New TWA Flight 800 film coming out

[LSSBB]

What???


There are many family members who are outraged at the false investigation.

You are forgetting your side has been proven to have lied and committed crimes in the investigation.

This is about sides? Something has been proven about one of them?


Say, what's the name of the sub captain? This long without evidence and science or engineering to back your arguments is just trolling.

 

[Hans]

Looks like we just get the same stuff repeated over and over again

How many times has he said some kinda imaginary incendiary shrapnel?

When do we start reporting spam?

 

[Hans]

Say, what's the name of the sub captain? This long without evidence and science or engineering to back your arguments is just trolling.

No, it cannot be true, JB TROLLING by Jove what an idea....lol

 

[beachnut]

That's not really honest. All parties admitted they documented pellets that could not have come from a Boeing that perfectly conformed to US warhead incendiary pellets. The only reason FBI "won" is because they got away with murder on a technicality by saying they lost the documents.


It's not really difficult to defend pure government corruption. You have some powerful bullies on your side.

You never produced the source. And you never will.

You can't read the NTSB reports, and present BS all refuted by the NTSB work. But feel free to google more lies, hearsay and nonsense, post them as evidence - it is self-critiquing.

 

[thedopefishlives]

No, it cannot be true, JB TROLLING by Jove what an idea....lol

He's starting to branch out into the 9/11 subforum, too. Not quite the single-minded determination of the late lamented Robert Prey.

 

[matt.tansy]

But wait, I thought you said CIA's Zoom Climb explained the streaking object hundreds of witnesses saw?

So which one is it?


Boy, what I would give to see Tansy go to VietNam veteran Meyer's face and tell him he saw Gamma Pegasi.

Where did you pull that out of? How on Earth did you interpret what I wrote as referring to Meyer? Did the "s" at the end of "pilots" to indicate the plural of pilot confuse you? Or was it "would have seen if it were dark" and "directly in front of the aircraft" that confused you? Look at the image. The line that says "Az/Alt +70°48'38"..." That is the azimuth of Gamma Pegasi. That is the heading of TWA 800 when it exploded, i.e. that star was directly in front of TWA 800. If I was going to show anything about what Meyer saw I would have picked an azimuth that matched the bearing to TWA 800 as seen from Gabreski airport.

 

[LSSBB]

He's starting to branch out into the 9/11 subforum, too. Not quite the single-minded determination of the late lamented Robert Prey.

RP had birtherism a a side job.

 

[fess]

That's not really honest. All parties admitted they documented pellets that could not have come from a Boeing that perfectly conformed to US warhead incendiary pellets. The only reason FBI "won" is because they got away with murder on a technicality by saying they lost the documents.


It's not really difficult to defend pure government corruption. You have some powerful bullies on your side.

And, you do have proof of this... yes?

 

[fess]

That's not really honest. All parties admitted they documented pellets that could not have come from a Boeing that perfectly conformed to US warhead incendiary pellets. The only reason FBI "won" is because they got away with murder on a technicality by saying they lost the documents.


It's not really difficult to defend pure government corruption. You have some powerful bullies on your side.

What are "warhead incendiary pellets"?

 

[abaddon]

RP had birtherism a a side job.

He quit that when he got caught in outright lies.

 

[matt.tansy]

Since the point was more than clear to anyone with any basic intelligence that the pellets were shaped like US warhead incendiary shrapnel

Except AA missile don't use pellets.

and were composed of the exact same metals in direct proportion I'll consider this regressive evasion the obvious tacit admission of guilt it is and a concession of the issue.

Sure, because ask any weapons designer and they'll tell you the damage mechanism of a fragmentation warhead is not kinetic energy (which is proportional to mass), but the lightness of the metal.

 

[thedopefishlives]

RP had birtherism a a side job.

Only when the JFK thread got locked for moderation.

 

[DGM]

What are "warhead incendiary pellets"?

I have to assume he is looking at metals that are used for thermite reaction in US missiles. These are used but, it doesn't really matter.

He has not shown any report and these metals are also very common.

It's like the "truthers" exclaiming there was iron at the World Trade site.

 

[abaddon]

I have to assume he is looking at metals that are used for thermite reaction in US missiles. These are used but, it doesn't really matter.

He has not shown any report and these metals are also very common.

It's like the "truthers" exclaiming there was iron at the World Trade site.

I'm kinda wondering why or how the presence of metals commonly used in aircraft construction are proof of anything other than an aircraft was constructed.

 

[DGM]

I'm kinda wondering why or how the presence of metals commonly used in aircraft construction are proof of anything other than an aircraft was constructed.

I think he's hoping no one will question this fact.

He's fixated on the pellet aspect. As we know he has not actually shown this was the form the shrapnel was found. (I have no hope he will)

 

[catsmate]

All parties admitted they documented pellets that could not have come from a Boeing

Lie.

that perfectly conformed to US warhead incendiary pellets

Lie. "Incendiary pellets" aren't used on anti-aircraft missiles.

The only reason FBI "won" is because they got away with murder on a technicality by saying they lost the documents.

Also untrue.

It's not really difficult to defend pure government corruption. You have some powerful bullies on your side.

And you have lies.

Kallstrom: "They were Naval vessels."

Unsupported assertion. Worthless.

Since the point was more than clear to anyone with any basic intelligence that the pellets were shaped like US warhead incendiary shrapnel

Untrue.

and were composed of the exact same metals in direct proportion

Again untrue.

It isn't honest to demand evidence that is presently being criminally withheld by FBI as we have more than reasonably shown.

Evasion.

You haven't explained what they were since even FBI admits they were not metals found in Boeing construction.

Untrue.

I would like to get you people in front of a jury.

I have testified, unlike you.

What are "warhead incendiary pellets"?

Made up CT nonsense, rather like "nanotherm?te" for twoofers.

He quit that when he got caught in outright lies.

Well JB already started.

I think he's hoping no one will question this fact.

Indeed.

He's fixated on the pellet aspect. As we know he has not actually shown this was the form the shrapnel was found. (I have no hope he will)

Nor has he shown it has the purported composition, nor justified her claim that it matches his "warhead incendiary pellets".

 

[Robrob]

Since the point was more than clear to anyone with any basic intelligence that the pellets were shaped like US warhead incendiary shrapnel and were composed of the exact same metals in direct proportion I'll consider this regressive evasion the obvious tacit admission of guilt it is and a concession of the issue.

Please post the link where you've compared the two shapes or where you've compared the two metallic compositions.

 

[JayUtah]

Since the point was more than clear to anyone with any basic intelligence...

"Agree with me, or else you're stupid." Such a persuasive argument.

...obvious tacit admission of guilt it is and a concession of the issue.

Instead of declaring victory in every post, why don't you instead show us the proof for your theory and answer questions regarding it?

It isn't honest to demand evidence that is presently being criminally withheld by FBI as we have more than reasonably shown.

Circular reasoning. "I can't prove my conspiracy because there is a conspiracy to withhold the evidence of it."

I would like to get you people in front of a jury.

Gladly. Unlike you, I am qualified to speak to juries on matters of forensic engineering investigations. Bring it on!

 

[jhunter1163]

The whole "kamikaze Cessna" thing is unbelievably stupid. Just off the top of my head:

1. Air traffic control would be ALL OVER the approaching Cessna. That's what they DO, for FSM's sake.

2. How does a Cessna catch up to a 747, or compensate for any evasive action the 747 might take? If you wrap out a Cessna, you might get it up to 200 knots in a dive; a 747 would easily outrun or evade a Cessna.

3. All of the other objections to Navy submarines firing missiles still apply.

4. All of the other objections to Navy surface vessels firing missiles still apply.

Methinks someone has watched WAY too many movies....

 

[thedopefishlives]

The whole "kamikaze Cessna" thing is unbelievably stupid. Just off the top of my head:

1. Air traffic control would be ALL OVER the approaching Cessna. That's what they DO, for FSM's sake.

2. How does a Cessna catch up to a 747, or compensate for any evasive action the 747 might take? If you wrap out a Cessna, you might get it up to 200 knots in a dive; a 747 would easily outrun or evade a Cessna.

3. All of the other objections to Navy submarines firing missiles still apply.

4. All of the other objections to Navy surface vessels firing missiles still apply.

Methinks someone has watched WAY too many movies....

5. Even if, by some miraculous chance, an explosives-laden Cessna was seen as a credible threat to TWA800, firing a missile is major overkill to bring down a Cessna, especially a missile with the destructive capacity to bring down a 747. Some poor sod would be scrubbing toilets for a month for authorizing the launch of a high performance surface-to-air missile against a tiny civilian craft that could be shot out of the sky with a pea shooter.