New TWA Flight 800 film coming out

[matt.tansy]

Wire in his 2nd FBI interview did say it shook the bridge. See 3rd paragraph on page 132: http://twa800.com/witnesscd/AppendixG.pdf

 

[Jetblast]

I forgot to mention the P-3 was going to play with a sub in a post proving to you the P-3 wasn't orbiting??? How on Earth could that be germaine? Oh I see now. You are trying to imply I am being dishonest in another attempt to deflect attention away from your errors of fact.

I re-read Cashill. I admit openly I was mistaken about the orbits being during the event. The P-3 orbited after it happened when it learned of the incident. My mistake.

However anyone can see your answer above doesn't answer the point I made. That point was that the Orion was part of the exercises that were going on around TWA800. The Orion was flying to meet the Trepang which was one of the 3 subs involved in the operation. You are clearly evading that in your answer. The Orion captain Ray Ortt got testy when he was asked if he witnessed anything.

Yes, "off" meaning 70-260 miles away. This chart encompasses most of the NBOA operating areas were the subs out of Groton play. Except the actual oparea chart extends another 15 minutes of latitude (15 nmi) south and another 46 minutes of latitude (36 nmi) east.

http://www.charts.noaa.gov/OnLineViewer/12300.shtml

Don't forget your statement that the Navy deceives and conceals and doesn't tell what it is up to.


A test missile was fired out of Virginia that evening in the Long Island direction.

3 miles off of Long Island??? That doesn't even pass the laugh test. The residents on the shore would have taken hundreds of photos of it. Cashill is a sucker if he believed that.

I'd love to see you say that to Navy man Dean Stewart's face. I guess here is where we just get to the straight denials because your stuff is blowing-up on you. Cashill wrote that Lisa Perry and Alice Rowe witnessed a Navy vessel further east that evening that was clearly a numbered warship with military globe radar and gunnery etc. They said they frequented Long Island beaches and never saw anything like it before. More hallucinators, I guess, according to Tansy.

There was a video of the missile contrail the evening of the crash on TV. It was yanked and never re-appeared. Is this the media where your photos are going to show up?

 

[Hans]

You're trying to get out of answering the evidence.


The worth of your opinion is how much you honestly engaged the arguments (which was virtually never). You're the troll.

Who says I have to? I'm not in this debate. I asked one question not of you but of others. I've seen this type of behaviour before it is not that of one interested in debate at all, its trolling.

So if you are interested in 'winning' this debate why are you trolling instead?

lol

 

[Jetblast]

As you've been shown, it would take a nuke to produce that kind of concussion at 10 miles.

You are comparing apples and oranges with a nuclear shockwave and missile warhead high-explosives. I beg to differ with you that that nuclear chart is not valid according to what we are talking about. The only valid chart would be for warhead explosives. So in my opinion I haven't been shown anything that is valid.


Besides we have two witnesses who were there who testified the blast shook their bridge and house. I think you should ask them.

 

[JayUtah]

Don't forget your statement that the Navy deceives and conceals and doesn't tell what it is up to.

And they have a very justifiable reason for doing so. That people keep secrets is not per se evidence that what they are keeping secret is the thing you're speculating about.

I'd love to see you say that to Navy man Dean Stewart's face.

You rely disproportionately on this type of bluster.

 

[Hans]

I've been reading along, and I find the detailed technical refutations of Jetblast's theory informative and entertaining. And nothing in this thread has reached the level where I would consider putting on my Mod Hat. I am watching, though.

ETA: Ah, I spoke too soon.

I would agree but also look at the responses to the technical refutations - they are simply ignored

Have you noticed that the name of the captain who was relieved is not being produced?

Wait fifty pages or so and you'll see the same pattern of evasion and insult continue on.

 

[JayUtah]

You are comparing apples and oranges with a nuclear shockwave and missile warhead high-explosives.

Nonsense. You are making specific, testable, quantitative claims regarding the alleged movement of the bridge. You have provided no affirmative argument to support them. Other quantitative data from shockwave mechanics, including relevant acoustic loading, contradict your claims. You have no answer for that.

I beg to differ with you that that nuclear chart is not valid according to what we are talking about. The only valid chart would be for warhead explosives.

Why would the nuclear detonation chart be inapplicable? What specific difference in acoustic loading persists between them?

So in my opinion I haven't been shown anything that is valid.

The facts remain, despite your unwillingness to believe in them.

 

[CORed]

You're trying to get out of answering the evidence.


The worth of your opinion is how much you honestly engaged the arguments (which was virtually never). You're the troll.

You have yet to provide anything remotely resembling evidence.

 

[Jetblast]

Wire in his 2nd FBI interview did say it shook the bridge. See 3rd paragraph on page 132: http://twa800.com/witnesscd/AppendixG.pdf

Your link skips from page 131 to page 146.

 

[carlitos]

Wire in his 2nd FBI interview did say it shook the bridge. See 3rd paragraph on page 132: http://twa800.com/witnesscd/AppendixG.pdf

Thanks. It's still not a direct quote, but it's there. The multiple explosions thing is probably him hearing echoes.

 

[Jetblast]

You have yet to provide anything remotely resembling evidence.

Ah ha. Answer the unidirectional ejecta plume vs your CIA animation showing a symmetrical fuel tank explosion.


Meanwhile your side has presented an investigation that has been caught committing many proven lies and crimes with no follow-through.


Very convincing.

 

[Hans]

Your link skips from page 131 to page 146.

Works fine for me

 

[thedopefishlives]

I would agree but also look at the responses to the technical refutations - they are simply ignored

Have you noticed that the name of the captain who was relieved is not being produced?

Wait fifty pages or so and you'll see the same pattern of evasion and insult continue on.

I note also that the testimony and/or report of the Long Island Coroner, which was for so long regarded as such vaunted evidence, is no longer present in the discussion, as well.

 

[Hans]

Yep, he'll just keep going with whatever he doesn't need to provide evidence for

Deny and ignore all technical evidence which he cannot refute and continue on forever

Example he's now demanding evidence for the 4 mach thingy which was covered before and he ignored it

If evidence is given again he ignore it once again and demand more, sprinking all of his notes with little barbs.....and demands for more evidence against his contentions - which will also be ignored

 

[Jetblast]

Thanks. It's still not a direct quote, but it's there. The multiple explosions thing is probably him hearing echoes.

Nice try but no. If you follow his statement the first explosion happened in isolation with no echo. The second one had one immediately following. If it was an echo the first one would have echoed too. This is science. The same science you pretend to demand and then run roughshod across yourself.


The other witnesses also described numerous explosions. They couldn't all have echoes. It was the seashore. Unlikely to have any echo source.


The FBI testimony is a direct quote of his interview so you're just plain wrong.


Let me know if you need correction on anything else.


Time-out. Back later.

 

[matt.tansy]

However anyone can see your answer above doesn't answer the point I made. That point was that the Orion was part of the exercises that were going on around TWA800. The Orion was flying to meet the Trepang which was one of the 3 subs involved in the operation. You are clearly evading that in your answer.

Do you have a source the P-3 was operating with the Trepang? Because if you follow its course it will skirt the coast and head for Virginia? You keep ignoring that I told you submarines don't operate anywhere near Long Island. They operate in the deep water off the continental shelf.

The Orion captain Ray Ortt got testy when he was asked if he witnessed anything.

If the interviewer used the usual low-brow conspiracy theorist debating tactics then that is fully understandable.

Don't forget your statement that the Navy deceives and conceals and doesn't tell what it is up to.

Conceals and doesn't say what it's up to? Absolutely. We weren't even allowed to tell our wives when we were coming back. Deceives? That would have to be determined on a case by case basis with, you know, actual evidence.

A test missile was fired out of Virginia that evening in the Long Island direction.

Great! Somebody let the navy know they now have an anti-aircraft missile with a 275 mile range!

There are designated, permanently established areas for missile launches and 10 miles off the coast of Long Island in the middle of a major airway ain't one of them.

Cashill wrote that Lisa Perry and Alice Rowe witnessed a Navy vessel further east that evening that was clearly a numbered warship with military globe radar and gunnery etc.

Great! And Cashill, of course, was smart enough to ask what the hull number was?

They said they frequented Long Island beaches and never saw anything like it before.

I'm sorry. Could you repeat that again? Because it sounds exactly what I've said numerous times and that you kept ignoring.

 

[matt.tansy]

Nice try but no. If you follow his statement the first explosion happened in isolation with no echo. The second one had one immediately following. If it was an echo the first one would have echoed too. This is science. The same science you pretend to demand and then run roughshod across yourself.

If there were three missiles then he would have heard all three equally as loud.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Suddenly it gets quiet as the facts come out that there was more than one witness to the shockwave and shaking.


It is science that a 300 foot per second fuel explosion cannot shake a bridge or a house at 10 miles.


You people are done.

Neither can the warhead from an AA missile shake a bridge at 10 miles.
I says Wire is either mis-remembering or telling a lie.

 

[matt.tansy]

Thanks. It's still not a direct quote, but it's there. The multiple explosions thing is probably him hearing echoes.

Probably. The sound would have taken 55 seconds too reach him. Try as the missile theorists might, they cannot stretch out his description with the known fact the aircraft flew for another 30~35 seconds after the initiating event before pitching down and breaking apart.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Wouldn't a bomb in the aircraft be a lot easier as our other resident conspiracy fan already suggested?
Why go to all the complication of fitting out a sub with an experiemntal missile and then using it to shoot down an airliner in full view of the coast?

Why include all those extra crewmen, dockyard fitters and logistics people when a bomb could be put aboard?

WHy do these conspiracies always have to be so big and complicated?