Whilimena

TWA Flight 800 Scam

whilimena | 10 July, 2006 19:32

The TWA Flight 800 slaughter was a scam by our local thugs. This one could not be pinned on the Middle Eastern bogeymen. These thugs who blew up the Flight wanted to eliminate some of the agents on the said Flight; so, they took out the whole lot.

Unfortunately for these criminals, hundreds of witnesses came forward and stated that they saw the plane bombed out of the sky.

Again it shows how barefaced these hoods are.

STATEMENTS BY EYEWITNESSES

1999

"We do have information that there was something in the sky. A number of people have seen it. A number of people have described it similarly. It was ascending." -- James Kallstrom

"We saw what appeared to be a flare going straight up. As a matter of fact,we thought it was from a boat. It was a bright reddish-orange color. Once it

went into flames I knew that it wasn't a flare."

- Lou Desyron, Flight 800 eye-witness; ABC World News Sunday; 07/21/96.

"I looked up because it sounded like thunder. I kept looking trying to

figure out what it was. And that's when I saw a flare come off the water.

The flare, trailing orange flame, shot up roughly at a 45 degree angle, then rapidly increased its angle of ascent. Then it appeared to strike

something. This was the strangest thing I ever saw. Everyone calls it a

'missile theory,' but when you see something, you know what you see, and I

didn't see a 'theory'."

- Tom Dougherty, Flight 800 eye-witness; interviewed on Hard Copy, 1996

"It was what we would best describe as a boat flare, a reddish object going up. It went up and a few seconds later we saw an explosion in the sky. I can't say if it came off shore or on shore. At first, we thought it was a boat flare. It zigzagged a little. We thought it was strange. Then, several seconds later, we saw an eruption of fire. We never heard anything. We saw a fireball, and at that point we identified what was an aircraft. We could see it fluttering down. We were the third boat on Long Island to report the incident to the Coast Guard. It was something going up to it beforehand.

Yes, I saw flaming debris go down. Something attracted us to the area before it exploded. And even my wife and my oldest daughter, we all were witnesses to it. There definitely was something there first before the aircraft went down." - Donald Eick, Flight 800 eye-witness; October 20, 1997; The

Press-Enterprise, Riverside, CA.

"I picked it up three seconds before it turned into a bright white ball,which split. I thought it was fireworks. And then I didn't know what to think because from the white ball, I saw two wide orange bands of light fall down, obviously the fuel igniting. I'll lay my ass on the table and tell the president or the FBI, and someone can hypnotize me: There was no way that red light was descending. It was ascending. It made contact with what turned out to be that airplane and made a white bright light and then split in two.

If I were in a courtroom and the prosecutor says I've got an eyewitness,

then I become a trump card. We're not just one witness but 135 or more

strong. I saw something hit the right side of the plane. My opinion was it

blew the wing off on impact. I assumed something went through the airplane,

like behind first class and into the wing. My honest opinion, my gut

feeling, is that we have the most brilliant people in the world and the best

technology, [and] if they've been on scene for a year and they've not come

up with something, as a critical thinker I have to ask, could they be

covering up something?"

- William Gallagher, fisherman from N.J. who witnessed Flight 800 crash;

October 20, 1997, The Press-Enterprise

"[The FBI] said, 'Are you sure you didn't see something going down and not

going up?' I said, 'No....Gosh sakes I ain't that stupid. I ought to be able

to tell if something is going up in the air or going down in the air. No,

and I said I'm not changing my mind about it. I'll stick to that until I

die. I said I saw something going up and I said there was no question in my

mind. I said I'm telling you what I saw."

- Roland Penney, Flight 800 eye-witness; quoted from an interview with Cdr.

William Donaldson presented at the AIM conference, October 18, 1997.

"It looked like a big skyrocket going up. The flash looked like a rocket

launch at a fireworks display".

- Paul Runyan, Flight 800 eye-witness; N.Y. Daily News, 11/09/96

"More than 150 credible witnesses - including several scientists and

business executives - have told the FBI and military experts they saw a

missile destroy TWA 800. 'Some of these people are extremely, extremely

credible,' a top federal official said. 'When we asked what they saw and

where they saw it, the witnesses out east pointed to the west, and the

people to the west pointed to the east'."

- The New York Post, September 22, 1996.

"Almost due south [of the helicopter], there was a hard white light, like

burning pyrotechnics, in level flight. I was trying to figure out what it

was. It was the wrong color for flares. It struck an object coming from the

right and made it explode."

- Capt. Chris Baur, eye-witness to Flight 800 crash; July 1996.

"This is either a train wreck in the sky, or an explosive device - mid-air,

outside the plane. The measurements [from the flight recorder] indicate

there was an explosion - a big explosion - outside the cockpit."

- Navy Cmdr. William Donaldson (ret.); a former plane crash investigator;

Louisville Courier-Journal, 1-9-98

"My God! Somebody's shooting at that airplane!"

- Crew of a British Airways jet flying behind Flight 800 whom radioed to air

traffic control; July 17, 1996.

"I know what I saw. I saw an ordnance explosion. And whatever I saw, the

explosion of the fuel was not the initiator of the event. It was one of the

results. Something happened before that which was the initiator of the

disaster.''

- Frederick C. Meyer, An Air National Guard helicopter pilot who witnessed

the explosion of TWA Flight 800; 7/29/97; Riverside Press.

"I know what I saw, I saw several fires go across the sky. One hit the plane

at the tail and the second hit at the front, just before the wings. The fire

came from both ends and met in the middle and exploded. Then the nose

dropped, hung there for a minute. I understand that when a plane bursts into

flames the flames fall, but this was a fire going up towards the plane."

- Barbara Pacholk, Flight 800 eye-witness; November 19, 1997; The New York

Post.

"We know what we saw. We weren't drunk. I looked up and my immediate

response was, I never saw an alert flare like that. It was projecting upward

with a stream of smoke behind. I don't think our accounts will be reflected

in the final version [of the FBI report]. I have a hard time believing that

the FBI believes its conclusions. I don't believe that the truth is ever

going to come out."

- Jim Naples, Flight 800 eye-witness; November 24, 1997, The New York

Observer, (p.16)

"C.I.A. analysts have determined that the eyewitness sightings thought to be

that of a missile actually took place after the first of several explosions

on the aircraft. Our technical analysis concludes that what these

eyewitnesses saw was in fact the burning [Boeing] 747 in various stages of

crippled flight, not a missile."

- C.I.A. spokeswoman Carolyn Osborn - September 24, 1997

"She [Ms. Osborn] said they were mistaken in what they saw. That's not very

professional, and its not the way to dispute eyewitness statements. Those

witness statements should be part of the public record. And they [the

F.B.I.] have to come up with a credible scenario of why the eyewitnesses saw

what they saw."

- Paul Marcone - Press Secretary to Rep. James Traficant - House Aviation

Subcommittee

"It's (the C.I.A.) message to the eyewitnesses: Shut up, you didn't see

anything."

- Philip Weiss - The New York Observer - November 24, 1997

"All evidence would point to a missile. All those witnesses who saw a streak

that hit the airplane...you have to assume its a missile. In an

investigation like this, you can't overlook anything."

- Adm. Thomas Moorer, former Chairman of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff;

Louisville Courier-Journal, 1-9-98

Naneen Levine

"I thought it was something on the beach going straight up. The red dot

went up like this, sort of curved. It came to a point where I thought

little fireworks were going to come down or just fade and be a flare."

Capt. Chris Bauer - Airborne

"I saw a track of light and saw a hard explosion, then another

explosion," - "told officials, repeatedly that I thought a missile hit

the plane."

.

Sven Faret, Private Pilot - Airborne

"Pin flash of light near the shore" - "It looked like a rocket launch at

a fireworks display. My first impression was that the National Guard had shot down one of

their own planes."

Roland Penney

". . . a pencil thin white trail rising like a Grucci fireworks in the

middle of the night sky, until it turned into a big ball of just plain

white. Seconds later, as the ball of light descended, it exploded into

an orange-red fireball."

D.A. Walsh

"It is No rumor about sabotage or a missile. Having lived on Long Island

for 24 years and only 8 miles from the crash site I am familiar with

the area and too many of us saw what happened that nite. I believe that

someone is trying to cover up for mistakes."

From: C.C.Jordan@worldnet.att.net (C.C. Jordan) Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997

02:55:29 GMT Message-ID: <33C59B43> I live

on eastern Long Island. I am good friends with several of the Air Force

flyers out of West Hampton. An USAF Blackhawk was flying (training) only

three miles away from Flight 800 on a heading to observe the crash. The Plane

Commander, a Major, said, in my presence, that he saw what he believed was a

missile, coming from sea level go up and explode. He stated this to NTSB

investigators and to Air Force debriefers. He is a gulf war veteran and has

seen many night time SAM launches, both shoulder launched and fixed sight. No

one has yet to refute his observation. Could he be mistaken? Sure. Is it

likely he is mistaken? No. NTSB and the FAA have no **real** answer for the

crash, or do they? ....By the way, This guy was one of the pilots who flew

the Blackhawks 650 miles out into the atlantic to rescue stranded seamen,

refueling several times from a C-130. The Air force believes him. They are

the 106th Rescue Wing flying C-130 and Blackhawk aircraft. Top notch

professionals.

11-9-96 N.Y. Daily News

"Red meteor with a smoke trail"

Paul Angelides

Olympic Airline Engineer

"Suddenly, I saw in the fog to my left, toward the ocean, a small flame

rising quickly towards the sky. Before I realized it, I saw this flame

become huge. My first impression is that it was a flare shot off a

boat."

Colonel Stratemeier - Pilot

"said he had seen what appeared to be the trail of a shoulder fired SAM

ending in a flash on the 747"

Heidi Krieger

"I think it;s a missile or friendly fire or something like that."

(She took picture from her boat, squiggley white line in photo, FBI took it and negs)

Richard Grauer (25 yr old Fishing Tackle sales)

"It was a thin trail of smoke going up fast - then there was this huge

pink ball of fire"

Patrick Grant - 02:27pm Jul 19, 1997 ET (#300 of 321)

I live on Long Island. And there were more than a hundred people

out here including cops, firemen and National Guard who saw

something streak into the sky before the plane came down. Now

experts can tell you what would of, or should of, or could of

happened. But an eye witness will tell you what really happened.

And when a hundred people see something, its not an illusion. I

believe the investigators are lying when they say they don't know

what happened. And I'd like to see them be forced to take

polygraphs. And even those who believe that the government isn't

running a cover up should support giving the investigators lie detectors. We all want the truth, don't we?

_________________

The New York Post, in its story of September 22, 1996, reported,

Law-enforcement sources said the hardest evidence gathered so far overwhelmingly suggests a surface-to-air missile... The FBI interviewed 154 "credible" witnesses -- including scientists, schoolteachers, Army personnel and business executives -- who described seeing a missile heading through the sky just before TWA 800 exploded. "Some of these people are extremely, extremely credible," a top federal official said. FBI technicians mapped the various paths -- points in the sky where the witnesses said they saw the rising "flare-like" object -- and determined that the "triangulated" convergence point was virtually where the jumbo jet initially exploded.

The New York Times, on July 19th, 1996, reported,

" [ Witnesses reported ] a "streak of light" hitting the plane just before it blew up."

And perhaps most tellingly, from the Associated Press, on September 23, 1996,

"...a source...said on condition of anonymity.... ``There's metal bent in, metal bent out. Metal you can't tell. I see a hole going in and a hole going out..."

______________

An Associated Press Article on March 10, 1997 reported the following:

The report said "compelling testimony" indicated a missile hit the plane on the right side, forward of the wing, passing through the fuselage without exploding.

______________

_____________ REMEMBERING THE DEAD TWA800 WorldNetDaily.com 8/26/00 "…..Not to worry, says the National Transportation Safety Board, the cause of the TWA tragedy was sloppy routing by Boeing of some low-voltage wires to the central fuel tank. In future, the Federal Aviation Administration is not going to allow such sloppy routing. ...... According to the NTSB, such sloppiness allowed coupling between frayed high-voltage and low-voltage wires. When a high-voltage pulse somehow got coupled into the practically empty -- except for some fumes -- fuel tank, it was like a sparkplug igniting the fuel-air mixture in the engine of your SUV. According to the NTSB, the "explosion" of the ignited fumes 1) instantaneously chopped all electrical power to the cockpit, 2) blew off the whole front-third of the plane, 3) ruptured the wing fuel tanks and 4) set fire to the resulting fuel-air mixture, which burned until the aft two-thirds of the plane hit the water. ……Oh, yeah? ……" WorldNetDaily.com 8/26/00 "…..In tests of an almost empty central fuel tank, the NTSB apparently had some difficulty getting such a low-pressure fuel-air mixture to deflagrate. But the NTSB fuzzed up the issue by calling the deflagration "an explosion." They announced that they had been able to get a simulated TWA 800 fuel tank to "explode." Well, that's not a lie, but then it's not exactly the truth, either. …… But in the TWA 800 tragedy, we know that something supersonic -- something that was over before the sound of it could reach the cockpit sound recorder -- instantaneously chopped all electrical power to the TWA 800 cockpit. A concurrent powerful blast wave separated all of aircraft forward of the wing -- including the cockpit -- from the rest of the plane. ...... Then the fuel tanks in the wings of the plane "deflagrated," burning brightly for many seconds. ......" WorldNetDaily.com 8/26/00 "…..All that is consistent with what hundreds of people on the ground reported. First, they heard a detonation, then they looked and saw a big explosion, then heard a big explosion and then saw a brightly burning fire which lasted for many seconds. ……. " WorldNetDaily.com 8/26/00 "…..You think we ought to tell the NTSB what we suspect, that some person or persons unknown, did to TWA 800 what had already been done to Avianca 203? Don't bother. Here is an excerpt the report of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, an official Party to the NTSB TWA 800 investigation: ………An explosion did occur within the center fuel tank during TWA Flight 800. We have not been a party to any evidence, wreckage or tests that could conclude that the center tank explosion was and is the primary contributor to this accident. ... We find that its explosion was as the result of the aircraft breakup. The initial event caused a structural failure in the area of Flight stations 854 to 860, lower left side of the aircraft. A high-pressure event breached the fuselage and the fuselage unzipped due to the event. The explosion was a result of this event!………" ………. By "high-pressure event" they mean a detonation, a supersonic shock. Like from a bomb, detonated inside, or a missile warhead, detonated outside, which penetrated the central fuel tank. Like, what the FBI claims happened on Nov. 27, 1989, to Avianca Airlines Flight 203. ……." http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/ed-column-20009619185.htm tony Blankley "……The Gore Commission produced a tough preliminary report, and at a Sept. 9, 1996, press conference Mr. Gore publicly asserted the need for those changes. And then, all hell broke loose - but for Mr. Gore, not for the terrorists. "Within ten days, the whole [airline] industry jumped all over Al Gore," Mrs. Cummock reported. On Sept. 19, Mr. Gore sent a letter to airline lobbyist Carol Hallett, promising that the commission's findings would not cause the airlines any loss of revenue. The next day the Democratic National Committee received a $40,000 contribution from TWA. In the next two weeks Northwest, United and American Airlines donated $55,000 more…………. In the following two months (leading up to the November 1996 presidential elections) American Airlines donated a quarter of a million dollars to the Democrats. United Airlines donated $100,000 to the DNC. Northwestern upped its anty to $53,000. In all, Mr. Gore and the Democrats collected almost half a million dollars between the election and the day - two months before - that Mr. Gore assured the airlines his commission wouldn't cost them any money. At the time, White House spokesperson Ginny Terzano refused either to confirm or deny that Mr. Gore personally solicited the airline contributions. But that is not what got Victoria Cummock's dander up. In January 1997, Mr. Gore's staff circulated a draft final report that eliminated all security measures from their findings. Not only Mrs. Cummock, but CIA Director and fellow Commissioner John Deutch complained. So Mr. Gore pulled back the draft. In February Mr. Gore finally came up with the classic Washington ploy. The final report called for sensible new procedures that would cost the airlines millions of dollars: 450 high tech bomb detectors, more training for airport security, criminal background checks for security personnel, increased canine patrols. But Victoria Cummock noticed one thing was missing - there was no timetable to accomplish these requirements. She informed the vice president that without timetables, the report was "toothless" and she couldn't support it, but instead would file a dissent.......... It was a classic Washington victory. The policy wonks got their proposals noticed, the airlines got their bottom line protected and Mr. Gore got his party the money. The only losers were the passengers, who got no increased security from terrorism. So, when Mr. Gore actually had a chance to fight, rather than talk about, the powerful special interests on behalf of the little guy, he turned his money-stuffed coat and protected the interests that bought him. In an open meeting on Feb. 12, Mr. Gore stated that he would leave room in the final report for Victoria Cummock's dissent. A few minutes later at the White House, as Mr. Gore presented the final report to President Clinton, the vice president announced that the report was unanimous. Both of those Gore lies are on video tape. NBC's Dateline has the tapes……..And so Mrs. Cummock went to court. Not on behalf of some conspiracy theory, but on the right to see commission files that were denied her and the right to file a dissent. She only wanted the commission's own findings to be enforced. After winning in the D.C. Court of Appeals last year, she is slowly gaining discovery of the commission's secret files….. has already found one interesting document in the secret commission files: A letter to Mr. Gore from his now famous convicted felon fund-raiser Maria Hsia. In that note she talks about the successful fund-raiser at the Buddhist Temple and asks the vice president for help in getting government funding for her to be part of the Project Citizenship initiative. …….." Associated Retired Aviation Professionals 9/6/00 Jerry Cimisi "…… In a phone interview some days after the NTSB hearing, now retired TWA pilot Al Mundo, who had brought the plane into New York from Athens late on the afternoon of July 17, 1996, explained not only the fuel system of the plane, but detailed his reasons why the center wing fuel tank would not have been the initiating cause of the explosion or explosions that destroyed Flight 800. ...... "We had left Athens that Wednesday morning," said Mundo. "The center wing tank would have been full." ............ "We turn on both of the center wing tank fuel pumps. The center wing tank has two pumps, which work at twice the capacity of the other four main tank pumps; their fuel flow is at fifteen pounds per square inch (psi), the center wing tank pumps put out fuel at thirty psi. ……… "The cross feed valves are open, which allow fuel from the center wing tank pumps to go to the number one, two, three and four engines. We shut off the pumps from the number one main and its reserve and the number four main and its reserve. We leave the pumps on from two and three as back up, though because they are working at a rate only half that of the center wing tank, it's the center wing tank that is supplying fuel to the engines. At that point the two and three main tank feed is there as a backup. Anyway, at this point the center wing tank is supplying fuel to all the engines. …….. "Eventually, as the center wing tank burns down to about 3,000-4,000 pounds of fuel, the fuel begins to feed from the number two and three main tanks." When the fuel quantity in the center wing tank gets low, a light for each pump begins to blink on the flight engineer's panels. "When the light gets steady," said Mundo, "you turn off the pump for that light. ……. "Then you turn on the fuel/water scavenge pumps in the center wing tank to drain any liquid remaining. " ……….. With the feed from the center wing tank now turned off, all four engines are being fueled from the number two and number three main tanks. ……" Associated Retired Aviation Professionals 9/6/00 Jerry Cimisi "…… Mundo went on: "When the plane landed in New York, the center wing tank guage in the cockpit would have read zero pounds. It is possible that the underwing center wing tank fuel gauge could have read 300 pounds, which would be about fifty gallons. This is not an unusual discrepancy." ...... In the first few days after the Flight 800 investigation Mundo asked a TWA official what exactly the fuel use log had shown in regards to the quantity of fuel in the center wing tank upon arriving in New York. "He told me," Mundo said, "that the log, which is placed in the Flight Document Envelope and normally kept for ninety days, could not be found. This was an abnormality." …….. He added that whatever level of fuel existed in the center wing tank at that time would not be entirely composed of fuel. "All fuel contains some water. It's the same with the gas in your car. Fuel is 6.7 pounds per gallon; water is heavier, 8.34 pounds, so the water goes to the bottom of the tank. This combination of water and fuel is what the scavenger pumps transfer to the number two main tank." …….. In sum, the center wing tank of the plane that was about to become Flight 800 was empty or nearly empty before leaving New York in the late afternoon prior to its evening takeoff to Paris. Because of prevailing winds, planes usually carry more fuel when going west than when going east. "And then," said Mundo, "you also have to consider the distance youâ€(tm)re travelling. Athens to New York is a lot farther than New York to Paris." ......" Associated Retired Aviation Professionals 9/6/00 Jerry Cimisi "…… Now we get to one of the crucial points of the NTSB theory about the volatility of the center wing tank. Mundo said, "There is the assumption by the NTSB that the fuel was heated by the air conditioning packs below the plane to a temperature that caused the fuel and fuel vapors to reach an explosive level." ......... This is an assessment with which the majority of the media concur. A New York Times article from Wednesday, August 23, the day after the NTSB hearing began, stated, "the nearly empty tank, which had been heated to an explosive state while the twenty-five year old jet sat baking in the sun for nearly three hours before taking off." ……..... "This is something they should have tested, but they didn't, exactly. The NTSB flew a plane across the continental United States, trying to duplicate the conditions of the Athens to New York flight, but in the summer the air over the land would be warmer than over the North Atlantic" and of course the plane would not be in the air for as long as on an Athens to New York run. Nobody knows exactly what the temperature in the fuel tank was when Flight 800 took off from New York. …….. " Associated Retired Aviation Professionals 9/6/00 Jerry Cimisi "……"Flight 800 took off for Paris at about 8:15 p.m. on the evening of July 17, 1996. A nearly empty tank has more fuel vapor than a tank that is full. Government investigators speculate that the vapor-ridden center wing full tank was ripe for an explosion" instigated by the as-yet unfound electrical source. …….. But Mundo pointed out that the center wing fuel tank is vented to relieve the pressure inside the tank. "With an aircraft in flight," Mundo said, "you have a Venturi effect over the vent outlet. The more the speed, the less the pressure. When you're in a car and someone's smoking and you open a window, the air pressure outside is less than the pressure inside and the greater pressure inside pushes the air outside; the smoke will be sucked out of the car. The air rushing outside the plane would create a great suction that should have decreased or eliminated any buildup of vapor in the tank." …….." Associated Retired Aviation Professionals 9/6/00 Jerry Cimisi "……Former TWA pilot Al Mundo then talked about another aspect of the electrical spark theory: on Good Friday, 1995, when he was flying the plane that would become Flight 800 in July, 1996, the aircraft was struck not once but twice by lightning. …….. The plane did not explode. ……… "We were descending into Rome. We were at about 13,000-11,000 feet. There were two strikes of lightning, about three minutes apart. There was a loud bang, and a yellow flash; initially there was no indication of anything wrong in the cockpit." …….. But a photoelectric cell activated an inerting gas whose purpose was to smother any fire or smouldering that could be caused by an electrical spark. This was done on the first lightning strike. ...... "The damage incurred was extensive. The plane was out of service for a week," said Mundo. …….. But despite the damage that had been inflicted by the two lightning strikes, the plane was able to land safely. The inference is obvious: if the plane that expolded fifteen minutes out of JFK in the summer of 1996 was brought down by an electrical spark igniting the center wing fuel tank, why didn't two lightning strikes, which would certainly supply infinitely more voltage to the electrical system of the plane than the theorized stray spark, cause the aircraft to be blown apart? ......" Associated Retired Aviation Professionals 9/6/00 Jerry Cimisi "…… Early on in the Flight 800 investigation, Mundo learned that there had been sooting found on the right wing vent system. "It seemed strange to me that if the explosion was initiated by the center wing tank, why would there not be sooting on both sides of the wing? I contacted personnel in the investigating team and suggested they check those records from the 1995 flight to determine if the sooting came from the lightning strikes. I was later informed that the records could not be located." ……… Mundo was questioned by investigators "about five days after Flight 800," he said, but the extent of the questioning was solely on the character of the Athens to New York Flight. The former pilot continues to feel that government investigators have not pursued the obvious lines of inquiry raised above" or, if they have, such tests or studies have not been made public. ……." TWA800 Expert Panel Blackout 8/22/00 Ian Goddard "…..While the U.S. media faithfully blacked out the press conference of a panel of independent experts who disagree with the official investigation of the TWA Flight 800 crash, Agence France Presse cites it. Of particular note is that the flight data recorder (FDR) expert who examined the black boxes claims that four seconds were removed from the FDR data. ……. Indeed, one FDR second found in the NTSB's 1997 report was suddenly erased from that report at (http://users.erols.com/igoddard/coverup3.htm) the NTSB's website shortly after former Navy crash investigator William Donaldson presented an analysis about that erased FDR second which concluded that it indicates a missile strike: http://members.aol.com/bardonia/analysis.htm http://members.aol.com/bardonia/2seconds.htm ……" AFP 8/22/00 "……..An independent panel of experts on Monday lambasted the results of an official investigation into the 1996 fatal TWA Flight 800 crash, and maintained its theory the plane was downed by a missile. ……… According to the Flight 800 Independent Research Organization (FIRO), the official investigators had concealed crucial pieces of information from a final report to be presented Tuesday and Wednesday. ……… Aviation consultant engineer Glen Schulze, who analyzed the so-called "black boxes," also claimed that information was missing. "Four seconds of data has been removed from the Flight Data Recorder when the FBI was in charge of the investigation," he said. …….. Lending his weight to the argument of possible foul play, retired United Airlines pilot Richard Russell claimed he had received a copy of radar data showing a small object flying next to the plane that indicated a possible missile. ……. "An (air traffic) controller has identified the target as potentially being a missile," Russell said, declining to identify his source of information. ……." Fox News/AP 8/22/00 Randolph E Schmid "……Four years after TWA Flight 800 plunged into the ocean, killing all 230 people aboard, investigators have reached "the inescapable conclusion" that the plane was brought down by an explosion of fuel vapors in its center wing tank. "The bottom line is that our investigation confirmed that the fuel-air vapor in the center wing tank was flammable at the time of the accident, and that a fuel-air explosion with Jet A fuel was more than capable of generating the pressure needed to break apart the center wing tank and destroy the airplane," said Bernard S. Loeb, director of aviation safety for the National Transportation Safety Board. ……….Loeb summarized the investigators' findings as the board began a two-day session discussing the crash, its causes and possible safety measures that need to be taken. Loeb indicated the investigators have yet to determine exactly what ignited the blast, but said an electrical short appears the most likely cause. ……." Washington Times 8/23/00 Randolph Schmid "…..Despite all the fears and conspiracy theories, the conclusion is "inescapable" that an explosion of vapors in a fuel tank is what brought down TWA Flight 800 four years ago at a loss of 230 lives, a top federal investigator concluded yesterday. Investigators "cannot be certain" what ignited the blast, but the most likely cause was an electrical short in wiring inside the tank, said Bernard S. Loeb, aviation safety director of the National Transportation Safety Board. The physical evidence, he said, "leads to the inescapable conclusion" that the plane was brought down by a fuel-air explosion inside the center wing tank. As the meeting wore on, Robert Swaim of the aviation engineering section expressed the frustration of investigators seeking the source of ignition. "I would love to walk in here with a molten piece of wire and say, 'Here it is,"' he said………. The NTSB findings, however well documented, are unlikely to be accepted by dissenters with theories ranging from bombs to a Navy missile to air turbulence………. Some contend the government is trying to cover up the real cause, and one group, calling itself the TWA 800 Eyewitness Alliance, ran a full-page ad in yesterday's Washington Times insisting missiles brought the plane down…….. "It is unfortunate that a small number of people, pursuing their own agendas, have persisted in making unfounded charges of government coverup in this investigation," Mr. Hall said. Bomb and missile blasts leave distinct patterns, Mr. Loeb explained. "High-energy explosions leave distinctive damage signatures such as severe pitting, cratering, hot gas washing, and petaling. No such damage was found on any portion of the recovered airplane structure," he said. Tiny traces of explosive discovered in the cabin were probably left over from exercises testing bomb-sniffing dogs conducted on the plane days before, investigators said…….." Excite News 8/23/00 "…..AP - Federal investigators say an explosion of vapors in the fuel tank caused TWA Flight 800 to plunge into the ocean, killing all 230 passengers aboard, but four years after the crash they are still unable to pinpoint what ignited the blast. A solid body of circumstantial evidence points to an electrical short as the cause, but there was not enough wire recovered from the wreckage to know for sure, said Robert Swaim of the National Transportation Safety Board. "I would love to walk in here with a molten piece of wire and say, 'Here it is."' said Swaim, who spent four years looking for the source of the ignition. Swaim's conclusions came Tuesday on the first day of a two-day meeting to study investigators' reports on the crash and its cause. …… While wiring inside the fuel tank is very low voltage those wires are bundled together with higher voltage wires and a short could have been carried into the fuel tank, investigators said. Air and fuel had been heated by an air conditioner positioned underneath the tank while the plane was delayed for three hours prior to takeoff. That helped to make the tank volatile when it climbed in altitude, NTSB investigator Joseph Kolly said. Given those conditions, a spark as weak as the static electricity transferred between a person's hand a metal doorknob would have been sufficient for an explosion, Kolly said. ….." NewsMax.com 8/22/00 Reed Irvine "…… On July 17, the fourth anniversary of the TWA 800 tragedy, a group called the TWA 800 Eyewitness Alliance sponsored a news conference together with independent investigators of the crash. Two eyewitnesses to the crash, Michael Wire and Dwight Brumley, spoke. They were both singled out as excellent witnesses by a CIA analyst in a document that was released by the National Transportation Safety Board last April together with the FBI reports of its interviews of 755 eyewitnesses. Wire and Brumley were amazed and angry to find that the CIA had misrepresented what they told the FBI. ......... Michael Wire was standing on a drawbridge on the south shore of Long Island gazing out over the water when he saw what he described at first as a "cheap firework" rising from behind a house not far away that was blocking his view of the horizon. He called it "cheap" because it kind of zigzagged as it went up. It didn't behave like a Roman candle. When it got high in the sky it leveled out and sped out to sea. He lost sight of it momentarily, when near the spot where he last saw it there was an explosion so strong that when the shock wave hit several seconds later, it shook the 70-ton bridge. He then saw a fireball that fell toward the ocean. ……… Dwight Brumley, a retired Navy electronics warfare expert, was a passenger in a northbound airliner that was abut 7,000 feet above TWA 800 when it blew up. Looking out his window on the right side of the plane he caught sight of a bright light below that was moving north at a high rate of speed. He said that as it peaked and pitched over he saw two explosions, one after the other, followed by a fireball that elongated as it fell into the sea. The passenger in the seat behind him, a Mr. Nugent, told him he had seen the cabin lights of an airliner before it blew up. The light Brumley saw speeding north could not have been TWA 800, which was flying east. It was the plane whose cabin lights were seen by Nugent just before the explosion. ......" ABCNEWS 8/23/00 "…… Investigators of the deadly crash of TWA Flight 800 believe the design of the Boeing 747 aircraft and its fuel tanks were at least partly to blame for the tragedy, ABCNEWS has learned. They also cite government certification of the safety of the plane and the tanks, sources familiar with the investigation of the crash told ABCNEWS' Lisa Stark today. Investigators, on the first day of a two-day NTSB hearing on the crash, today said an electrical short circuit outside the center fuel tank of Flight 800 likely sent excess voltage through wires into the tank, igniting flammable vapors and causing the jet to explode. ......... Boeing officials today stood by the aircraft design. "The design with the air conditioning packs under the center wing tank is a very common design for Boeing and other manufacturers. It is fully certified by the FAA," Russ Young, a Boeing spokesman, told ABCNEWS today. "We'll wait to hear what the NTSB has to say tomorrow." Both Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration, which certifies plane and part safety and design, have long held to the philosophy that to prevent explosions, jets had to eliminate ignition sources, but not necessarily tank flammability……… Another Boeing official today told ABCNEWS that reduction of ignition sources and flammability went hand-in-hand....... "We think that both ignition source reduction and flammability reduction are really complementary and not mutually exclusive," said Ron Hinderberger, director of airplane safety for Boeing. "We think that both of them are needed in order to ensure that we can have the most safe system that we can possibly have." ......" CBSNEWS 8/22/00 "……Four years after TWA Flight 800 exploded and plunged into the ocean, federal investigators ruled out any sabotage or missile as the cause of the explosion that brought down the Boeing 747 and killed the 230 people on board. The National Transportation Safety Board said Tuesday during the opening of a two-day public meeting to release its final report that evidence confirms what they've long suspected: the jumbo jet was blown apart in flight on July 17, 1996, by a catastrophic explosion of the plane's center-wing fuel tank shortly after takeoff. Bernard Loeb, director of the NTSB's office of aviation safety, said the most likely cause of the crash involved electrical wiring leading to the center-wing fuel tank. …….." NewsMax 8/26/00 Carl Limbacher "…… Accuracy in Media chairman Reed Irvine appears to really have gotten under the skin of the National Transportation Safety Board. This past Tuesday in Washington the NTSB offered its final report on the July 1996 crash of TWA 800. ……… Irvine says all the evidence points to a missile. Irvine helped form a new group called the "TWA Eyewitness Alliance." The alliance, with AIM's help, took out two large ads in the Washington Times denouncing the government conclusion. …….. Just before the NTSB meeting this past Tuesday Irvine decided to hand out copies of the ad in the lobby outside the meeting hall. A security guard quickly told Irvine he would have to stop. Irvine explained that this was public property and there was a little thing called the First Amendment that allowed him to do it. ......... Minutes later the guard came back and said the building was leased by the government, and that he would have to quit handing out copies of the ad or be escorted out of the building. "The only way I will leave is if you carry me," Irvine told the guard. Irvine went limp and laid on the floor. The guards picked the 150 pound media critic and deposited him street side. Several TV cameras were there, including ABC News, which aired the footage of Irvine being forcible removed. ……" Citizen Investigator 8/28/00 Tom Shoemaker and Richard Hirsch "……At this time we cannot prove that one or more missiles struck TWA Flight 800. We have no obligation to supply such a proof at this time. Our obligation is to chronicle the considerable collection of TWA Flight 800-related facts which may point towards missile involvement that have not been adequately addressed by officials over the past 49 months . We do not want to close our own study without a more careful examination of that possibility. ……We think it is as fair for us to discuss a possible missile shoot-down of TWA Flight 800 as it is for the NTSB to discuss the possible explosion of the Center Wing tank as being the cause of the crash. Our "proof" is as good as the "proof" being given by the NTSB at its public meetings. The truth of the matter is the NTSB has working theories for the reasons for the disaster. Working theories are not proofs: they are nothing more than professional speculations. In the absence of a proven causation scenario we each must choose the explanation that is most believable to ourselves,insisting that the final belief rests firmly on factual evidence, fact-based inferences, and critical and careful thought rather than free-floating speculations. ......" Citizen Investigator 8/28/00 Tom Shoemaker and Richard Hirsch "……2: Some of What We Don't Know About TWA Flight 800 ……… 1. The NTSB's CWT scenario is unproven. The NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) insists an explosion of the large, almost empty CWT (Center Wing Tank) destroyed the aircraft. But the NTSB cannot explain what initiated it. The NTSB also cannot get a CWT to explode without resorting to different fuels and contrived ignition schemes. …….. More evidence is becoming available now which indicates certain fuels may, in fact, exhibit explosive characteristics over a wider range of conditions than previously believed. The weight of evidence accumulated over the past four years, however, counsels that aircraft fuel systems are incredibly safe and reliable rather than incredibly quirky, volatile, unstable, and dangerous. ……." 2. All possible explosives tests have not been carried out by officials. Nitrates, which are ingredients of many explosives, were found splattered on a piece of wreckage located close to the point where the aircraft exploded. But the NTSB has not performed the tests needed to further identify the possible origins of those deposits. ………. This is still true. Incredibly, tests on residues found within TWA Flight 800 wreckage that are well known components of explosives including military munitions and projectile fuels were not carried out as a consequence of official decision-making…. . 3. The CVR may contain additional information. The CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) within the aircraft recorded a loud noise just before it stopped recording at the moment catastrophic structural damage was taking place aboard the aircraft. To this day the NTSB cannot identify that sound ………… This is still true. …. 4. Official tests of the "red residues" have not been definitive. To counter the suggestion by a journalist that certain red residues found on interior wreckage of the aircraft were residues of missile exhaust, officials have stated those residues were traces of a glue routinely used to attach fabric to seats. These officials have never fully used their test facilities to compare the glue's chemical composition with that of the found residues. ………… This remains true. A fair-minded person would settle for a "test-off" of the fabric in question by a prestigious and completely independent laboratory to end the debate on this topic between officials and critics. Such a fair analysis has never taken place. …. 5. The official "canine dog exercise" as a source of explosives residues is unconvincing. Explosives residues found in the interior wreckage of the aircraft have been explained away by officials as having been inadvertently deposited during a canine explosives test the month before the disaster. Information concerning that canine exercise strongly suggests it was performed aboard a different aircraft altogether. ………… Still true. Explosives residues were found in multiple places on the wreckage of TWA Flight 800. To claim an innocent genesis for the presence of such residues, officials pieced together and circulated the story of a police canine explosives detection exercise taking place aboard the doomed aircraft weeks before the disaster. Proof of that exercise aboard that particular aircraft remains incomplete...and if the last elements of that arguable scenario collapse, there is no benign explanation for bits of explosives being found within TWA Flight 800. …. 6. The radar tapes have never been shown and definitively explained. A radar tape of the accident showing the destruction of the aircraft was leaked to the public. Immediately after the accident a FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) technician stated the tape showed a possible intercept of the aircraft by a missile. Such an interpretation was later dismissed by officials. Persons possessing the tape were threatened with federal prosecution, and the tape remains under official wraps to this day…………… And that was the saga of only one radar tape. Official explanations of what that tape showed and didn't show were so varied it was never clear what the simple truth of the data was. There were many more radar sites having a view of the disaster. Their original data has not been freely shared with the public by officials. Radar data records supplied by officials have been selectively cropped, resulting in incomplete views of the complete crash environment. 7. Eyewitness information has been suppressed. Eyewitnesses to the tragedy were not interviewed in a timely manner. Some eyewitnesses waited months to be interviewed by officials. Direct eyewitness testimony was excluded from the NTSB's December, 1997 TWA Flight 800 Baltimore Hearings. In most disasters eyewitnesses play a very positive, major role: in this case eyewitness information has been hidden by officials. …………… Officials claimed CIA and NTSB animations were based on eyewitness input: the problem lies in finding any eyewitness who believes his or her inputs were followed by those animations! For a considerable time, the NTSB did no eyewitness interviews. Then they were allowed to eyeball FBI eyewitness reports, but not allowed to have copies of them. More recently (just this year) eyewitness data has been released to the public. …. 8. Unknown vessels were close to the victim aircraft when it exploded. After more than four years following the disaster, officials refuse to identify some of the radar tracks passing quite near the victim aircraft. At least one of those unidentified tracks was virtually underneath the aircraft when it exploded. Immediately after the explosion it fled the scene instead of arriving to lend rescue and recovery assistance. Officials continue to refuse to identify that vessel. …………. The identity of that vessel is still not publicly known. …. 9. The Flight Data Recorder's information needs further interpretation. When private researchers noted abnormalities in the FDR (Flight Data Recorder) records of the victim aircraft, the NTSB simply drew a line through the suspect data and stated that data belonged to another flight. Additional FDR abnormalities remain unexplained almost three years after the crash. …………. Still true. …. 10. The armed services have not been sufficiently frank. Despite initial official denials that military exercises had been scheduled for the ocean areas just to the south of victim aircraft's flight path, it was later determined that military exercises had indeed been carried out not far from the disaster scene. The numbers and types of military ships south of Long Island at the time of the accident were also initially minimized and misrepresented by officials. ……………. These confusions persist. …. Citizen Investigator 8/28/00 Tom Shoemaker and Richard Hirsch "……Some of the independent researchers have concluded that three different missiles struck TWA Flight 800...some will tell you Middle Easterners fired those missiles...some will say those Middle Easterners entered the U.S. with their missiles from Canada...and that the missiles themselves are known to have come from a specific nation in the Eastern Hemisphere...some will say the Navy fired missiles...some will try to name the ship from which the missiles were fired.....some will name the specific type of missile for you...some will delineate for you what data radar tapes they have never seen contain ...some will tell you the government knows terrorists destroyed TWA Flight 800 and has chosen to protect the terrorist murderers for domestic political reasons ... but even when argued long and passionately such ideas remain speculations, not facts.......... These speculations presented as facts are hurting the serious independent investigation work. The constant release of a myriad of unproven charges does more to muck up the investigation than to help it. The speculators sometimes appear to believe that their personal conviction is really all the proof they need to make their case. ………For all the energy invested in those speculations, their proponents would be hard pressed to prove such a case as a fact in a court of law or even in a decent high school debate tournament. At times there appears to be an overwhelming urge to attempt to bridge the chasm between speculation and proof with a leap lightened by the abandonment of weighty but necessary facts. This is a prescription for disaster that can be avoided. ……… Plain talk among the researchers should be able to separate beliefs from facts. There is no disgrace in an investigator admitting his hypothesis is a few facts short of a proof. Traditionally that admission has spurred researchers to refine their techniques and redouble their efforts.........." http://www.newsmax.com/articles?a=1999/4/26/152337 Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "…. Chris Baur and Fritz Meyer were New York Air National Guard pilots who witnessed the crash of TWA Flight 800 on July 17, 1996 and flew straight to the scene. ...... Baur stated: "Almost due south of the helicopter, there was a hard white light, like burning pyrotechnics, in level flight. I was trying to figure out what it was. It was the wrong color for flares. It struck an object coming from the right and made it explode." Baur saw a streak moving from his left to his right and towards the TWA aircraft. Meyer said he saw "a streak of light moving from my right to my left." The streak that Meyer saw was traveling in the same direction as the TWA flight. The streak was red-orange in color and ended in a yellowish-white explosion that looked like the detonation of an anti-aircraft shell. "It left a cloud of smoke just like a flak explosion," Meyer said, and "one to two seconds later, there was a second, hard explosion almost pure white in color. Immediately thereafter there was a third explosion and a fireball". (March 10, 1997 Aviation Week and Space Technology) Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "…. On July 29, 1997 the Riverside Press reported that Meyer was convinced he had seen an "ordnance explosion" near the plane. He commented: "The explosion of the fuel was not the initiator of the event. It was one of the results. Something happened before that which was the initiator of the disaster." ......... The two pilots were describing separate missiles: both missiles exploded and the fuel from the aircraft then ignited in a "fireball". ...... " Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "….In March 1998 Meyer spoke to the Granada Forum (a conservative organization located in Hollywood, CA) and described an interesting phone call he had received which supported his position that he and Baur had witnessed two missiles. …. "After my picture appeared on television I received a phone call one night from an anonymous person - the person just got on the phone and said: 'You don't know who I am but I work for Sikorsky'. …. He said there is a tape -- and I don't think it is a tape -- I think it is a digital disk -- there is a tape of the Sikorsky radar which shows two targets approaching TWA Flight 800 before the impact -- one a high speed supersonic and one subsonic. The Sikorsky radar is not up in Bridgehampton - the Sikorsky radar is in Riverhead - it's actually just 5 miles north of the Suffolk County airport, which I was flying to. It is a remote site run by the U.S. Navy Virginia Capes authority and they lease the digital information to Sikorsky so that when helicopters are out there being tested, Sikorsky has the most sophisticated data radar that the Navy has watching their helicopters. When I went down to talk to my congressman in Washington, an assistant of his showed me a list of all the data that the FBI said they were holding -- all the documentation. I looked for this particular tape on it because the gentleman on the telephone had told me that the FBI had come in the next morning and confiscated it -- he used that word. The tape was not on that list and so in an interview in Washington I told Congressman Traficant that I didn't see this radar tape on the list that the FBI had given to Congressman Forbes. After my interview with him, Congressman Duncan sent a letter to the FBI specifically asking for this tape by name - just nailed it down and said: "Do you have this?" Even though it wasn't on the inventory that they presented to the Congress, they then admitted that they did have it in their possession -- said it didn't show anything unusual -- but refused to release it to anybody." (A video of Meyer's presentation is available from Dennis Whipple, 2315 Marine Avenue, Gardena, CA 90249.) ......" Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "…. Rosa Gray Khalilch saw "double orange flares" streak upward and explode into a large orange fireball. The flares were arcing and trailed by gray smoke. ……… Tom Stalcup, a research assistant in the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, Tallahassee, Florida, interviewed Barbara Pacholk on January 28, 1998. Pacholk said she saw "two objects" rise from the surface. The first object exploded near the tail and the second near the nose. She also noticed two large navy vessels on the ocean. One of these vessels, Pacholk declared, quickly left the area after the tragedy. ……… Frank Lenahan and his wife were sitting on their outside deck when Frank saw "two red streaks", very vivid in color, ascend. He brought this to the attention of his wife who turned and saw one of the streaks go west to east, straight across the horizon just above the dune line. They didn't follow the streaks all the way up as they assumed they were fireworks. ……" Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "…. On the evening of June 26, 1996 the Coast Guard received a report of 'three red flares' launched 25 miles south of Shinnecock Inlet - approximately the same location that TWA Flight 800 would explode exactly three weeks later. This report came within hours of the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia conducted by Saudi dissidents funded by Iran and believed to have been directed by Osama bin Laden. An air and surface search was carried out which found nothing out of ordinary. There was no one in distress on the ocean. ………This incident was brought to the FBI's attention on March 17, 1997 when Philip E. Kuhlman, a resident of Moriches, New York sent a letter to James Kallstrom (who headed the FBI investigation into TWA 800) in which he wrote: …….. "I am a retired SA (Special Agent) of the FBI who incidentally resides in the vicinity of the area where TWA flight 800 came down. I feel constrained to write this letter to you in view of all of the furor recently over the possibility of TWA flight 800 being brought down on July 17, 1996 by friendly missile fire. This letter could indicate that possibly flight 800 might have been brought down by hostile missile fire. On Monday, July 22, 1996 I belatedly read the following newspaper article which appeared on page 186 of Dan's Papers, July 5, 1996 edition under the heading of 'U.S. Coast Guard Blotter'. (Dan's Papers is an Eastern Long Island weekly newspaper.): ......... A sailing vessel hailed Coast Guard Station Shinnecock on channel 16 VHF-FM at sunset on June 26, reporting three red flares. The Coast Guard 41-foot Utility Boat responded to the reported position, 25 nautical miles south of Shinnecock Inlet. Station Shinnecock searched throughout the night, along with a Coast guard helicopter and a fixed wing plane from Air Station Cape Cod, with no results. The Coast Guard rescue helicopter returned at sunrise and found no evidence of any distress." …….. Mr. Kuhlman continued: "Upon reading the above, I became curious when I realized that this 'red flare' incident occurred on the same day of the week, a Wednesday, as the downing of flight 800 only three weeks earlier. It also happened at approximately the same time of day and at approximately the same location. I wondered whether this could be a test missile firing on June 26, or perhaps could it be a failed attempt to bring flight 800 down on that date?" ……….. When no reply was received from Kallstrom, Kuhlman wrote to Dan's Papers commenting: ……… "Concerning this letter I sent to Kallstrom, much to my chagrin and amazement, I never received an answer from either him or one of his subordinates -- not even a brief letter advising me that his matter had been checked out and found to be of no significance. Believe me, in the good old days, when I was still with the FBI and might have been one of the men called upon to assist in the handling of this matter, Mr. Hoover would have insisted that a letter of this nature be answered." ………" Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "….Kuhlman continued: "Did it (the FBI) know beforehand -- the identity of the 30 knot vessel that was picked up by Islip radar that evening? (July 17, 1996) This was a large, 50 foot-plus ship, that had been at sea more or less under the path of Flight 800 and which had steamed away, going Southwest, afterward, over the horizon. There has been no official identification of this ship and there has been no evidence that this vessel, right beneath the breakup of Flight 800, ever radioed anyone of what it must have witnessed. Well, in view of this unidentified ship revelation on the night that Flight 800 went down, my curiosity has again been aroused as to the possibility of this vessel being identical with the mysterious 'distress' vessel on the evening of June 26, 1996." (Kuhlman's letters may be read in their entirety in the 'Interim Report on the Crash of TWA Flight 800 for The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation, U.S. House of Representatives, July 17, 1998'. This report is available on the internet at http://www.twa800.com/ ……….." Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "…. In a December 17, 1996 article The Washington Times stated: …… "An official with the Defense Intelligence Agency, spy arm of the Pentagon, has informed congressional staff members that, in his opinion, a shoulder-fired missile brought down TWA Flight 800. The same DIA official, described as an expert in missile technology, told the staff members last week that he personally was called in by the FBI in the days following the explosion of the TWA jet to assist with witness interviews." ……. The article went on to report that a congressional source present at the briefing by the DIA official reported: "In his opinion, the plane was brought down by at least one shoulder-fired missile" and then the source remarked, "When he said that, we all took a deep breath." …… After seeing the CIA video depicting the U.S. government's explanation of the crash, witness Barbara Pacholk told the New York Post (November 19, 1997): ........., "I know what I saw, I saw several fires go across the sky. One hit the plane at the tail and the second hit at the front, just before the wings. The fire came from both ends and met in the middle and exploded. Then the nose dropped, hung there for a minute. I understand that when a plane bursts into flames the flames fall, but this was a fire going up towards the plane. I wouldn't accuse anyone of wrongdoing, but I'm definitely still wondering what happened." …….." Newsmax 4/26/00 Michael Hull "….Commander William S. Donaldson USN (Ret.) - former Officer-in-Charge of Carrier Battlegroup's Air Traffic Control Center, pilot and military accident investigator, developed additional eyewitness evidence that two missiles were fired towards TWA Flight 800. Donaldson located the firing points of the missiles by triangulating witness bearing lines as described in his 'Interim Report on the Crash of TWA Flight 800 for The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation, U.S. House of Representatives, July 17, 1998'. The report, which was provided to Congressman Traficant, may be read on the internet at http://twa800.com/report/Final.PDF. ......... A missile was fired from a location one nautical mile off shore and three nautical miles east of Moriches Inlet. ………. The second missile was fired approximately 10 miles out to sea from a surface vessel that sailed away from the disaster at 30 knots. ………" The America Spectator 6/18/97 John B Roberts II "…… When he was putting together his White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security late last July, after the explosion of TWA 800, Bill Clinton took the trouble to call Victoria Cummock personally and ask her to join. Cummock, who had lost her husband over Lockerbie on Pan Am 103 eight years before..."

 
A service provided by Al Bawaba