New TWA Flight 800 film coming out

[kookbreaker]

I still want to know who the 'Long Island Police' are.

 

[CORed]

I still want to know who the 'Long Island Police' are.

Why, they're the police that work for the city of Long Island, err, County of Long Island, err.. Some police department on Long Island.

 

[Hans]

It's funnier watching him score own goal after own goal while missing all his opponents shots then declaring victory.

Actually it is a victory for him as he has no interest at all in the subject of the CT as shown by his lack of attempts to provide evidence he just wants you to respond so he call yell at you.

In THAT he is succeeding quite well. lol

 

[catsmate]

Ah. SEALs were employed for the wreckage recovery as divers along with about 10 other Navy commands that had divers (EOD, underseas medicine, maintenance activities, etc). I can't find from which team though. If they were from SEAL Team Six then they are subject to the Executive Order; if they're not then they aren't.

I hadn't thought of that, yes it'd make sense if their diving services were used, especially if they were operating from one of the ships used in the recovery.

From the 'What Really Happened To Flight 800' website:

Despite early denials, the Navy finally admitted that there had been three submarines present in the area on the night of the crash.

Citation required.

The Trepang; a Sturgeon class attack submarine, the Albuquerque; a type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarine equipped with vertical launch tubes....

It rather shows the level of credibility one should assign to your CT website buddies when they manage to get this wrong. And it also speaks to credibility when you parrot this unquestioningly.
The Albuquerque was not fitted with VLS, only later boats were so fitted.

.... and the Wyoming, a nuclear ballistic missile submarine just out of Groton on sea trials. It has just surfaced that something went wrong on those trials, delaying the commissioning of the Wyoming, and her captain and exec were relieved of command. "

Evidence for this assertion? Given that the Wyoming was commissioned on schedule (and in fact before the TWA 800 crash) your "source" is again wrong.
Now, again, what the submarine captain's name JB?

What about the Trepang?

What about it? Other that it being a sea cucumber.......

One of its seaman claimed "We shot down Flight 800."

Evidence? Both for the claim and it's accuracy.

You guys are great at demanding information.

Yes we are. We're also great at providing it. You however are utterly abysmal at providing information and evidence to support your claims.

Especially when any credible people's democracy should have access to its military records in such an event.

Is this supposed to mean something?

You operate under the premise that the government and military always tell the truth.

No we don't. However conspiracy peddlers also lie.

Even right next to your own written statements that they have an accepted license to misinform (lie).

Is this supposed to mean something?

Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of blast-shaking. Especially when two witnesses said the same thing separately without speaking to each other.

When witnesses statements conflict with physical evidence and physical reality, they are shown to be invalid.

Very strong arguments you make.

Unlike your squirming, evading and refusing to address points.

 

[catsmate]

You have no right to ignore that FBI lied about the seat glue and why.

"Already explained"? I don't think so.

Just because you don't like the explanation doesn't in any way invalidate it. You have shown no evidence for the material to be anything other than adhesive residue, as stated by the manufacturer and verified by the tests carried out by NASA.

Your side already entered the new continuous rod missile. You input is easily dismissible.

Is this supposed to mean something?
Just an FYI, a continuous rod warhead would not have produced the type of shrapnel you claim was found.

The Infallible Fred Meyer in his own words: http://newcity.patch.com/groups/mic...ng-of-twa-800--part-2--major-meyer-speaks-out


Oops.

http://i.imgur.com/zBtps3d.jpg

No eyewitness is infallible.

Oops indeed. I expect JB will be right along to ignore this inconvenient fact.

Interesting: The post quoted states that the submarines were not capable of carrying anti-aircraft SAM's, yet you do not address this issue at all. Your response is more unsupported claims form yet another conspiracy theorists' website.

Yeah we went through this a few pages back. And JB ignored the facts. And now he's making up his own facts, like VLS on the Albuquerque......

I suppose you'll be supplying the name of the seaman who said "We shot down flight 800" at the same time you provide the name of the captain who was relieved (never?).

 

[catsmate]

Agreed. He has no idea what forensic science is, what an investigation in the real world actually entails (forensic or otherwise), nor the simple logic of how to test a proposition.



Amusing indeed except for the arrogance of claiming victory with every third sentence. One of the big differences between a conspiracy theorist and an actual investigator is that the former, while sometimes temporarily enamored with some favored proposition, will be swayed by evidence and will actually demonstrate the willingness to find truth. The conspiracy theorist in contrast is simply about attaining some semblance of victory over his critics.

I think you mean 'latter'.

 

[matt.tansy]

I suppose you'll be supplying the name of the seaman who said "We shot down flight 800" at the same time you provide the name of the captain who was relieved (never?).

His name is HMCS(SS) Randy Beers. Here is a quote about Beers near the end of the AIM article which revealed the identity of Beers:

The transcripts of his conversations with his acquaintance and me have been printed out because they are the best evidence that he was not lying. He had no reason to lie to either one of us. What he says and the way he says it has the ring of truth. It is consistent with what we know from other sources. I asked him for references who would attest to his propensity to lie. He gave me one name, someone who had served on the Trepang. He doesn’t know where he is now. The office manager of the firm where he worked for over a year attested to his honesty. ^Link

And another from the same author when it was revealed Beers had lied:

... But I began to check it out. I located and interviewed five officers who served on the Trepang with Beers. The one who Beers said was on the bridge with him when TWA 800 crashed checked his records and told me that he had been transferred off the Trepang three months before the crash.

The rest were on the Trepang that night, and they all acknowledged that it was off Long Island, but they didn’t know their exact location. One of them, a navigator, said they were close to the crash site, but none saw the crash. Two were sure they began a long deployment that night. They refused to say where they went. Questioned by the FBI on their return, they told them that U.S. submarines carry no surface-to-air missiles.

All said they heard about the crash from the radio. None heard about it from Beers. He lied to me, and I regret having been deceived by him. ...^Link

I have bolded the part where the author failed to learn an incredibly valuable lesson.

 

[catsmate]

His name is HMCS(SS) Randy Beers. Here is a quote about Beers near the end of the AIM article which revealed the identity of Beers:

And another from the same author when it was revealed Beers had lied:

I have bolded the part where the author failed to learn an incredibly valuable lesson.

Thank you for that. I assume none of the CT peddlers verified that Beers was in the US Navy at the time and served on the Trepang? Or that the person they (allegedly) spoke to was in fact Beers?
Further the whole account peddled by the CTers about three subs operating on surface, on some supposed "exercise" seems rather bizarre.

 

[JayUtah]

I think you mean 'latter'.

Er, yeah. I actually went to go get coffee between those two sentences and forgot what I was writing.

 

[matt.tansy]

I just saw this on the twa800.com website (the website of ARAP): http://twa800.com/warningareas.htm

It covers most of the stuff I've mentioned in this thread regarding W-105 and naval exercises.

 

[LSSBB]

I still want to know who the 'Long Island Police' are.

I have the feeling we're just helping someone consistency check his movie script "based on a true story".

 

[Robrob]

You operate under the premise that the government and military always tell the truth.

It's a common thread with CT types. Anytime you debunk their wild claims with actual facts they accuse you of "always" trusting "Teh Gubmint ^TM."

Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of blast-shaking. Especially when two witnesses said the same thing separately without speaking to each other.

Yes, he should have been much more critical. It would have kept him from basing his claim on lies. Funny how many Flight 800 "truthers" still repeat those lies as fact.

Thank you for that. I assume none of the CT peddlers verified that Beers was in the US Navy at the time and served on the Trepang? Or that the person they (allegedly) spoke to was in fact Beers

As long as the story fit their POV, why would they want to fact check it?

 

[beachnut]

You're just name-calling. The credentials of the ARAP and FIRO members are listed on their site. 1) They are top level vs yourself. 2) They have evidence you haven't been able to answer except this obviously silly stuff that fails to meet the standard of argument and evidence they present.

They have no evidence, they have BS, aka, nonsense. You have a fantasy, and you can't supply rational evidence past the standard woo support; "they said so". Faith based woo, the 3 missile theory. Did you read any of the woo yet? Do you know what you really have? No.


Which ones were trained aircraft accident investigator qualified in the task to make the conclusion the NTSB made? Not one. You failed to do more than say they were experts, but failed to present their resumes, as you make the claim; you failed to source your claim that the nuts are more than failed conspiracy theorists.

Where is the sonic boom for the missile? Did you review all the witnesses yet?

Did you give up on the AOA? How does the AOA show a missile blast? And please source it, with back up math and physics.

You gish gallop from one failed claim to the next.

You say MACH 4 stuff but don't explain why the MACH 4 left no sonic boom, a path of sound like thunder rumbling in the distance. Have you been attacked by missiles or Rockets going MACH 4?

Did I miss the AOA claim you failed to source? Where is that study?

Where is the RADAR study which support the MACH 4 stuff?

You got the same evidence Bigfoot believers have; talk.

You have a source that lies due to ignorance.
http://twa800.com/pages/fuel.htm
Oh, your expert web site says, "Why, because the fuel vapor is not explosive." No wonder my KC-135 can't blow up, it was a missile which killed fellow crew members, not fuel tanks essentially empty blowing up due to overheating hydraulic pumps with cumulative damage from crews which left them running dry... It was the silent, missiles from the fantasy minds of nuts, your "experts" fantasy minds.

Wait, jet fuel fumes can be explosive; but ignore science, you have to stick to woo to keep your 3 missile fantasy, and sell books full of nonsense. Follow the money, it is to sell books and make money from fools.

Physicist Thomas Stalcup produced this evidence. You demand we jump through your hoops and hurdles but anyone can see you have yet to produce a simple explanation for the unidirectional ejecta plume caught on radar.

lol, where is the evidence? Did you check it before believing it? You can get the RADAR data if you ask from the evil government, and the military is the same, run by civilians, with a civilian in charge of all the military. You don't see to understand how easy it is to expose the government spreading lies. Watergate solved very fast, why can't you solve 800 with all the evidence. Is Stalcup hiding it? Where is it?

You have talk, where is the study? MACH 4? Where is the study? You can't source it. Saying Stalcup has the evidence is not sourcing the study, it is faith based nonsense.

Again, you produce no evidence, and quickly gish gallop to your nest BS, the unidirectional ejecta, not producing the study, not sourcing the claim.
You can't produce a simple diagram which will show 800 breaking up due to air-blast. You have no idea the loads on an aircraft in perfect shape, now a fuel tank overpressure due to a fuel vapor explosion, and the air rips 800 apart, air. Then the water impact does the rest of the damage.

You ignore the real problem, and believe "experts" you can't produce who, and why they are qualified.


One of your experts (CDR. William S. Donaldson, USN (ret.), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDAvsKeuL0U ) says a wing can't produce lift at 20 degrees up because they are not into the wind; never knew there was a wind like that... What wind? I use to do loops, not sure why a 747 can't pitch up with there is a Major CG change.

All the stuff I have seen on 800 videos and junk supporting a CT, is nonsense, based on each person's level of ignorance in the area they are making up what they think should be. Wow, what a mess.

 

[Myron Proudfoot]

You got the same evidence Bigfoot believers have; talk.

The Bigfooters also claim to have poop. Oh wait.....

 

[catsmate]

It's a common thread with CT types. Anytime you debunk their wild claims with actual facts they accuse you of "always" trusting "Teh Gubmint ^TM."

Of course anything published by "Teh Gubmint ^TM" that can be used to support the CT case is fine.

Yes, he should have been much more critical. It would have kept him from basing his claim on lies. Funny how many Flight 800 "truthers" still repeat those lies as fact.

Utter unwillingness to question the party line.

As long as the story fit their POV, why would they want to fact check it?

Indeed.

The Bigfooters also claim to have poop. Oh wait.....

And hair.....

 

[jhunter1163]

The Bigfooters also claim to have poop. Oh wait.....

That's a difference. The conspiracists don't have ****.

 

[Myron Proudfoot]

That's a difference. The conspiracists don't have ****.

I thought they were full of it!

 

[jhunter1163]

I thought they were full of it!

Well played, sir. *tips hat*

 

[carlitos]

Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of blast-shaking.

Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of being possessed by demons.
Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of being raped by police.
Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of being abducted by UFOs.
Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of seeing bigfoot.


So - Yeah, he should have been more critical of people who had no reason to lie making-up a shocking memory of blast-shaking. As you've been told about 100 times, eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable.

The blast shaking was impossible. It doesn't matter what people say about an impossible thing. People can say anything they want. Jesus.

 

[Jetblast]

You-Tube: FBI Attempts Cover Up for TWA Flight 800



Chris Emery has a good grasp of this. He says 23 naval vessels participated in the exercise.


I'm sure we all share an interest in Navy coming forth with the relief of duty information according to the great sunshine democracy we live in.