web analytics

INVESTIGATORS: TWA 800 CRASH WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT

By Pete Moore On June 19th, 2013

We probably remember this one. TWA Flight 800 exploded over the Atlantic near Long Island on 17th July 1996. All 230 people on board were killed. Despite scores of eye-witnesses testifying that they saw a bright streak of light ascending towards where an explosion happened, the investigation concluded that faulty wiring caused a fuel tank explosion.

Now six (retired) investigators have come forward in a documentary to claim that this is wrong and that their findings were falsified-

According to CNN, they were barred from talking before retiring. It’s pretty clear from the video that we might just get informed comment from experienced and senior men at the heart of the investigation. If they’re really onto something, they might want to be sure they don’t have any unfortunate accidents. The documentary goes out on 17th July.

45 Responses to “INVESTIGATORS: TWA 800 CRASH WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT”

  1. Having watched the 45min documentary on YouTube a few months back, the conclusion looked pretty conclusive: The plane exploded from the inside, not the outside, as the fuselage showed.
    Being able to *hide* a missile hit from all those people involved in reconstructing the plane parts is stretching credulity a bit, especially after 17 years of mulling it over.

  2. The evidence proves that “one or more ordnance explosions outside the aircraft caused the crash,” the producers said. But it does not identify or speculate on the source of the ordnance explosions.

    It sounds like their conclusions will be vague enough that they don’t upset too many of the various concpiracy loon theorists.

  3. Here we go again.

    Great.

  4. Here we go again what?

    Phantom, I know you can’t watch videos during the day, so allow me to explain. The six whistle-blowers include two senior accident investigators from the NTSB, the Chief Medical Examiner and the Senior Medical Forensics Examiner.

    Some loony line up that is.

  5. I’ll see it later.

    Just back from a quick business trip to Minnesota. I’m really beat, after two straight 430 am wakeup calls and and a late night last night.

  6. Interesting post Pete. I remember watching an Air Crash documentary about this on Discovery Channel a few years ago. I thought that the official explanation for the missile witnessed by 200 or so people was unconvincing and the explanation that the the explosion was fuel-related was convoluted.

  7. If the plane had been shot down, it would have been because somebody was on-board who ‘needed’ to be shot down, somebody like Ed Snowden – or Congressman Larry McDonald. Watch from about 3.15:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BPhYEFGaGM

    Oh! I’ve just read that Michael Hastings, contributing editor to Rolling Stone, has been ‘car-crashed’. His mercedes was consumed by what looks like napalm.

  8. This is what happens when a Mercedes crashes?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LSY3wVuASg

    Rolling Stone writes that:
    – Hastings’ hallmark as reporter was his refusal to cozy up to power. While other embedded reporters were charmed by McChrystal’s bad-boy bravado and might have excused his insubordination as a joke, Hastings was determined to expose the recklessness of a man leading what Hastings believed to be a reckless war. “Runaway General” was a finalist for a National Magazine Award, won the 2010 Polk award for magazine reporting, and was the basis for Hastings’ book, The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America’s War in Afghanistan. –

    I wonder what he was working on before he blew up his car?

  9. You’re famous Allan.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/conspiracy-theories-abound-michael-hastings-death-article-1.1377392

  10. Allan

    Over 30,000 people died in auto crashes in America in 2012.

    It’s not exactly a rare event.

    Though both the raw number of deaths and the death rate is definitely going down, thanks in no small part to safety features mandated or encouraged by that evil government. You know, the seat belt scam, the uniform bumper scam, the crash test scam, the speed limit scam.

    Next time you see a congressman/woman, give them a big kiss if you would.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

  11. Good man, Allan. lol

  12. Phantom – does this mean that more people die in automobile accidents than from ‘terrorism’? Now that I think of it, the ratio is around 2000:1.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/americans-are-as-likely-to-be-killed-by-their-own-furniture-as-by-terrorism/258156/

    Americans Are as Likely to Be Killed by Their Own Furniture as by Terrorism

    Terrorist attacks killed 17 U.S. civilians last year and 15 the year before.

    As for the manner of Michael Hastings’s death, I would hope that Mercedes sends over a team of technical specialists because having a Merc go up like a napalm dump is not good for business. The authorities are claiming that it was “a fuel tank explosion” – just like TWA 800.

  13. Oh please.

    You’re an engineer?

    Do you speak like this at work?

  14. Phantom – it’s quite simple.

    Do you disagree with what I wrote at 11.04am? If so, please state the points with which you disagree.

  15. I am aware of the fact that relatively few have died from terrorism as compared with other causes.

    I am also aware that nearly 3000 died in one terror attack in my city, and that the attackers had goals of killing multiples of that. And that they are interested in more and different spectaculars, esp if they can do them in NYC or London.

    I’ll take my chances with the furniture.

  16. Phantom – relatively few indeed. I would say that 15 deaths is few in absolute terms. You would no doubt agree that the huge sums spent on the NSA, CIA, FBI and other TLAs would be better spent on agencies dealing with furniture.

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

    Investigators want missile theory probed in ’96 TWA Flight 800 crash

    Published June 19, 2013
    FoxNews.com

    Reaction to new claims about TWA Flight 800 crash
    Was TWA Flight 800 crash actually caused by missile…
    Documentary challenges cause of TWA Flight 800 crash

    A handful of aviation experts, including a number of investigators who were part of the original probe of TWA Flight 800, have come forward in a new documentary to say evidence points to a missile as the cause of the crash off the coast of Long Island 17 years ago.

    The New York-to-Paris flight crashed July 17, 1996, just minutes after takeoff from JFK Airport, killing all 230 people aboard. In the weeks that followed, the plane was reassembled in a hangar from parts retrieved from the sea. But the cause of the crash was not identified immediately, and after authorities said the crash was caused by static electricity ignited fuel fumes, many skeptics cast doubt on the theory. Adding to the controversy were multiple eyewitness accounts of a fireball going up from the ground and hitting the plane before it went down, accounts which the FBI dismissed at the time.

    “It’s obvious that the truth was not allowed to be pursued.”

    – Jim Speer, accident investigator for the Airline Pilots Association

    The half-dozen investigators whose charges will be fleshed out in a documentary set to air July 17 – the anniversary of the crash – say they were never allowed to get at the truth. But they are confident a missile brought down the plane.

    “We don’t know who fired the missile,” said Jim Speer, an accident investigator for the Airline Pilots Association, one of a half-dozen experts seeking a new review of the probe. “But we have a lot more confidence that it was a missile.”

    The group is comprised of people who worked for the National Transportation Safety Board, TWA and the Airline Pilots Association, all of whom have since retired. All six say that the evidence shows the plane was brought down by a projectile traveling at a high speed.

    “It all fits like a glove,” said Tom Stalcup, a physicist who is considered one of the foremost independent researchers and participated in the documentary, said during a press conference on Wednesday. “It is what it is and all the evidence is there.”

    Hank Hughes, a retired senior accident investigator for NTSB, said probers were not allowed to seek answers once the FBI took over the crime scene. “We just want to see the truth come out,” Hughes said. “We don’t have hidden agendas. The only thing we are looking for is the truth.”

    He wants the truth – WHAT AN EVIL CONSPIRACY THEORIST.

  17. this story is just red meat for the loons.

    Was the plane shot down? Maybe, a lot of people think so. Would the Clinton Administration have covered up an attack on American soil? Definitely. Will it ever be classified or changed from the reason in the reports? No

    So it’s just red meat for the loons.

    Remember if this plane was shot down it was taken down with a hand held SAM. When Obama gave Libya to the Islamists 10,000 of those missiles went missing from Libyas military inventory.

    That’s what you should be concerned about.

  18. No-one is claiming that it was terrorism, not least because no-one claimed it. When the islamists score a hit, they are all over the airwaves within hours.

    If it was a missile it was a US one. So a cover-up would be totally predictable.

  19. The reason why there is a cover-up is that there was a US navy exercise not too far from the area of interest. What has been postulated elsewhere (I’ll dig it up but I recall this from a couple of years ago) is that a live-firing exercise went wrong and that the missile locked on another unintended target. Naturally the implications of this would have been enormous but it was unlikely to have been terrorism, whether by external or state-run forces.

  20. Was the plane shot down? Maybe, a lot of people think so. Would the Clinton Administration have covered up an attack on American soil? Definitely. Will it ever be classified or changed from the reason in the reports? No

    Troll – those are the questions which the ‘loons’ are asking and those are the answers which they give themselves. Why do you consider it to be worthy of a lunatic to ask such straight questions?

  21. There is no way that it was an accidental shoot by the US military ( God forgive me from interacting with the bats in the belfry crowd )

    I’ve been on US Navy ships when missiles were fired. When such a thing happens, the entire crew knows about it. There is no way that the crew of a ship would keep silent on a thing like this, even for a day.

  22. It was shot down by a Tibetan Buddhist convert to Scientology outside a mosque in Hicksville USA as a protest.

  23. It was the Illuminati.

  24. A missile fired from a ship makes so much noise that it would wake you up if you were sleeping two decks below.

    Watch Allan and his flock flog this rhinoceros for weeks now.

    Cuz they’re ” just asking questions “

  25. Over 200 independent eye witnesses said they saw a missile, or a bright streak of light, ascend to a point where an explosion took place.

    The eye witnesses included pilots, perfectly sober fishermen and (for some reason this is supposed to be significant) military veterans.

    Admittedly the veterans could have been suicidal and as high as a kite, but some might have been clear headed.

    Even so, the FBI completely dismissed all of these reports. They were all wrong. They were all imagining it.

    Incidentally Jamie Gorelick (whose fingerprints are often not far from scandal and corruption) took over the investigation at the White House. Questions were closed off because she didn’t take any and spoke only to the NYT poodles. Soon after, she went to Fannie Mae and trousered millions. She also sat on the 9/11 commission. Maybe her experience of shutting down investigations came in handy.

  26. “It was the Illuminati.”

    Nope.
    It was a protest against Western poseurs championing the cause of the great Oppressed and Scottish conspiracy theorists.
    The missile was an Irish design built in a top secret weapons factory behind the chip shop in Navan. The guy who loaned it to the Tibetan on condition he got it back when he was finished with it…

  27. Such astonishing and in depth knowledge.. Well by Jove the case is closed right now!

    You are aware that eyewitness testimony is very often wrong. A fact known to detectives and other investigators since forever.

    The circumstances here would further increase the chance of error.

    It is noted that those who believe this have also tended to believe in 9/11 and 7/7 Trutherism and many other tales.

  28. James Gandolfini and the Rolling Stone guy were about to expose the whole thing. I guess they won’t be doing that now.

  29. You are bad boy.

  30. Phantom –

    Yes, eye witness testimony is often wrong, I’ve told you that. But hallucinogens must have been in the water for 200 eye witnesses to be wrong in exactly the same way that evening.

    Those who believe that the feds covered up include two senior NTSB investigators who worked on this specific investigation, the Chief Medical Examiner and the Senior Medical Forensic Examiner. We’re not talking about students in pyjamas on the wacky baccy, therefore your red herrings are swatted aside without effort.

  31. 200 persons ( if that ) who say that they were eyewitnesses, mein herr.\

    There are people who have given eyewitness testimony of seeing aliens doing the macarena at Roswell New Mexico

    There have been those who say that they were in the Twin Towers who were not, who say that they were in concentration camps who were proven not to have been there, etc.

    All is not as it seems. Stop being so completely gullible. You and Allan fall for every tall tale. I want to get a job selling you guys stuff.

  32. Two senior NTSB investigators who worked on this specific investigation, the Chief Medical Examiner and the Senior Medical Forensic Examiner: are they gullible?

  33. I will listen to them.

    Not to the Conspiracy Industry.

  34. your red herrings are swatted aside without effort

    Does one swat a herring?

  35. There is no way that the crew of a ship would keep silent on a thing like this, even for a day.

    Really? I haven’t read anything by any US serviceman about the time when USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian airliner killing over 200 people. And even if members of the crew couldn’t keep silent, to whom could they talk? Their wives, perhaps? No component of the corporate media would run with such a story.

  36. Alonso

    We know that the Vincennes missile hit the Iranian plane.

    That’s not a mystery Sherlock.

  37. We know that the Vincennes missile hit the Iranian plane.

    Sure Phantom, and the rest…..

    http://alt-f4.org/img/seaoflies.html

    In Washington, almost 11 hours later, at 1:30 pm EST, Adm. William Crowe, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the Iranian airliner was flying outside the commercial air corridor and had failed to respond to repeated warnings. The plane had been descending and picking up speed when it closed in on the Vincennes. Rogers had only been protecting his ship. A large map showed the position of the Vincennes at the time of the shoot-down. It was well within international waters.

    The vice-president (Bush) claimed that the Vincennes had rushed to defend a merchantman under attack by Iran.

    BUT

    The tapes of the Vincennes Aegis system, with its combat and navigational data reached the United States on July 5 and what they showed was reported to the Pentagon on July 10. The Vincennes had been in Iranian territorial waters. The Iranian airliner was well within the commercial air corridor and had been ascending, not descending. There was no beleaguered merchant vessel.

    Most mysteriously, Rear-Admiral Fogarty told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Vincennes had been racing to rescue a Liberian tanker, the Stoval, that morning. There is no such tanker reported in any ship registry. According to two sources, including a naval officer involved in the investigation, the Stoval was a decoy, a phantom conjured up by fake radio messages to lure out the Iranian gunboats. According to these sources, the Iranian aggression that Vice President Bush had so vigorously decried at the United Nations had in fact been in the trial run for an American sting operation.

    The navy might have gotten away with all of these deceptions had it not been for the slow grinding of international law. A lawsuit by the Iranian government has now forced Washington to admit, grudgingly, that the Vincennes was actually in Iranian waters – although Justice Department pleadings still claim the cruiser was forced there in self- defense. The admission is contained in fine print in legal briefs; it has never received public attention until Crowe, confronted with the evidence, conceded the truth last week on “Nightline.” Crowe denies any cover-up; if mistakes were made, he told NEWSWEEK, they were “below my pay grade.” Rogers continues to insist that his ship was in international waters.

    The only reason why the truth of the Vincennes aggression and mass-murder came to light from the US navy is because another country was involved and made sure that the cover-up would collapse. I hadn’t been aware of the depths of mendacity of the US military over the Vincennes massacre until I read this. there is now no doubt that the US Navy would cover its arse by whatever means are necessary and, given that the situation is ENTIRELY within US jurisdiction, one must worry about the safety of the whistle-blowers.

  38. Allan

    Who,wrote what you linked to? What are theeir credentials?

  39. Phantom these are the people accredited for that article

    John Barry is NEWSWEEK’s national security correspondent. Roger Charles is a retired Marine colonel and military intelligence officer who is now a freelance writer in Washington. Also reporting were Daniel Pederson in London, Christopher Dickey in Paris, Theresa Waldrop in Bonn, Donna Foote in Los Angeles, Tony Clifton in New York and Peter Annin in Houston.

    Flt 800 whether it blew up from faulty fuel tank wiring (which I doubt) was shot down by terrorists, or by the Navy, is a story that we will NEVER get the truth on. It took place during the Clinton Administration. If it wasn’t the wiring then there was a major cover up.

    Now with Hillary as the pottential next President do you really think that a cover up by her Husbands administration is going to get the investigation that it should? NO

    It’s just a good red meat story for the loons like Allan and the Alex Jones crowd to be distracted by.

  40. The truth often isn’t known because it’s impossible to find.

    When a 747, a huge complex machine with massive amounts of jet fuel in its belly blows up over the ocean, that may be one of the times when the truth is too hard to get at.

    I don’t have any concern about Clinton in this matter. I doubt it was a terrorist attack. The chance of it being the US military is about zero.

    Follow the truth where it leads. If these investigators have something to say, let them say it.

    But, always, always, keep in mind that the conspiracy industry, including it’s resident tools here, will at every stage make bad faith comments. Bet the ranch on it.

  41. It’s just a good red meat story for the loons like Allan and the Alex Jones crowd to be distracted by.

    Troll – I’ve just linked to a clear demonstration of the institutional mendacity of the US navy. Would you explain what is ‘loony’ about doing that? The rereason why I linked to it is because Phantom wrote to the effect that the US navy would never be involved in covering up the shooting down of a civilian airliner – yet there it is before you. The ‘loony’ is he/she who doesn’t see or refuses to see the lying machine of US military.

    Given that the accreditations for the linked report on the Vincennes atrocity were at the foot of the article, I assume that Phantom did not read it which is to be expected. I assume that you did read it, yet it bounced off that armoured hide of a brain that you have.

  42. I can’t believe Phantom didn’t read that piece.

  43. Pete – phantom didn’t read that piece because the excerpt which I attached in my post showed that it would refute everything he believes about the US military. That’s why he challenged those who wrote it – “what are their credentials”. What exactly are ‘credentials’ other than permission of corporate media to write for them. My credentials are that I won’t tell lies for money.

  44. I heard a great interview with the guy who was the head of the NTSB, and was the lead investigator on this event. It was a really good detailed review of the crash, the evidence, the eyewitnesses everything.

    He asked to be interviewed because of all the e-mails and phone calls he has been receiving from family members of the passengers.

    He discussed the man behind this film, and how he took all this to congress years ago. He testified under oath and presented his info. Basically the whole beef this guy had was he had procedural issues with the FBI’s tactics and how they worked with other people and agencies.

    He had no data/facts that refuted any of the conclusions that were presented.

    As I said nothing but red meat for the conspiracy loons.

  45. As we’ve seen with the WTC, 7/7, Sandy Hook even, these people – I am tempted to call them by another name – they do not want or need evidence. The Truthers hate and fear the truth. They are People of The Lie.