Quote:Was TWA Flight 800 shot out of the sky?

As a former pilot, that is a question I get asked about all the time.

I’m no conspiracy theorist, but let’s be clear: Yes. I say it was. And I believe the FBI covered it up.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/obam...-1.2186329

Not to make light of the skills needed to do so, but this guy was Obama's campaign pilot. Not an Air Force One pilot. Pointing that out for clarity's sake.

I don't normally hold much water for conspiracy theories, but this one sounds plausible. Not confirmed, not likely, just..... plausible.

However, if the argument is that "planes just don't blow up," that's a crock of bull. It's an argument that no plane could blow up because "they" (smart people) design them perfectly, or maintain them perfectly, or fly them perfectly. Nonsense. A plane, especially a 747, is a giant, 150 ton metal box with thousands upon thousands of moving parts that has to travel 350mph just to stay in the air. Otherwise it reverts to its natural state of being a sleek rock.

(04-16-2015 10:22 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Not to make light of the skills needed to do so, but this guy was Obama's campaign pilot. Not an Air Force One pilot. Pointing that out for clarity's sake.

I don't normally hold much water for conspiracy theories, but this one sounds plausible. Not confirmed, not likely, just..... plausible.

However, if the argument is that "planes just don't blow up," that's a crock of bull. It's an argument that no plane could blow up because "they" (smart people) design them perfectly, or maintain them perfectly, or fly them perfectly. Nonsense. A plane, especially a 747, is a giant, 150 ton metal box with thousands upon thousands of moving parts that has to travel 350mph just to stay in the air. Otherwise it reverts to its natural state of being a sleek rock.

Absolutely agree.

When some of the lead investigators of the crash say the explanation given to the public was not plausible nor did they find anything that would lead them to that conclusion I think constitutes something a little more realistic than a conspiracy theory.

Yes it was a cover up in my opinion. Just Like the Oklahoma City bombing. Does anyone really think Those 2 Guy did it by Themselves ? Funny the FBI was looking for 4 Men originally including 2 Middle eastern Types. Now with Americans joining ISIS type groups is that really far fetched it wasn't a cover up to make it look like a right wing group, and That fact Was never proven.

That's the problem with conspiracy theories, you mention that one isn't impossible, and in comes people throwing in progressively crazier ones. Next we'll be arguing over whether those were real planes that hit the WTC or if they were holograms.

The FBI and Louis Freeh covered that crap up at the behest of Bill Clinton. I believed that beginning in 1997 and I believe it now.


They found PETN residue on every single seat that was on the right-hand side of that airplane, between rows 15 and 25. That's a 100% absolutely true fact. That plane was blown up, be it a missile from the ground or an in-flight bomb. It definitely wasn't a "fuel tank explosion."

Clinton went out of His way after every attack on U.S. Interests to not blame Middle Eastern terror cells for the Hits Our country took in the '90's. He did not want to open up that can of worms as He didn't want the Heat from going to War against Them.

(04-16-2015 10:32 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  That's the problem with conspiracy theories, you mention that one isn't impossible, and in comes people throwing in progressively crazier ones. Next we'll be arguing over whether those were real planes that hit the WTC or if they were holograms.

No, WTC was from a Radical Islamic Terror Group That Murdered over 3000 innocent people that Day and It was an Islamic Terror Cell that tried it before with the Truck bombs just like the one in Oklahoma City. There has been a pattern of those Attacks both here and Abroad By Extreme Islamic Groups for a long time now. Call it what it really is. We are at war with Radical Islam. They know it, They declared it !

Going to have to rewatch a couple of the shows on this. Curious though, how come a terrorist group never
claimed credit for shooting the plane down? That opinion article was rather weak by the pilot.

(04-17-2015 06:35 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Going to have to rewatch a couple of the shows on this. Curious though, how come a terrorist group never
claimed credit for shooting the plane down? That opinion article was rather weak by the pilot.

Good point. Also, what would Clinton's purpose be in covering this up? He didn't cover up the 1993 WTC bombing and he didn't cover up the USS Cole bombing. He did treat them as criminal acts, but I don't see much evidence that he didn't want people to blame the muzzies. The thing that has me scratching my head is there are scores of witnesses saying they saw a missile.

There are also scores of witnesses saying the planes flying into the WTC had no windows or that they saw a missile hitting the pentagon on 9/11, despite all physical evidence otherwise. Eyewitness accounts simply aren't as full proof as we once thought, and it turns out memory is more malleable than most people would think.

(04-17-2015 07:32 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  There are also scores of witnesses saying the planes flying into the WTC had no windows or that they saw a missile hitting the pentagon on 9/11, despite all physical evidence otherwise. Eyewitness accounts simply aren't as full proof as we once thought, and it turns out memory is more malleable than most people would think.

I'm not an expert, but is it possible flight 800 was leaking fuel and the fuel outside the plane caught fire leaving a fire trail to the plane itself that might have appeared to be a missile?

As far as planes with no windows, the windows of a plane are so small you can't really see them, especially from a distance so I can see how someone would make that error.

Back a year ago, there was a thread on here that asked "do you believe in any conspiracy theories?" At the time I posted that I don't "believe" in any of the more popular theories. But I've always wondered, just a bit, about TWA 900. I still don't believe it was shot down but I'm not convinced we got the real story either. I have no idea what may or might or did happen and have no desire to make this a big issue. I'm only saying, I'm unconvinced.

I absolutely agree that it's difficult to see the windows on a plane, especially one in motion, but that sort of outlines the problems with eyewitnesses. They aren't saying 'it was hard to see the windows', there are many certain that they saw no windows. People overestimate their ability to remember details and trust their memories, which are proven to be very malleable. Just good to keep in mind.

If this plane was shot down, you'd have

A dozen or so terrorists planning the mission and desperate for the attention shooting a 747 out of the sky over the United States of America would bring. Or if it was an accident, an entire Navy ship of 100's of men and women horrified that they shot a 747 out of the sky over the United States of America. Neither of these are little things. Then after the plane crash you have the entire bureaucracy of the United States Government in on the conspiracy.

So, it's either the above, or a fuel tank explosion.

Which is more plausible?

Yeah, it'd be a lie if I said overall government ineptitude played no role in my decision to be wary of most government conspiracy theories. Hell, even the truth about the gulf of Tonkin incident was pretty well know. and that took place on the other side of the globe and involved only limited military members.