User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:46:53 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So show us the evidence.... I'm not even discounting a bomb or other nefarious means to take down the aircraft. But a few select ARF retreads that keep going on about A US MANPADS weapon system taking down an aircraft flying well above the max ceiling from a US warship is pants on head retarded. A few folks in this thread need evaluated... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Okay. Let's roll with your theory TWA800 was somehow within range of a stinger. Where is the evidence of a missile detonation? No metal perforation patterns on the recovered fuselage hint at a near proximity high velocity explosion/detonation. Were you on the recovery team or were you doing analysis back at the hanger? Or did you just read an excerpt of an 'official' report in the media? I'm not saying it was a SAM...I have no idea...but I also know that other than the folks who were fishing debris out of the water, and the forensic folks doing the physical analysis, everything else is 2nd hand information at best. A lot of effort went in to discrediting eye witnesses. Despite the fact that a number of completely objective observants all reported seeing similar things...like a fire climbing in the sky up toward the plane....prior to the explosion...all official sources deny this was possible. Did all those eye witnesses 'mis-remember'? Did a bunch of folks with nothing to gain by doing so (and no prior communication with each other) all make up the exact same story? If there was some physical phenomena that resulted in what those people observed, why hasn't it be replicated? I'm not saying that the official findings aren't possible...sure....I suppose an electric short in proximity to thousands of gallons of jet fuel could make a pretty big bang...and if there were no eye witnesses claiming they saw a rocket flying upward toward the plane...and if the NTSB quietly made the determination without all the hype and pressure on silencing other possible reasons, it might be believable. In truth, I have no clue what happened that night. I can only look at the probabilities of the various hypotheses. That said, I think its more likely that a bad actor was responsible than a faulty electrical circuit. So show us the evidence.... I'm not even discounting a bomb or other nefarious means to take down the aircraft. But a few select ARF retreads that keep going on about A US MANPADS weapon system taking down an aircraft flying well above the max ceiling from a US warship is pants on head retarded. A few folks in this thread need evaluated... Well....thats kinda the thing...there is no evidence...in any direction....just supposition and a whole lot of assumption based on calculations and likely correlation. I would be shocked if this was an 'accident'. The whole 'Navy training gone wrong' is ridiculous. And, at the same time, the short circuit seems like an incredible long shot. Bad actor seems far more plausible, and explains why so many agencies drove the investigation in so many directions. I have no idea what took that plane out of the sky, but I think its unlikely that it was a simple mechanical failure, and even more unlikely that the USN fucked up. My guess...some rogue actor took out the plane and there were enough reasons that folks in power decided its was better to white wash it all than it was to be forthcoming. No conspiracy....no clandestine act....just an attack by a rogue actor and a decision to keep that hidden from the public. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:47:15 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seawolf was going thru trials, stands to reason they were testing new stuff. You’ll have to spell out your reasons, I’m not seeing. Are you asking how comms with the sub might work? I think a lot of times they use aircraft... a P-something... No missile testing gets shot at night/dusk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:49:21 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes it is. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm NOT a proponent of the Navy did it theory, but it doesn't have to happen "on" the ship where everyone would hear it. There are launches/fast boat/skiffs available on lots of vessels that could motor away do it's deed and return. It's not completely impossible for a missile to be launched and no one aboard the ship be aware. Yes it is. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:49:36 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So, on one of the busiest air and shipping corridors in the world, a vessel entered American waters and launched a 1900 lb missile (Hawk) somehow without the command radar and equipment trailer (need another boat for that) without a single ship out of hundreds waiting to transit the port seeing them. This missile didn't leave so much as a cornflake of evidence and didn't show up on any radars. ( A hawk launch would look like the yacht exploded) These two ships then sailed away and never said a word about committing a terrorist attack. It may have been a bomb, it may have been a fuel tank explosion. It damn sure was not a missile. Doesn't require more than one ship because Iran can launch one from one F-14. One boat can hold the equipment needed. One boat was marked as leaving the area ATC testified that flight data was taken the next day outside of protocol for NTSB investigations. So yeah. All of that is possible. Even if it's wrong, the FBI and CIA ran an disinformation op and coverup of the real truth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:49:55 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So, on one of the busiest air and shipping corridors in the world, a vessel entered American waters and launched a 1900 lb missile (Hawk) somehow without the command radar and equipment trailer (need another boat for that) without a single ship out of hundreds waiting to transit the port seeing them. This missile didn't leave so much as a cornflake of evidence and didn't show up on any radars. ( A hawk launch would look like the yacht exploded) These two ships then sailed away and never said a word about committing a terrorist attack. It may have been a bomb, it may have been a fuel tank explosion. It damn sure was not a missile. Don't forget, that ship transited all the way from Iran, through the Suez and Strog, or around the horn of Africa, and was never detected, not tracked, either on the inbound or outbound leg. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:51:02 PM EST
[#6]
NTSB suspected it was terrorism. That put it under the jurisdiction of the FBI. FBI launched a seperate investigation. The NTSB concluded four years later it was an accident
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:52:20 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would very much like to see a Trident in a Seawolf. What about Harpoon anti-ship missiles? Would you like to see those on a Seawolf class submarine? Those are pretty big- like bigger than an AMRAAM or Sparrow. Again, the type and origin of missile is secondary to the very real possibility that some type of missile was involved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:53:34 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There's more to a missile system then just a missile. We're trying to engage some of you folks to think critically which none of you conspiracy folks are doing when you throw out these claims which you have obviously done absolutely no research into the validity of. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: What medium range SAM utilizes the least amount of C2 equipment in conjunction with a launcher to fit on a yacht? You fedposters must be sharing usernames and doing shitty hand overs at shift change. Iran has a copy of the Hawk which they managed to mount on their F-14. That would fit quite nicely. So the Hawk fire control, acquisition, targeting, and missile, can all fit on an F-14 but not on a Yacht. Please. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:54:23 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There's more to a missile system then just a missile. We're trying to engage some of you folks to think critically which none of you conspiracy folks are doing when you throw out these claims which you have obviously done absolutely no research into the validity of. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: What medium range SAM utilizes the least amount of C2 equipment in conjunction with a launcher to fit on a yacht? You fedposters must be sharing usernames and doing shitty hand overs at shift change. Iran has a copy of the Hawk which they managed to mount on their F-14. That would fit quite nicely. So it was a Hawk system on some Iranian cargo ship. It was shot in the vicinity of three US Navy warships each with air search radar. It was either not detected,at all, and quietly skulked back to Iran, or Cuba, undetected, Or It was detected, and the several hundred Sailors manning the three CICs were told to shut up about it,and remained silent. That's their story? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:54:47 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn't require more than one ship because Iran can launch one from one F-14. One boat can hold the equipment needed. One boat was marked as leaving the area ATC testified that flight data was taken the next day outside of protocol for NTSB investigations. So yeah. All of that is possible. Even if it's wrong, the FBI and CIA ran an disinformation op and coverup of the real truth. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So, on one of the busiest air and shipping corridors in the world, a vessel entered American waters and launched a 1900 lb missile (Hawk) somehow without the command radar and equipment trailer (need another boat for that) without a single ship out of hundreds waiting to transit the port seeing them. This missile didn't leave so much as a cornflake of evidence and didn't show up on any radars. ( A hawk launch would look like the yacht exploded) These two ships then sailed away and never said a word about committing a terrorist attack. It may have been a bomb, it may have been a fuel tank explosion. It damn sure was not a missile. Doesn't require more than one ship because Iran can launch one from one F-14. One boat can hold the equipment needed. One boat was marked as leaving the area ATC testified that flight data was taken the next day outside of protocol for NTSB investigations. So yeah. All of that is possible. Even if it's wrong, the FBI and CIA ran an disinformation op and coverup of the real truth.   |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:55:03 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No missile testing gets shot at night/dusk. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Seawolf was going thru trials, stands to reason they were testing new stuff. You’ll have to spell out your reasons, I’m not seeing. Are you asking how comms with the sub might work? I think a lot of times they use aircraft... a P-something... No missile testing gets shot at night/dusk. Not to be rude, but you have to know that’s bullshit. We test shit at night because we primarily fight at night. Unless you’re currently sitting in the Pentagon with a window office, I doubt you or anyone in this thread is read in to all the tests we do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:55:55 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What about Harpoon anti-ship missiles? Would you like to see those on a Seawolf class submarine? Those are pretty big- like bigger than an AMRAAM or Sparrow. Again, the type and origin of missile is secondary to the very real possibility that some type of missile was involved. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I would very much like to see a Trident in a Seawolf. What about Harpoon anti-ship missiles? Would you like to see those on a Seawolf class submarine? Those are pretty big- like bigger than an AMRAAM or Sparrow. Again, the type and origin of missile is secondary to the very real possibility that some type of missile was involved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 6:58:43 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What about Harpoon anti-ship missiles? Would you like to see those on a Seawolf class submarine? Those are pretty big- like bigger than an AMRAAM or Sparrow. Again, the type and origin of missile is secondary to the very real possibility that some type of missile was involved. Not if we're speculating it was a US Navy missile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:00:29 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So the Hawk fire control, acquisition, targeting, and missile, can all fit on an F-14 but not on a Yacht. Please. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What medium range SAM utilizes the least amount of C2 equipment in conjunction with a launcher to fit on a yacht? You fedposters must be sharing usernames and doing shitty hand overs at shift change. Iran has a copy of the Hawk which they managed to mount on their F-14. That would fit quite nicely. So the Hawk fire control, acquisition, targeting, and missile, can all fit on an F-14 but not on a Yacht. Please. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Iranian_F_14_Tomcat_Units_in_Combat/_MTvCwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Iran+MIM-23+sky+hawk&printsec=frontcover |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:00:35 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No the type and origin of the missile isn't secondary. You can't just cram things into other things not designed for them. If the anti-air weapon is smaller than the anti-ship weapon... that is the opposite of “cramming” This is hypothetical anyway, cuz who knows Edit: would still like y’all’s counter points to this vid called out earlier. Not saying he isn’t full of shit, but he brings up specific points and names Video |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:02:44 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not to be rude, but you have to know that’s bullshit. We test shit at night because we primarily fight at night. Unless you’re currently sitting in the Pentagon with a window office, I doubt you or anyone in this thread is read in to all the tests we do. The Navy has rigid safety protocols. One of those is visual range clearance to preclude range fouling contacts that do not show up on radar. I have conducted numerous Shipboard missile and CIWS firings and provided range clearance services for many others. US Navy missile tests are not conducted at night. Period. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:07:42 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Navy has rigid safety protocols. One of those is visual range clearance to preclude range fouling contacts that do not show up on radar. I have conducted numerous Shipboard missile and CIWS firings and provided range clearance services for many others. US Navy missile tests are not conducted at night. Period. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Not to be rude, but you have to know that's bullshit. We test shit at night because we primarily fight at night. Unless you're currently sitting in the Pentagon with a window office, I doubt you or anyone in this thread is read in to all the tests we do. The Navy has rigid safety protocols. One of those is visual range clearance to preclude range fouling contacts that do not show up on radar. I have conducted numerous Shipboard missile and CIWS firings and provided range clearance services for many others. US Navy missile tests are not conducted at night. Period. . Thankfully nothing I was involved in caused it. I also remember shit getting scrubbed in other tests because some random fucking boat or airplane wandered into the safety box.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:14:58 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How many missile launches have you run? participated in? seen on TV? For me more than a dozen including being in combat for some and watching the mount on others. It's not an accidental event. There's a greater chance of your Ford F150 starting itself up and driving to Florida and back for spring break than a missile "accidentally" launching. If a missile launched it was with INTENT. So who was on that plane that was so bad than +30 guys had to secretly launch a silent missile, or the whole crew of +200 men must be holding the secret of the murder of hundreds of Americans. What kind of monsters work for the Navy?  Right on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:19:26 PM EST
[#19]
Quote History"According to a senior member of the staff of then-Secretary of the Navy John Dalton, the test firing of a new generation Navy missile from the submarine USS Seawolf accidentally struck TWA flight 800 en route from New York to Paris on July 17, 1996. According to the former Navy official, the missile test was so important for the Clinton administration, it was being shown live on a Navy closed-circuit television feed at the White House. The Seawolf's missile was to have struck a drone reportedly being towed by a Navy P-3 Orion maritime surveillance aircraft. However, to the horror of the Navy personnel involved with the test and senior White House staff gathered to witness the missile's successful launching, it veered off course and intercepted the TWA 800 Boeing 747, killing the 230 passengers and crew on board the aircraft." I'm not reading past that. A sub-launched missile in the 90s that hit an airliner around 15000AGL. Missile test being watched by Hilly, Bill, and Al at night as it happened. Drone being -towed- by a P3. Test shot actually has a live warhead and smackitates TWA800. CSB. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:20:27 PM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If anyone is actually interested and not gonna be like .gov never lies retards, check out Jack Cashills take. There used to be a video on youtube, but it's gone now so all I can find is the one cspan https://www.c-span.org/video/?414407-1/jack-cashill-discusses-twa-800 So you are implying the Govt. never tells the truth? Being extreme in either direction is absurd. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:22:06 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "According to a senior member of the staff of then-Secretary of the Navy John Dalton, the test firing of a new generation Navy missile from the submarine USS Seawolf accidentally struck TWA flight 800 en route from New York to Paris on July 17, 1996. According to the former Navy official, the missile test was so important for the Clinton administration, it was being shown live on a Navy closed-circuit television feed at the White House. The Seawolf's missile was to have struck a drone reportedly being towed by a Navy P-3 Orion maritime surveillance aircraft. However, to the horror of the Navy personnel involved with the test and senior White House staff gathered to witness the missile's successful launching, it veered off course and intercepted the TWA 800 Boeing 747, killing the 230 passengers and crew on board the aircraft." I'm not reading past that. A sub-launched missile in the 90s that hit an airliner around 15000AGL. Missile test being watched by Hilly, Bill, and Al at night as it happened. Drone being -towed- by a P3. Test shot actually has a live warhead and smackitates TWA800. CSB.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:23:03 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Right on. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: How many missile launches have you run? participated in? seen on TV? For me more than a dozen including being in combat for some and watching the mount on others. It's not an accidental event. There's a greater chance of your Ford F150 starting itself up and driving to Florida and back for spring break than a missile "accidentally" launching. If a missile launched it was with INTENT. So who was on that plane that was so bad than +30 guys had to secretly launch a silent missile, or the whole crew of +200 men must be holding the secret of the murder of hundreds of Americans. What kind of monsters work for the Navy? Right on. Missile firing fuckups aren’t unprecedented. I don’t think CAPT Rogers meant to slaughter 290 Persians. Or did he?... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:23:08 PM EST
[#23]
So a yacht launched one of these?
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:24:11 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Navy has rigid safety protocols. One of those is visual range clearance to preclude range fouling contacts that do not show up on radar. I have conducted numerous Shipboard missile and CIWS firings and provided range clearance services for many others. US Navy missile tests are not conducted at night. Period. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Not to be rude, but you have to know that’s bullshit. We test shit at night because we primarily fight at night. Unless you’re currently sitting in the Pentagon with a window office, I doubt you or anyone in this thread is read in to all the tests we do. The Navy has rigid safety protocols. One of those is visual range clearance to preclude range fouling contacts that do not show up on radar. I have conducted numerous Shipboard missile and CIWS firings and provided range clearance services for many others. US Navy missile tests are not conducted at night. Period. https://slate.com/technology/2015/11/california-mystery-light-trident-missile-test-seen-by-thousands.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:25:03 PM EST
[#25]
I also wonder what sort of drone a P-3 would be towing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:33:12 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am sure the passengers of Iran Air Flight 655 might have a different view on the competence and morality of the US Navy. Having worked for them myself I would put absolutely nothing past them. So are you asserting the airliner refused to identify itself 10 times? Are you saying the circumstances under which TWA 800 was shot down were the same as in the Persian Gulf? Paranoid much? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:34:35 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not to be rude, but you have to know that’s bullshit. We test shit at night because we primarily fight at night. Unless you’re currently sitting in the Pentagon with a window office, I doubt you or anyone in this thread is read in to all the tests we do. The Navy has rigid safety protocols. One of those is visual range clearance to preclude range fouling contacts that do not show up on radar. I have conducted numerous Shipboard missile and CIWS firings and provided range clearance services for many others. US Navy missile tests are not conducted at night. Period. https://slate.com/technology/2015/11/california-mystery-light-trident-missile-test-seen-by-thousands.html Gosh, that’s weird. But The Navy only does missile tests during the day. It must have been a very, very dark day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:35:08 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So are you asserting the airliner refused to identify itself 10 times? Are you saying the circumstances under which TWA 800 was shot down were the same as in the Persian Gulf? Paranoid much? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I am sure the passengers of Iran Air Flight 655 might have a different view on the competence and morality of the US Navy. Having worked for them myself I would put absolutely nothing past them. So are you asserting the airliner refused to identify itself 10 times? Are you saying the circumstances under which TWA 800 was shot down were the same as in the Persian Gulf? Paranoid much? LEO/FLEO: NCIS, CSI Miami DoD: Michael Bay Transformer Movies, Battleship, and Spies Like Us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:37:08 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Gosh, that's weird. But The Navy only does missile tests during the day. It must have been a very, very dark day. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Not to be rude, but you have to know that's bullshit. We test shit at night because we primarily fight at night. Unless you're currently sitting in the Pentagon with a window office, I doubt you or anyone in this thread is read in to all the tests we do. The Navy has rigid safety protocols. One of those is visual range clearance to preclude range fouling contacts that do not show up on radar. I have conducted numerous Shipboard missile and CIWS firings and provided range clearance services for many others. US Navy missile tests are not conducted at night. Period. https://slate.com/technology/2015/11/california-mystery-light-trident-missile-test-seen-by-thousands.html Gosh, that's weird. But The Navy only does missile tests during the day. It must have been a very, very dark day. . SLBM's have a bit more leg to them than a SAM.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:38:10 PM EST
[#30]
Fair enough
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:41:01 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm convinced most of what GD thinks happens is from: LEO/FLEO: NCIS, CSI Miami DoD: Michael Bay Transformer Movies, Battleship, and Spies Like Us. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I am sure the passengers of Iran Air Flight 655 might have a different view on the competence and morality of the US Navy. Having worked for them myself I would put absolutely nothing past them. So are you asserting the airliner refused to identify itself 10 times? Are you saying the circumstances under which TWA 800 was shot down were the same as in the Persian Gulf? Paranoid much? LEO/FLEO: NCIS, CSI Miami DoD: Michael Bay Transformer Movies, Battleship, and Spies Like Us. Some of the stuff they come up with on Line of Duty ?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:45:10 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think the Navy did anything here, but it wouldn't surprise me if the CIA did. So when did the CIA ever blow up a civilian airliner with mostly all Americans aboard? What target is so important to murder that many Americans. Wouldn't it be better to just order the plane to turn around and meet and greet on the ground? We didn't shoot down hijacked airliners just to nail some terrorists, why now? You guys are watching way too many Hollywood movies where the CIA is always the bad guy. You are now believing the propaganda. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:47:06 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So when did the CIA ever blow up a civilian airliner with mostly all Americans aboard? What target is so important to murder that many Americans. Wouldn't it be better to just order the plane to turn around and meet and greet on the ground? We didn't shoot down hijacked airliners just to nail some terrorists, why now? You guys are watching way too many Hollywood movies where the CIA is always the bad guy. You are now believing the propaganda. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I don't think the Navy did anything here, but it wouldn't surprise me if the CIA did. So when did the CIA ever blow up a civilian airliner with mostly all Americans aboard? What target is so important to murder that many Americans. Wouldn't it be better to just order the plane to turn around and meet and greet on the ground? We didn't shoot down hijacked airliners just to nail some terrorists, why now? You guys are watching way too many Hollywood movies where the CIA is always the bad guy. You are now believing the propaganda.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:50:16 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’m not a conspiracy theorist, and I was was pretty young at the time of the incident, but I seem to remember the next morning one of the news shows interviewed a military pilot who said he was towing target drones in the vicinity at the time of the incident. It was never mentioned again and I’ve never been able to find the interview since. Think about it. A controller is directing an airliner over an active firing range? Really? And no one in the tower even notices it? Really? And it is covered up? Really?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:50:56 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't forget, that ship transited all the way from Iran, through the Suez and Strog, or around the horn of Africa, and was never detected, not tracked, either on the inbound or outbound leg. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So, on one of the busiest air and shipping corridors in the world, a vessel entered American waters and launched a 1900 lb missile (Hawk) somehow without the command radar and equipment trailer (need another boat for that) without a single ship out of hundreds waiting to transit the port seeing them. This missile didn't leave so much as a cornflake of evidence and didn't show up on any radars. ( A hawk launch would look like the yacht exploded) These two ships then sailed away and never said a word about committing a terrorist attack. It may have been a bomb, it may have been a fuel tank explosion. It damn sure was not a missile. Don't forget, that ship transited all the way from Iran, through the Suez and Strog, or around the horn of Africa, and was never detected, not tracked, either on the inbound or outbound leg. You think Iran doesn't have allies in the west? Cuba would be super easy. And it didn't have to come from Iran anymore than the WTC planes came from Saudi Arabia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:53:10 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You think Iran doesn't have allies in the west? Cuba would be super easy. And it didn't have to come from Iran anymore than the WTC planes came from Saudi Arabia. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: So, on one of the busiest air and shipping corridors in the world, a vessel entered American waters and launched a 1900 lb missile (Hawk) somehow without the command radar and equipment trailer (need another boat for that) without a single ship out of hundreds waiting to transit the port seeing them. This missile didn't leave so much as a cornflake of evidence and didn't show up on any radars. ( A hawk launch would look like the yacht exploded) These two ships then sailed away and never said a word about committing a terrorist attack. It may have been a bomb, it may have been a fuel tank explosion. It damn sure was not a missile. Don't forget, that ship transited all the way from Iran, through the Suez and Strog, or around the horn of Africa, and was never detected, not tracked, either on the inbound or outbound leg. You think Iran doesn't have allies in the west? Cuba would be super easy. And it didn't have to come from Iran anymore than the WTC planes came from Saudi Arabia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:53:50 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What would a yacht look like after it launched a hawk from it? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/Hawk_launch_better.jpg/440px-Hawk_launch_better.jpg https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2014-03/1394076017_hawkfiring.jpg Jihadists are known for the great care they take for their safety especially during jihad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:54:42 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Jihadists are known for the great care they take for their safety especially during jihad. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What would a yacht look like after it launched a hawk from it? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/Hawk_launch_better.jpg/440px-Hawk_launch_better.jpg https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2014-03/1394076017_hawkfiring.jpg Jihadists are known for the great care they take for their safety especially during jihad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:54:54 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Jihadists are known for the great care they take for their safety especially during jihad. Just stop. You sound ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:55:11 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryJihad is known for its careful engineering and perfect execution of technical weapons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:55:48 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Missile firing fuckups aren’t unprecedented. I don’t think CAPT Rogers meant to slaughter 290 Persians. Or did he?... But if he fucked up and thought it was an Iranian F-14 would they pretend it didn't happen? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:56:26 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So a yacht launched one of these? https://www.northwestfirearms.com/data/attachments/570/570956-2cd470c32503fa40b06d4cc6b5f35f6b.jpg I think the yacht has now been replaced by an Iranian F14. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:58:24 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm convinced most of what GD thinks happens is from: LEO/FLEO: NCIS, CSI Miami DoD: Michael Bay Transformer Movies, Battleship, and Spies Like Us. Or CONTROL with Agent 86 in the lead.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 7:59:47 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or CONTROL with Agent 86 in the lead. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm convinced most of what GD thinks happens is from: LEO/FLEO: NCIS, CSI Miami DoD: Michael Bay Transformer Movies, Battleship, and Spies Like Us. Or CONTROL with Agent 86 in the lead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 8:01:07 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But if he fucked up and thought it was an Iranian F-14 would they pretend it didn't happen? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Missile firing fuckups aren’t unprecedented. I don’t think CAPT Rogers meant to slaughter 290 Persians. Or did he?... But if he fucked up and thought it was an Iranian F-14 would they pretend it didn't happen? Do they have the ability to destroy evidence, alter witness testimony and misattribute the cause in order to prevent embarrassment to the government? Then yes |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 8:02:34 PM EST
[#46]
I guess the fuel tank explosion is the simplest, and likely reason. Occum’s razor and all that.
Where I get hung up is that hundreds reported seeing an arc of light rising from the water, and towards TWA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 8:02:43 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the yacht has now been replaced by an Iranian F14. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So a yacht launched one of these? https://www.northwestfirearms.com/data/attachments/570/570956-2cd470c32503fa40b06d4cc6b5f35f6b.jpg I think the yacht has now been replaced by an Iranian F14.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 8:03:28 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There wasn't a single explosion/failure there were several stages of the CWT explosions, fire and final breakup. The CWT ignited which damaged the plane. This caused a fuel leak and/or general fire and some cascading failures that led to the final explosion/separation. At the perspectives things pretty high up can look pretty close to the horizon. What most of the witnesses were seeing was TWA800 itself going through it's final moments. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Okay. Let's roll with your theory TWA800 was somehow within range of a stinger. Where is the evidence of a missile detonation? No metal perforation patterns on the recovered fuselage hint at a near proximity high velocity explosion/detonation. Were you on the recovery team or were you doing analysis back at the hanger? Or did you just read an excerpt of an 'official' report in the media? I'm not saying it was a SAM...I have no idea...but I also know that other than the folks who were fishing debris out of the water, and the forensic folks doing the physical analysis, everything else is 2nd hand information at best. A lot of effort went in to discrediting eye witnesses. Despite the fact that a number of completely objective observants all reported seeing similar things...like a fire climbing in the sky up toward the plane....prior to the explosion...all official sources deny this was possible. Did all those eye witnesses 'mis-remember'? Did a bunch of folks with nothing to gain by doing so (and no prior communication with each other) all make up the exact same story? If there was some physical phenomena that resulted in what those people observed, why hasn't it be replicated? I'm not saying that the official findings aren't possible...sure....I suppose an electric short in proximity to thousands of gallons of jet fuel could make a pretty big bang...and if there were no eye witnesses claiming they saw a rocket flying upward toward the plane...and if the NTSB quietly made the determination without all the hype and pressure on silencing other possible reasons, it might be believable. In truth, I have no clue what happened that night. I can only look at the probabilities of the various hypotheses. That said, I think its more likely that a bad actor was responsible than a faulty electrical circuit. what they saw was not twa 800 do the math 12 miles off the coast. aircraft breaks up on fore and climbs 3000 feet and the fbi claims it looked like a misdile going p at 12 miles away, at 13,000 feet that is an angle of 10 degrees high off the horizon. then it catches fire and climbs 3000 feet that is a gain of 2.5 degrees higher. so we are to believe witnesses see a plane 10 degrees high climb on fire to 12.5 degrees high and it is mistaken for a missile leaving the water bullshit you would not even see that 2.5 degree movement |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 8:06:37 PM EST
[#49]
I think some of you forget which govt we're talking about:
USS Maine Explosion Gulf of Tonkin incident Operation Northwoods Experimentation on troops |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/18/2021 8:09:49 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: what they saw was not twa 800 do the math 12 miles off the coast. aircraft breaks up on fore and climbs 3000 feet and the fbi claims it looked like a misdile going p at 12 miles away, at 13,000 feet that is an angle of 10 degrees high off the horizon. then it catches fire and climbs 3000 feet that is a gain of 2.5 degrees higher. so we are to believe witnesses see a plane 10 degrees high climb on fire to 12.5 degrees high and it is mistaken for a missile leaving the water bullshit you would not even see that 2.5 degree movement As a fellow aviator, I’d be interested in your opinion of a nose-less 747 climbing 4000 ft |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
