part of the aircraft with voltages high enough to produce a spark are the ignitions in the jet engines. Everything else has a voltage too low to produce a spark. Boeing engineered the aircraft that way on purpose. Which is why the so-called “faulty wiring” that supposedly caused the CWT explosion has never been found. It never sparked and it was never faulty. The NTSB even said in the official report that they found parts of the wiring from the center fuel tank and none of it showed signs of being faulty.

      • Rick Romero

        As I understood it, the high voltages were related to the heat energy produced within the spark. IMHO, you can spark almost anything, but intensity and duration will vary. Saying spark is a spark is like saying fire is fire – different materials have different combustion points. ie diesel vs gasoline.
        Try and light diesel with a match and then try and light gasoline with a match…(safely of course).. :)

    • Ave

      Anon,

      I have a question for you, and for US citizens who believe, as I do, that the aircraft was shot down by friendly fire : why don’t you submit a petition on petitions.whitehouse.gov/ ?

      I would but I am a European citizen. I admire Clinton who was an amazing politician and president, but htis cover up would ternish his name forever.

      • Anon

        Posting a petition to whitehouse.gov is useless especially with Hillary Clinton making a bid for the Presidency. We are still decades away from the truth being fully exposed and accepted by mainstream media. Look how long it took for the truth to come forth for other events like the sinking of the Lusitania. It turns out after all that ship was carrying weapons which is why it sunk so fast. Maybe in 30 years we will all see some National Geographic that brings forth the truth but stops just short of actually naming the US Navy.

        • Ave

          I still think it’s worth a shot. The petition to the NTSB seems to have failed. No surprise there. But why keep this matter between interested parties in the first place ? We should bring that debate to the open, and a whitehouse.gov petition could help in that regard.

          Now that a documentary is available on this topic on Netflix (200 000 ratings, and growing), I think the whole dynamic has changed, and all the pieces are in place for the subject to actually gain proper momentum.

          It will not be easy, of course. Democrats, or Republicans, none of them want that reopened. Because it’s not about destroying the Clinton’s image anymore. It would destroy the credibility of the US federal government, or whatever is left of it after the Snowden scandal, and the Dick Cheney’s “they have WMD in Iraq, there’s proof!” episode. It would create incredible defiance towards the armed forces too. It would also damage the positions of the US on the foreign stage, at a time when it needs it most. Basically, if you are a patriot, you understand why people want to leave it be and forget about it.

          Hopefully they can find a middle ground, where they acknowledge it was a missile, but where the origin of that missile is not determined. Before friendly fire is established, maybe a few more years could go by, to soften the load of truth a bit. I don’t know..

          • Anon

            James Sanders tried softening the blow and he was prosecuted by the DOJ. He was the original pioneer in implicating the US Navy.

    • Kapricorn4

      Was it an El Al flight that was supposed to take the hit, but its take off from JFK was delayed ?

      • Anon

        No I don’t believe any part of the shoot down was on purpose. It is possible but a little far fetched and I haven’t seen any physical evidence that shows that would be the case.

  • Tim

    I was in the US Navy and Surface to air missiles come in several flavors. They do not need to come in contact with an airframe but rather just be in proximity. A skin to skin hit is ideal but if they are within proximity and detonate they have both expanding rod missiles and continuous rod missiles which are comparable to a stack of welded rebar that is in the missile and when detonated flies out like a buzz saw shredding the airframe. Being off the coast of Long Island there are no US Navy ships that would have been exercising or participating in a target shoot so close to shore and most systems that existed at the the time with the exception of Aegis would not fire unless manned and someone pulled the trigger. Even if someone did you can override and destruct the missile several ways one of which is simply turning off the radar. I was not an Aegis Sailor but am told if Aegis is in auto mode that it will engage, threat assess, and launch autonomously. I would think even if Aegis had some catastrophic failure it would be impossible to silence a whole ship’s crew for so many years if it was a Navy ship. Somebody always talks. I find so many witnesses extremely credible but just don’t know.

    • Anon

      Someone did talk. Lookup Master Chief Randy Beers.

  • Mark Burginger

    How did the missiles not make a thunderous noise? Especially the one that originated in a neighborhood? One did a reported zig-zag? All three of the missiles reached the target at the same time ~within a second or two, from different distances? No smoke trail, only a vapor trail? What weapon do we gave that can do all that? I found the documentary amazing. Amazed at how everyone acted like sheep.

    • Anon

      A vapor trail is essentially a smoke trail when the rocket motor is burning. Several witnesses did report hearing rocket noises. According to my research data most if not all rockets were fired from the sea.

      • Mark Burginger

        From above”The film concludes that likely three missiles were shot from near the Long Island coast, including at least one from a ship at sea.” sounds like (1) out of (3) were shot from the water. – Further question, so accepting that three missiles left from various points. So then they eventually to all arrive on the target within a second of each other? – Do we know of such a weapons system that can do that today? #timeforgoogle

        • Anon

          Based on my research, Wallop Defensive Systems in seawolf subs accomodated surface to air missiles in 96.www.naval-technology.com/contractors/decoy_defensive/wallop/index.html (search for Wallop defensive systems from the homepage)
          http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/submarines/seawolf/seawolf1.html

          The sea sparrow was modified with retractable fins in order to be fired from the MK-41 launch tubes which are the same size as the VLS (which launches tomohawks) found on 688i Los Angeles class attack subs (USS Albuquerque). The USS Albuquerque was confirmed to be a part of Global Yankee 96. The military operation that was going on in warning zone that TWA was shot down in. I believe at least one of the warheads was a continuous rod warhead but not all of missiles and warheads that hit were necessarily the same or even from the same boat. Here is proof that the Navy test fires missiles right off our coasts.
          cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-7036716.html

  • John

    could aegis (missiles) have been activated from on board twa 800?

  • John

    could aegis have remotely activated missiles launches from on board twa 800? or was aegis wanting to silence Charles Beatty? what aegis (cia) (fbi) secrets did he know about? that was worth his life and 229 others lives? something very wrong about the entire thing isn’t there?

  • Garnett Gibson

    TWA Flight 800 was a planned terrorist act by higher ups in U.S. government. Higher ups in U.S. government have committed more terrorist acts against The United States of America than any outside forces ever have and maybe ever will.

  • Of Course

    There is 1 person out there that has a shit load of information that proves many government conspiracy theories,
    and that person is going to blow the whistle one day. I can’t wait. It will stir up a lot of shit, many people will get fired, many people will die, but the truth will come out. Just you wait

  • DHaslam

    While our kids played inside OHare in Chicago, I had a lengthy conversation with an airplane mechanic who had just lost his job after the 9-11 fiasco. He was one of the few people who had been assigned to change out the electrical part on the planes after the FBI concluded it was a mechanical cause. He told me it was all a sham, because the part that he changed was at the bottom of the fuel tank, where there was ALWAYS fuel present, even when the tank was reading empty. It was at the low point. So a spark would be underwater, so to speak, and incapable of igniting fumes. This was not brought out in the documentary but is an important component to the massive cover up. -Donald Haslam, San Jose

    • Anon

      Many of the 747s weren’t even retrofitted after the accident as well.

  • Bigdog

    Wow!! It is really sad that all of you nut jobs can create off spring.

  • Amicus Curiae
  • Amicus Curiae

    I just watched that film on Netflix. As far as I am concerned, the people involved in forming the arguments for a government conspiracy are also disingenuous. They want it to be a missile. All those eyewitnesses saw a missile. Some of the data is consistent with a missile attack, according to them. Then, it’s a missile. But even the distinguished PhD that is obsessed with the possible cover-up has apparently found that the eyewitnesses contradict each other, because one missile became 3 missiles launched from three different locations. The disgruntled investigators that are off the reservation and demand more investigation seem sincere. After 4 years of less than satisfactory analysis and mind boggling resource expenditure, all they see is the data that contradicts the official explanation, while blind to the data that contradicts their own theory. OK, maybe circumstantial evidence affected the official decision. This is pretty weak, but the public demanded an official reason. It is possible they took the easy way out and said the 747 broke. A fuel fume explosion was plausible, but not provable. One thing that is much less probable is that the US military shot down this plane. Why? Because it would be impossible to hide. Three missiles fired from two land sites and a ship at sea would leave so many loose ends in the form of people involved, the secret could not be kept. I don’t know what type of missile has the performance required to be consistent with this intercept, but I don’t think little shoulder fired IR guided “stinger” types can do it. Besides, those small warheads could not do what happened to TWA 800. The makers of this documentary dance around who the capable entity would be, and why they would do an airliner shoot-down. Is it me, or are they indicting the US military for this act? Since they say the missiles came from land and sea, was cooperation between the Navy and Army implicated? They did not come out and say it, so they know how serious a charge like that is. The dissenters do not have the proof of their theory either. Mach 4 debris radar tracks? Puh-leeze. Why was the fact the same radar did not track the incoming missile better explained? They are convinced further study will get them what they need. I am telling everyone that in a case like this, more data and more “experts” will only unearth more theories. The lead dissenter, the PhD in physics guy, has no expertise in the results that come from a missile warhead detonation. I have some knowledge of those effects, limited to viewing pictures of ballistic ground tests of actual jet fuel systems. His theory that a missile detonation shattered the left wing into pieces all along the span is dumb. He made it up to connect the data that the left wing was found fragmented and there was a mist observed coming from the left wing by one of the witnesses. Both these data points can be explained by several alternate scenarios. His makeshift explosive ground test gives me no insight, but proves everything to him. I noticed that military aircraft survivability experts declined to comment for this documentary. They probably couldn’t make a definitive judgment either. Sorry for the rant, but the frailties of human beings upset me, especially my own.

  • qjackson

    What do USS Liberty, Benghazi, King David Hotel,TWA Flight 800, Malaysia Flight ML370, WTC have in common?

    • Megan Harding

      They all have half-assed conspiracy theories?

      • DmaxD

        The word conspiracy does not mean fiction to thinking people. There are three types of people who do not believe in conspiracies, those who are ignorant of history, fools and conspirators.

      • Quickledo

        And which theory are you calling conspiratorial, the theory witnessed by over 100 people, or the center fuel tank fiction?

  • Swapster_com

    My brother was an Air Traffic Controller out of Boston… and a co-worker out of NY said they saw a missile. NY radar has faster scan than the Boston center. My brother was Special Forces… he’s a clear thinking person.

    • Anon

      Air Force NORAD radar detected missiles as well. I spoke with a captain Air Traffic Controller who saw the readouts from that night.

  • OutragedintheUSA

    I just saw Kristina Borjesson’s film and It left no question in my mind that this flight was shot from the sky. It also left no doubt in my mind that there was nothing unintended about it. A single rocket fired.. that could be a tragic case of friendly fire. Three rockets? Sorry, there is no way that was unintentional. The “edited” under water footage no doubt holds some critical proof, coupled with the hands on selection of what evidence would make it’s way back to the investigation scene there is little question this was no act of terrorism. Stunningly bold to point blank look witnesses in the face and tell them they were mistaken, even more blatant to concoct a story under the nose of said witnesses and parade it around as gospel. These are not the act of patriots. Wake up America, we have become a Nation of lemming like puppets, too apathetic and lethargic to demand accountability – even when we see the truth staring us in the face.
    Perhaps even more disturbing.. this thread. Discussing the murder of 230 people with only 183 comments. Yet I am but one guy, who watched this film – listened to the witness statements, viewed what there was of the wreckage, watched the footage of the official determination and even I hesitate to post. What does it say when the machine we call government has become so big and dark we feel our voices no longer count? That law has become something that governs only those who can’t afford to live outside of it. There was something or someone on that plane, something that someone somewhere decided was important enough to sacrifice 230 innocent people to destroy. Anyone else want to know what that was? More importantly WHO made this decision? Let’s just sit back and trust that we don’t need to know, after all it must be for our own good.. THAT has worked out well so far huh.

  • ylekiote63

    When in history has an government agency ever denied eyewitness testimony? The fact that no eyewitness of the over 100 who saw a missile hit that airplane was allowed to testify at the “PUBLIC” hearing, is an abomination of free speech and civil liberties. Why do we sit back and let this happen?
    It takes one credible eyewitness to convict a murderer. Why are we ignoring over 100 credible witnesses. In my opinion whoever is involved in this coverup is guilty of the murder of over 250 people.
    Someone high up needs to get this off their conscious and do the right thing.

    • Anon

      Won’t happen until the Clintons get out of politics. Remember that come election time.

    • Kapricorn4

      It is obvious from watching the documentary that TWA 800 was shot down by a missile. This was in fact the original position by Kallstrom of the FBI, but he was given orders from on high to find in favor of an accident. The question then becomes, why? Was it so that the NSA was not found to be asleep at the wheel, or that they knew, but did nothing about it ? Was it in fact a terrorist attack, but that if it were determined which country was behind it, would lead to embarrassing repercussions ?

      http://www.cashill.com/twa800/limbaugh_blows.htm

      How Gorelick persuaded Kallstrom to change direction we do not know. I suspect that it was an appeal to his patriotism along national security lines.

      Gorelick was rewarded for her work with the most plum job in Washington, vice-chair of Fannie Mae, a job that would pay her more than $25 million over the next six years. Kallstrom’s reward was a tortured conscience.

      Alternatively, were the FBI told that it was a friendly fire accident, but could not admit it since it might affect the military budget ?

    • Kapricorn4

      It is obvious from watching the documentary that TWA 800 was shot down by a missile. This was in fact the original position by Kallstrom of the FBI, but he was given orders from on high to find in favor of an accident. The question then becomes, why? Was it so that the NSA was not found to be asleep at the wheel, or that they knew, but did nothing about it ? Was it in fact a terrorist attack, but that if it were determined which country was behind it, would lead to embarrassing repercussions ?

      http://www.cashill.com/twa800/limbaugh_blows.htm

      How Gorelick persuaded Kallstrom to change direction we do not know. I suspect that it was an appeal to his patriotism along national security lines.

      Gorelick was rewarded for her work with the most plum job in Washington, vice-chair of Fannie Mae, a job that would pay her more than $25 million over the next six years. Kallstrom’s reward was a tortured conscience.

      Alternatively, were the FBI told that it was a friendly fire accident, but could not admit it since it might affect the military budget ?

  • Megan Harding

    I am pretty sure that all of you folks need to talk to your doctors about upping the dosage of your medications, then go and realign your tin foil hats.

    • Kapricorn4

      Is that you Ms Gorelick ?

    • Kapricorn4

      Is that you Ms Gorelick ?

    • dretyn

      Go away little girl, this an adult conversation. When you grow up and learn what a fallacy is and how their use shows a lack of intellectual credibility, then we may give you the time of day.

  • james

    terrorists planned and executed11 bv v

  • james

    WE DO NOT NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS. THEY THREATENED TO SHOOT DOWN PASSENGER JETS IF THE U.S. DID NOT PAY MILLIONS IN BLACKMAIL. WE DID NOT PAY, TERRORISTS CARRIED OUT THEIR THREAT. LATER THE U.S.PAID WHAT THE TERRORISTS DEMANDED. OPTIONS WERE FEW, PAY OR TELL AMERICA AND THE FREE WORLD NOT TO FLY ANYWHERE ANYMORE, IN ANY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. AIRLINE INDUSTRY WOULD CRUMBLE TO THEIR KNEES. NOT EVEN AIRFORCE ONE WOULD BE SAFE IN THE SKY. MILLIONS OF PEOPLE UNEMPLOYED, ECONOMIES CRASHING AND BURNING. THE BEGINNINGS OF 9-11.

  • DHDuke

    Its “Seven Monkeys” but they changed the ending & brought Brad Pitts plane down instead….

  • colinAlcarz

    What is needed is to consider the various possibilities, free from confirmation bias, consider what evidence one would expect in each, and then examine the actual evidence to see if it is consistent with the given possibility. This is not what the NTSB report did. there was no systematic presentation of rational possibilities with each one either explained away or settled on. Could an errant missile in a naval exercise have caused the explosion? Could a terrorist with a small missile launcher? Could a submarine from a foreign country? Could a fuel system malfunction? Not which is more likely, but which is more consistent with the evidence from the wreckage AND the testimony? If one of the possibilities involves a party that is linked to the investigation organization itself, then one has no other choice than to be skeptical of the findings. In which case, the testimony from the investigators themselves telling of pressure to suppress or withhold evidence or artificially build a plausible case that is not in evidence, is essential. What is the actual evidence? What did the NTSB investigators actually find? Why was there not consensus as to the conclusion of the report from among the NTSB investigators themselves?

  • guru dogg

    And the story continues that 6,570 days later (18 years), at exactly the same time in the afternoon, another plane is shot down by communists with 295 people viciously slaughtered and burned to their death.

  • Double_Up

    As time goes by, evidence shows that a missile launched from a submarine (likely) to be used in training went astray and hit the plane, bringing it down. Radar data tracks, missile fuel residue on many front seats, the hole in front of the wings on the right/starboard side, the eyewitnesses who saw a missile, the lack of burn marks or other damage on the front section (that would have occurred if the fuel tank exploded and tore the plane apart), the failure of centre fuel tanks to explode like they had to and the damage an actual explosion would cause (not found on TWA 800), so much more comes out every year.

    Why would the US hide the fact? Think of the time: it was just after extremists were around bombing places (Mcveigh in 1995) and recent incidents of military incompetence were coming to light. Would you as President want the public to know that idiots in the military had carelessly fired a missile and lost control of it, only to find out it brought down a plane? No way in Hell would a President in that environment want the public to learn careless military had shot down an airliner.

    Heck, how long did it take for the US to admit it shot down an Iranian jet? And they never admitted the Vincennes was in Iranian water. And what about the USS Iowa, the US military never admitted it was poor storage and protocol that killed over 40 men, not an angry gay lover.

    • Anon

      The only thing I have left to do is determine which submarine fired the missile. I don’t believe it was the Trepang because it was too old to be outfitted with a modern subsam system not that it couldn’t be but it would not be cost effective. Also Randy Beers was aboard the Trepang and from what little he said he made it sound like the missile was launched from a sub other than his own. That leaves the Wyoming or the Albuquerque.

  • bob_adams

    Jet fuel (high grade kerosene) cannot explode unless ignited under high pressure. It acts much like diesel fuel. Jet aircraft fuel tanks are not under high pressure. How did a spark cause the the jet fuel inside the tank to explode? That was a government lie that only the uneducated masses would buy. That is how stupid the average American is now.

    • Quickledo

      How did a spark cause the jet fuel inside the those tanks to explode?

      It didn’t. There, that was simple.

      • DmaxD

        I’m sure there’s a popular mechanics article to explain that one.

    • DmaxD

      Sort of like how jet fuel caused the symmetrical implosions of three massive skyscrapers in a row. The TV tells lies.

  • Jay_Sherman

    I know of an eyewitness to the downing of TWA800- He told the truth right after he witnessed it. He then talked to the Feds….and never spoke of it again; Now works for DHS. (Formerly a minimum-wage earner….but since that fateful day, now receives a nice salary for keeping his mouth shut). THIS is the way our government works…. Yes folks, this criminal (and many others) who was willing to help them cover-up the deaths of hundreds of fellow Americans, now is paid with your tax money; and has a badge and a gun, and authority over you and your children. Feel “safe”?

  • Busdriver Bill

    I remember reports that an EL AL flight ahead of TW800 was pulled out of the take off sequence at the last minute, causing the TWA flight to take off one flight early. Was the EL AL flight the real target? Wasn’t Henry Kissinger on that EL AL flight? Was HE the target? So many unanswered questions, my head swims. (BTW, I’m a retired Pan Am pilot, so I have a clearer perspective. And I was suspicious of the official report from the beginning). Should I beware of ninja clad night visitors? (1911 beats 911 all to Hell).

    • Anon

      Kissinger was not on the El Al flight. I looked at that theory and the physical evidence just didn’t pan out at all. It was definitely an accidental Navy shoot down that the Clinton Administration and the Navy didn’t want to own up to.

  • Busdriver Bill

    There have been suspicious deaths and disappearances since the event. And, were it a false flag gone wrong, it might need to be covered up, nicht war? There is a large group (I’m part of it) of pilots seeking truth in this event. We’ve been quiet for a long time, so perhaps this’ll stir the pot.

  • Beverly

    I was watching CNN, I saw something streaking upwards toward the plane, looked like a bottle rocket. That footage was soon gone.

    • Anon

      To this day you would be hard pressed to find that video. I saw it as well. The only thing you can find online anymore is photographs of the missile contrail.

 

 

Twitter