Cmsgop From United States of America, joined May 2000, 137 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3400 times:
Web site: twa800.com
Washington, DC - July 17, 2000 - For Immediate Release
Eyewitnesses Hold Press Conference on the 4th Anniversary of the TWA
Flight 800 Crash
Eyewitness testimony supported by 3 different independent research groups
Date: July 17, 2000
Time: 10:30 AM
Location: National Press Club, Zenger Room
Address: 14th & F St., N.W., Washington, DC (Map)
Eyewitnesses to the tragic crash of TWA Flight 800 will hold a joint press conference Monday, supported by three
separate groups of independent crash researchers. The eyewitnesses will tell their stories and the independent researchers
will discuss the current progress of their investigations. While each group differs in some of the details of their analysis
and conclusions, they are united in the belief that the NTSB's theory is a complete fabrication, unsupported by the evidence
uncovered so far and that other evidence is being withheld or ignored by the NTSB and FBI either through sheer
incompetence or through an overt desire to avoid the embarrassment of the real cause of this tragic crash. Presenting at the
press conference will be:
Eyewitnesses - A number of the 755 eyewitnesses interviewed by the FBI will be present to tell their story about how
they were ignored and how the CIA video, widely played in the national media, bears no relationship to reality. The 755
eyewitness statements were only recently released by the NTSB, who themselves only recently got access to them from the
FBI, 3 1/2 years after the crash. When you read the witness statements you will understand why the FBI held these
statements as Top Secret for 3 years- they completely refute the CIA video and the NTSB center fuel tank theory and to
the average reader will make clear that a missile was responsible for this tragic crash. The eyewitnesses were barred from
the December 1997 public hearing and therefore need to be heard at the Final NTSB hearing on August 22-23.
See highlights of several eyewitness accounts.
James Sanders - The journalist who, along with his wife, was prosecuted last year for receiving a piece of seat fabric and
having it tested at an independent lab to determine if it contained residue of rocket fuel. Mr. Sanders will present photos
of what he believes is evidence of tampering with evidence by the FBI and NTSB. See NewsMax.com article.
Dr. Tom Stalcup - Chairman of the Flight 800 Independent Researchers Organization (FIRO)
Mr. Stalcup will discuss his organization's frustrating efforts to pry information from the NTSB and FBI over the last 3
years. Notwithstanding the clear application of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), these agencies have
systematically stalled, delayed, lied and even stubbornly refused to comply with orders from their own FOIA appeals
processes. These unprecedented refusals have finally forced FIRO to file a lawsuit in U.S. District court to force the FBI
to comply with one of their FOIA requests. See FIRO press release.
Cmdr. W. S. Donaldson, USN-Ret. - Chief investigator for the Associated Retired Aviation Professionals (ARAP).
This group, which includes many aviation professionals with extensive crash investigation experience and senior retired
military officers including Adm. Thomas Moorer, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, believes the aircraft was
shot down and will present additional physical evidence. See letter to NTSB Chairman Hall.
Tca256 From Belgium, joined Dec 1999, 729 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3322 times:
Is it again that missile theory ?? it seems a lot of people
can't get rid of that conspiracy theory with dangerous
terrorists or the hypothesis of a missile mistookenly
launched by a US vessel !! This was a mechanical
failure that led to the accident...unfortunately...,
I can understand some families can't believe their
sons,mothers or sister have died for a such stupid
mechanical fault and want to give attention to that
missile theory...but...NTSB told the truth !! I don't
see also why the US governement would lie about
a missile if it was true, US Vincennes shot down a
civilian aircrafts in the past...no cover up..so why now??
because the victims were Americans and not Iranians ??
Anyway, I'll check about that press conference on
CNN...get in touch..
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7808 posts, RR: 54 Reply 3, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3298 times:
I don't see the point of a coverup, too many people would be implicated. A US warship can't just fire a missile and kill 300 people and no-one notices. The firing of a missile directly involves hundreds of people, and indirectly, thousands. In such a celebrity-orientated society (USA), the temptation to become immortalised (ie on TV) would be too great. SOMEONE would have come forward by now.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
Ben88 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1093 posts, RR: 3 Reply 4, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3286 times:
People HAVE come forward. Did you not read about the 755 eyewitnesses that the FBI chose to ignore? President Clinton issued an executive order recently, ensuring silence from men in service. The NTSB's report is absolutely ludicrous. Every single day 747's take off with little or no fuel in their center tanks, and from places which are much hotter than NYC. If this were the true cause, all 747's would have been grounded and had their center tanks checked thoroughly. After reading page after page of compelling evidence from extremely credible sources, I have come to the conclusion that the NTSB's report is pure fabrication. The people who believe the NTSB's story are the same people who believe the Warren Commission's "magic bullet" theory. That is all.
C172sb From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3277 times:
Ben88 is right, if there really was a problem with the center fuel tank, I am sure a lot of those old frieght 747 would have blown up by now. The NTSB and FBI have pulled too many fishy moves, something is going on and they don't want you to know about it. I have talked to a few people at TWA and they all say there is a big cover up going on. Why would it be necessary to seal eyewitness interviews for 3 years? Because anyone that saw that thing go down would tell you that it looked like a missle.
Pilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 12 Reply 7, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3281 times:
I believe that a missile took down this jumbo. I've tried, in my mind, thinking about different sceneros which could lead to this type of destruction and the only thing I can come up with is an outside source.
I don't think the NTSB lied, per se, I think they were mislead. I think that the FBI fed them a bunch of crap and they were forced to swallow it. Remember there were 10 FBI agents to 1 NTSB investigator. In any aviation crash investigation the NTSB has jurisdiction until it finds conclusive evidence of criminal activity. The FBI wasted no time in swooping in and keeping jurisdiction from the NTSB. I wonder why...
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7808 posts, RR: 54 Reply 8, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3258 times:
Why haven't any of those 755 witnesses written a book together or something - there are loads of individuals who have written books but all with wildly different scenarios. We need a document that overwhelms with the weight of collaborating evidence, not stupid semi-novels that go on about passengers invented private lives and the captain's supposed fear of flying, followed by highly subjective and conflicting accounts of the 'shoot down'. Everything on the subject I've ever read comes across like a mix of The Love Boat and The X-Files.
A scenario: there are wires that go through that tank for the temp etc sensors, and the voltage is very low. However, a short circuit could easily cause a much higher voltage to travel along the cables. Remember that this was one of the highest time airframes of any jet type in the world - forget those NW DC9s (well they're close), the TW800 a/c was past the 100,000 hours mark (design life on the 747-100 is either 40,000 or 60,000 hours, can't remember). Most of that wiring is inaccesible, even during a D-check - it's called 'Fit And Forget'. There haven't been any other 747s blow up in midair but then again there's never been one as old as TW800! And fuel tanks do blow up - case in point, that Philippine 737 who's body tank exploded just after pushback at Manila a few years before TW800. And an Iran AF 747 crashed in Spain after a wing tank exploded after a lightening strike (though that flight may have been using more volatile military fuel, JP1 instead of JP4 or visa versa).
I think a short circuit in an ancient aircraft that should have been grounded about ten years ago is at least as plausible as a huge gov't conspiracy that involves thousands but serves no discernable purpose. I'm no fan of the US gov't, quite the opposite, so I'm not defending them in any way. I just can't see them being able to keep a lid on a story like this. Like I said before, there's too much personal glory in the offering for someone to break the story, if there was a story to break.
(Why did Pierre Salinger end his involvement with the conspiracy theory?)
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
Magyar From Hungary, joined Feb 2000, 597 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3246 times:
but all with wildly different scenarios. We need a document that overwhelms with the weight of collaborating evidence, not stupid semi-novels that go on about passengers invented private lives
and the captain's supposed fear of flying, followed by highly subjective and conflicting accounts of the 'shoot down'.
Everything on the subject I've ever read comes across like a mix
of The Love Boat and The X-Files.
This is exactly the way I would try to cover up something. Instead
of supress or censor, rather overwhelm.
As an example let's suppose I have stollen someone's bag at broad
daylight. There was a big crowd but only a couple of person saw me.
However, I have a handful of friends trying to help me. When the
police arrives and looking for witnesses they give 'testimonies', like
that the suspect is a blond african american with blue eyes, etc.
If there is no hard evidence they may confuse the police pretty
So back to the original case. The FBI only has to make sure that
no hard evidence gets out. And some 'witness' has to keep up
with X-file and Love Boat stories. That would sufficiently mess
up the picture.
PS: I personally do not believe that there is any cover up in the case
of TWA800, just wanted to show that you can have a cover up
without serious censorship.
Ben88 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1093 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3235 times:
"There haven't been any other 747s blow up in midair but then again there's never been one as old as TW800!"
Hmmm...I'm sure there are 747's flying now that are as old if not older than TW800......Polar Air Cargo and UPS come to mind. NW also had some 747-100's flying until not so long ago. Aer Lingus also had some -100's flying into the early 90's. I'd be willing to bet that a wire short in a tank of JETA fuel would NOT cause an explosion of that magnitude, especially since the plane had just completed a trans-atlantic flight through sub zero temperatures. On the TWA800 site they spoke to numerous mechanics who stated that when they perform fuel checks on inbound 747's they find it to be ice cold. Now I find it hard to believe that a frayed wire caused ice cold JET A fuel to ignite and explode. I am not a "conspiracy theorist," I am just interested in the facts of this incident. After looking at the facts of this case, the NTSB's conclusion looks more "conspiracy like" than a missile theory.
"I think a short circuit in an ancient aircraft that should have been grounded about ten years ago is at least as plausible as a huge gov't conspiracy that involves thousands but serves no discernable purpose. "
Who said it involved thousands of people? Sailors are not on deck during test missile firings. The only Navy crew members who would have been aware of this are those that were in the ship's command center at the time of the firing. So the 700+ witnesses become very important at this point. It is true that there are different eyewitness accounts, but does that mean that we should just dismiss them all? This investigation is painfully reminiscent of the Warren Commision report.
Pilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 12 Reply 11, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3231 times:
The government's mainstay about conspiracy isn't about denying knowledge, but to confuse the public and discredit the witnesses.
This tactic was found to be very useful during the Cold War when, in Area 51, they were testing new top secret aircraft designs. They blamed the sightings on UFOs and whenever a scientist would leak information the government wouldn't deny it they would simply discredit the source and the paper.
Tca256 From Belgium, joined Dec 1999, 729 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (13 years 5 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3211 times:
People who believes in that "missile theory" are also
the same who believed in that "Rosswell case" with
the little green aliens coming from space with their
flying saucer...!! c'mon guys, I'm not here to say that
755 witness are wrong but I'm quite skeptical about that
missile theory: first of all, each time there's a terrorist
act, the crime is always signed by a group such as
Abou Nidal or PLO in the past...but in our case no one
has claimed to be the author !! Secundo, even if it
was a missile mistookenly launched by a US vessel,
as Cedarjet said, there always be someone who feel
sad and culprit for the innocent victims for telling about
the incident to the press !! You are making a big story
about TW800, I need to remind you that in the history
of aviation, there are a lot of mysterious crashes which
has never been explained: SAA B747 in vicinity of
Maurician island in the early 1980's (please don't bother
me with a "bomb theory", the most believable explaination is fire on board) but also unknown crashes
like in Africa where it happens sometimes that a plane
crashes into the jungle and no one is able to find out
the wreckage site for decades...I mean especially
about former-Zaire !!
you wrote: "On the TWA800 site they spoke to numerous mechanics who stated that when they perform fuel checks on inbound 747's they find it to be ice cold. Now I find it hard to believe that a frayed wire caused ice cold JET A fuel to ignite and explode. I am not a "conspiracy theorist," I am just interested in the facts of this incident" Well, are you a qualified and skilled engineer to able to understand and give a
serious explaination about the incident ?? you are
talking about fuel checks but do you know exactly what
does it mean and its links to all mechanical instruments
on board !!
755 witness have probably saw something...bullets of
fire or such horrible things like that...but do you really
think US navy was so dumb to test its secret weapons
in an area very crowded with civilian aircrafts (NYC
area is not AREA51 in terms of free airspace !!),
hundred of witnesses and MAINLY with the risk to
shoot down an aircraft !! US vessels certainly made
shot firing trainings in the area that time but I'm sure
it was well conducted !! you American guys...you're watching too much James Bond movies !!!
Ben88 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1093 posts, RR: 3 Reply 13, posted (13 years 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 3186 times:
1.) I don't have to be a skilled engineer to understand that ice cold JET A fuel won't explode because of a frayed wire.
2.) The U.S. Navy has ADMITTED to conducting tests that very night.
3.) What makes you so sure that someone would officially step forward? You ever heard of FT. Leavenworth?
4.) I don't see how you connect this to "flying saucers." If you are trying to discredit me, at least come up with some compelling evidence, instead of your usual, "cmon guys, this couldn't possibly have happened the way you claim."
Hmmmm... From Canada, joined May 1999, 2095 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (13 years 5 months 22 hours ago) and read 3182 times:
Other Missile Incidents before and after Flight 800
Prior to the downing of TWA 800 in July 1996 a missile was fired at aircraft
in the vicinity of Long Island in November 1995. Subsequent to the downing
of TWA 800 a missile was fired at aircraft off Long Island in November
1996 in a carbon copy incident of the TWA 800 incident. TWA 884 (New York to
Tel Aviv) was diverted around the problem area. Three weeks prior to TWA
800's destruction, TWA 884 had another near miss.
The FBI suggested that the November 1996 event was a meteor observation
despite the fact that the object climbed out of Long Island Sound and passed
through the witnessing aircraft's altitude. I have gathered the transcripts
and audio files of the FAA controller tapes for these three incidents
obtained by Freedom of Information Act filings. In March 1997 at least three
aircraft departing out of Newark and LaGuardia observed a missile. The
government claimed that the pilots in this incident had witnessed a missile
test off the coast of Florida, which begs the question of why the launch was
seen by pilots only in the NY metropolitan area. On August 9, 1997 Swissair
127 reported a near miss with a "rocket" over Long Island.
In November 1995, prior to the TWA 800 downing, a strange very bright, green
object passed two commercial aircraft in the vicinity of Long Island. The
following is the text of the radio communications between the FAA and two
commercial aircraft in the vicinity of Long Island, New York on November 17,
1995 at 22:20 hrs. EST
LUFT: Uh, Boston, Lufthansa 405/Heavy.
FAA: Lufthansa 405, go ahead.
LUFT: Uh, we just passed traffic on the left wing, uh, about 2,000 to 3,000
feet above us. What traffic was it?
FAA: Is this Lufthansa 405?
LUFT: Affirmative, Lufthansa 405. We had opposite traffic on the left wing.
Can you confirm this?
FAA: Lufthansa 405, negative. I show no traffic in your area within, uh, 20
or 30 miles.
LUFT: It should be now on our tail, about 10 miles. We passed it just one
minute ago, and it was looking strange.
BRIT: Speed Bird 226 confirms that. It was just above us on our left-hand
side about 3 minutes ago.
FAA What altitude does it appear to be at, Lufthansa 405?
LUFT: It was only 2 or 3 thousand feet above us. We are now passing (Flight)
Level 260. That's confirmed, or not? Lufthansa.
FAA: Lufthansa 405, roger.
BRIT: Speed Bird 226, we confirm that. We had something go past us about two,
well...about one to two thousand feet above on the left hand side. Uh, looked
like a green trail on it, and a very bright light on the front of it. We
assumed it was an opposite traffic.
FAA: Speed Bird 226, roger that.
LUFT: ((Garbled))..Lufthansa 405/Heavy. we are right now about 26 miles east
of "Hotel Tango Oscar ((Hampton??))." And the Speed Bird is now ahead, or
behind us ((or where))?
FAA: Lufthansa 405, the Speed Bird is in your 12:00 o'clock, and about 30
miles, 40 miles.
LUFT: That was not our traffic. Lufthansa 405 Heavy.
FAA: Lufthansa 405, roger. And the heading of the traffic, was it the same
direction, or opposite direction?
LUFT: Exactly opposite. Lufthansa 405/Heavy.
FAA: Roger. Did it pass off your right side?
LUFT: Uh, left side.
BRIT: Yea, Speed Bird 226 confirms that. We saw the same thing. It certainly
looked like an aircraft initially, but it may not have been one.
LUFT: ((We can't tell then??)) It was looking very strange, with a long, uh,
light, in the tail.
BRIT: Yea, a big bright white light on the front, and a greenish tail coming
out the back.
LUFT: Can you confirm this, Lufthansa 405/Heavy.
FAA: OK, Lufthansa 405, Speed Bird 226. Thanks, we'll look into it. ???
FAA: Speed Bird 226, did it go over...did it go overhead. The traffic go
overhead you, or was it below you?
BRIT: It was overhead and off to the left, much the same as ((garbled)). It
actually looked about...opposite traffic, 2000 feet above. That's what it
initially looked like. But then it did have a very strong trail to it...a
vapor trail, which looked more like smoke. And the light on the front was
very, very bright, and as it went past us, it seemed to ((just?)) disappear
and ((went)) 5 miles behind us.
FAA: Speed Bird, 226, roger. Were you level at 29 at that time?
BRIT: Yea, affirmative.
FAA: Roger. Lufthansa 405, how far off to your side did that pass, the
LUFT: It was pretty close, and like Speed Bird said, it looked like
((four??)) or three thousand feet above on the left wing, just one mile and,
uh, on opposite track... It doesn't have, ...it didn't have any uh,
lights...((normal)) lights, beacon lights, or red or green lights. Only a
white light in the front, and with a long green light. It looked like a
FAA: Lufthansa 405, roger that. Like I said, we had nothing flying in the
area. You are just north of a military operating area, but the traffic
shouldn't have varied out that far out,...out of the area.
LUFT: Must have been a military. Lufthansa 405/Heavy.
FAA: Roger. Giant Killer, ((garbled)) 59.
GK: Giant Killer. FAA: Hey, you got anything flying out in the area?
GK: Negative, ((105 is??)) turned over 0300.
FAA: Well, I just received a couple of UFO reports.
GK: Oh, is that right?
FAA? Yea, I had a couple of guys that reported lights, just moved all over
their heads. I have no traffic whatsoever in the area. They said it passed
within a mile of them, like at 2-3 thousand feet above them, opposite
direction. ((Garbled)) green trail out the back.
GK: It could have been a meteor, or something.
FAA: ((Garbled--Yea, it could have been that.....it passed within a mile of
GK: Who reported that?
FAA: Well, I got Speed Bird and Lufthansa.
GK: No, we don't have any aircraft out there.
Three weeks to the day before TWA 800 was shot down, at the same time in the
evening, in approximately the same location as the TWA 800 downing, and
within hours of the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, the Coast Guard
received a report of "three red flares" launched 25 miles south of Shinnicock
Inlet. An air and surface search was carried out which found nothing out of
ordinary. TWA Flight 848 (New York to Rome) blocked out at exactly 10:00 pm
on June 26, 1996 and assuming normal handling, Flight 848 would have passed
about 11 NM South of Shinnecock Inlet at 10:29 p.m. EDT. TWA Flight 884 (New
York to Tel Aviv) was scheduled to depart before FL 848 but blocked out late
at 10:19 p.m. EDT. We shall hear from another Flight 884 later but for the
moment let's note that on June 25, 1996 nineteen Americans were killed by a
truck bomb at the Khobar Towers in the Dhahran military base in Saudi Arabia.
Within two days suspicions focused on Saudi dissidents funded by Iran.
June 27, 1996 International News The Telegraph (U.K. Electronic Edition) Issue 415
Suspicion for the bombing outside Dhahran was pointing towards internal
enemies of the Saudi monarchy.
Was TWA 800 brought down by a missile? A pilot spoke about a light
coming right at him and then it blew.
Eastwind Flight 507 8:31:50: We just saw an explosion out here.
Eastwind Flight 507 8:32:01: Ah, we just saw an explosion up ahead of us
... It just went down -- in the water.
Virgin Atlantic Flight 009 8:32:25: I can confirm that. ... It looked like
an explosion out there about five miles away, six miles away.
Controller: ..507 Thanks for that report. New York on 113.05. Good day sir.
Eastwind 507 8:37:05: Anything we can do for you before we go.
Controller 8:37:11: Well I just want to confirm that you saw the splash in
the water approximately 20 south west of Hampton. Is that right?
Eastwind 507 8:37:20: Ah yes sir it blew up in the air and then we saw two
fireballs go down to the water and a big smoke plume coming up from it. Also
there seemed to be a light - I thought it was a landing light - coming right
at us at about 15,000 feet and I put my landing light as soon as I saw him
and then it blew.
Controller 8:37:40: Roger that sir. That was a 747 out there - you had a
visual on that. Anything else in the area when it happened?
Eastwind 507 8:37:47: I didn't see anything - seemed to be - I thought he
had a landing light on - maybe it was a fire - I dunno.
In November 1996, subsequent to the TWA 800 downing, a missile was again
fired at commercial aircraft in the vicinity of Long Island. On November
16, 1996 Pakistan International Airlines Flight 712 left Kennedy at 9:25pm,
bound for Frankfurt. The pilot, W. Shah, said his co-pilot saw an orange
light coming from the left hand side to the right hand side of the airplane.
The object was 3 - 4 miles in front of the aircraft and above it. Boston
apparently confirmed 'two unidentified blips' on radar. The tapes were turned
over to the FBI and NTSB since the object(s) rose directly out of Long Island
Sound and ascended almost vertically. Radio 5 in the U.K. reported that the
object which crossed the Pakistani aircraft had exploded. On a McNeill -
Lehrer newshour, when asked about the direction of the object, Mr. Kallstrom
admitted that it was "ascending".) TWA Flight 884 was following close behind
the Pakistani flight. Kallstrom told Lehrer on the PBS Newshour of November
17, 1996 that it was probably a meteorite.
Lehrer: Now, the latest new public report, was that of a Pakistan airlines
pilot, who said he saw, quote: "something with lights in the sky" near where
this TWA plane went down that night. Have you determined what that might have
Kallstrom: We think it was a meteorite shower, Jim, we're not absolutely
sure. We've interviewed the pilot. He's a highly experienced pilot. Appears
to be very competent. Has a good memory of what he saw. We have no doubt that
he saw what he described; an object he thought ascending from his left to his
right. We're in the process of looking at radar tapes and other things to
tell us if we can know for sure there was some other event. But there were
reports that evening of meteorite showers. They were reported widely
throughout Suffolk County.
Lehrer: And the National Weather Service confirmed it, did they not?
Kallstrom: More than likely, Jim, that's what it is, but we're still looking
in to it.
The following is the text of the radio communications between the FAA,
Pakistan Flight PIA 712, TWA 884 and 1504 FLL in the vicinity of Long Island,
New York on November 16, 1996 obtained through the filing of a FOIA request
to the FAA.
PIA: Boston Pakistan 712
FAA: Pakistan 712 go ahead
PIA: Do you have any fireworks going on in this area where we are. We just
saw a kind of a large something just streak ahead and it went beyond our
FAA: Ah ... no .. nothing that caused other than that. You said it was some
PIA: It came up diagonally from left to right and it crossed our altitude
right in front of us.
FAA: OK thanks.
1504 FLL: Boston Center 1504
FAA: 1504 Go ahead
1504 FLL: Yea - where about is that aircraft that reported that streak?
FAA: Ah .. He's about 20 miles south of Hampton
1504 FLL: 1504
TWA 884: Boston Center TWA 884 heavy just out of four thousand for one one
FAA: TWA Flight 884 Boston Center Climb and maintain flight level 190
TWA 884: Flight level 190 TWA 884 heavy
FAA: Pakistan 712 Boston
PIA 712: Boston 712
FAA: Just to confirm .. you saw like something that was like a white streak
coming from below and ending up on top of you .. I'm not sure exactly what
you saw. Could you classify maybe what you saw?
PIA 712: It was a streak of light like some kind of a large firecracker
rocket or something like that coming from .... the coast side - left to right
..... climbing beyond our altitude. At that time we were about 16,000 feet.
FAA: OK. Thanks very much.
FAA: Kennedy Departure (unclear)
Kennedy Departure: Kennedy
FAA: I'm going to put TWA on a 70 heading. Is that OK? 884
Kennedy Departure: Ya I'll shove over
FAA: TWA 884 Fly heading 070
TWA 884: 070 TWA 884 heavy
TWA 884: Boston TWA 884. Where was that fireworks area?
FAA: 884 I'm kinda ... I'm going to vector you around the area. It's about
20 miles .... actually 30 miles south of Hampton.
TWA 884: OK and I understand some type of rocket?
FAA: Yea ... we had a Pakistan just reported ... looked like a firecracker
that was passing from left to right about 30 miles south of Hampton.
TWA 884: 884 heavy thank you.
TWA 884: Firecrackers don't go past 16,000
FAA: I hear ya!
Mr Kallstrom may have heard the expression "meteoric rise" ..... but actually
On December 12, 1996, subsequent to the TWA 800 downing, a very bright,
green object streaked past a Saudi Arabian aircraft while on approach to
Kennedy airport 15 miles south west of East Hampton at about 12,000 feet. The
crew filed an incident report when they arrived at Washington, their final
Saudi Arabian 035: Boston Center 035
Boston Controller: Saudi 035 go ahead
Saudi Arabian 035: Ah yes, we just observed what appeared to be a green flare
at our approximately eleven o'clock position and maybe five miles distance
Boston Controller: Saudi 035 roger
Boston Controller: It's Saudi (garbled)
Other Controller: (garbled)
Boston Controller: I normally don't know what to do with reports like this
.... but he's going to land at Kennedy
Other Controller: (garbled)
Boston Controller: About a minute ago he said he saw what appeared to be a
green flare at eleven o'clock and five miles so ..
Other Controller: That puts it like over Spadaro airport (Note: Spadaro is
located halfway between Brookhaven and Gabreski and about 5 miles south of
Peconic near Mastic Beach on Long Island. The Calverton VOR is located at
Boston Controller: Hmmm. Yea, maybe about 8 miles south of that radar
antenna - it's probably about nine o'clock and six miles from where he is
now. So he said it appeared to be a green flare?
Other Controller: How high? You said all the way up to twelve thousand?
Boston Controller: Yea, let me check with him on that.
Other Controller: Well do you want to check Kennedy approach?
Boston Controller: Saudi 035 - that appeared to be at your altitude or above
Saudi Arabian 035: It appeared to be above our altitude - bright green -
appeared to be a flare - could have been a meteorite but extremely bright.
Boston Controller: Saudi 035 roger
Other Controller: (garbled)
Boston Controller: Yea he said it appeared to be above his altitude - it
might have been a meteorite but he didn't know. He said "very bright".
Other Controller: OK, I'll look at it. The guy in charge here knows too.
Boston Controller: Saudi 035 contact Kennedy approach 125.7. Good day.
Saudi Arabian 035: 125.7 Good evening.
Saudi Arabian 035: Kennedy, Saudi 035 heavy.
NY Controller: Say again.
Saudi Arabian 035: Saudi 035 - we picked up a target about 6 miles to our 9
o'clock position. Is that confirmed?
NY Controller: Ah, you said traffic?
Saudi Arabian 035: Unintelligible.
NY Controller: No. There is nothing within 20 miles of you.
On March 1997, subsequent to the TWA 800 downing, a missile was observed by
Northwest Airlines 775, US Air 1937, Delta 2517 and Northwest Airlines 361.
Northwest Airlines Flight 775 was travelling from Newark to Minneapolis and
Flight 361 from Laguardia to Minneapolis. Both flights departed at 6:55 PM
and reported the missile about 15 Minutes into their flights.
NWA 775: Air Center it looks like we see ah - this is Northwest 775 - on a
southerly heading - a missile or something. Do you know anything about that?
Controller: Northwest 775 - you see a what?
NWA 775: It appears to be a missile on the south of our course here -
straight south of us - off our left - it's climbing and heading south.
Controller: Due south of your position, heading south?
NWA 775: Yea, and climbing rapidly.
Controller: Going through about what altitude now?
NWA 775: Oh man, it's like over 30,000 and on its way up. It was a rocket or
a missile and I don't know - it's out of sight now.
Controller: You think it was a rocket or a missile?
NWA 775: Affirmative. It was extremely bright. Anybody else in the area I'm
sure would have seen it.
Another Pilot: Don't scare us!
Controller: Say again.
Other Pilot: Don't scare us .... unintelligible
Controller: Definitely a missile of some sort.
Multiple conversations somewhat garbled.
Controller: 843 west of ?? reported spotting a missile 10 south of his
position heading south ....
Other Controller: They're all talking about it.
USA 1937: Holy ?Mary - (unintelligible) a ?240 heading - Did you see that?
Controller: What did we miss?
USA 1937: A rocket going up to the southeast of our ?180
Controller: From who?
USA 1937: US Air 1937
Another pilot: It sure is.
Controller: How far away do you think?
USA 1937: ?God only knows.
Controller: Little Aberdeen is out there that' why I'm asking. It's about
ninety miles away from you so it could be there they do that rocket testing.
USA 1937: Yeah it was about 170 degrees from us and I don't know about how far.
Controller: Yeah that would be about right.
USA 1937: Yeah it was off our left wing tip.
Another pilot: Where did that rocket launch from?
Controller: I didn't know anything about it. The only thing I'm guessing from
where the US Air told me was the direction was correct for Aberdeen proving
Other pilot: Unintelligible... Commuter 533 ... 180 heading and about six
miles from my position. It was definitely a rocket.
Controller: Yea that would be a little bit to the west of Aberdeen but I
guess it's hard to be exact.
Other pilot: Yea I just looked at it and saw a plume coming out of it and
then it disappeared but the plume is still there.
Delta 2517: Center, Delta 2517.
Controller: Go ahead.
Delta 2517: You guys do you have any missile launches or anything tonight?
Controller: I believe there is one .... I don't know what the status is.
Delta 2517: Well it just went up - ... we just lost .. .... pretty awesome off the left side.
Controller: OK - you could see it. ..... Unintelligible .... We are .... all the traffic for it.
Delta 2517: Where did that thing come from?
Controller: I don't know.
Delta 2517: I was sitting here thinking the comet looks good tonight. Man ...
Can anyone explain how a missile test off the coast of Florida was observed
by only these aircraft flying in the NY metropolitan area?
April 10, 1997 CNN
The Federal Aviation Administration now believes that a missile sighted by
several commercial airline pilots flying over the northeastern United States
on March 17 was actually part of a Navy test off the coast of Florida.
And finally on August 9, 1997, Swissair Flight 127 reported a near miss with
a "rocket" over Long Island.
March 5, 1999 www.cbcnews.com Ottawa (CP)
A Swissair pilot reported his 747 jet was nearly hit by an unidentified
flying object, possibly a missile, near the area off New York where a TWA
airplane crashed in 1996, The Canadian Press has learned. Swissair Flight 127
was cruising at 23,000 feet on Aug. 9, 1997, when the pilot interrupted an
address to passengers to report the near miss by a round white object, says a
report by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. "Sir, I don't know
what it was, but it just flew like a couple of hundred feet above us," he
radioed Boston air traffic control. "I don't know if it was a rocket or
whatever, but incredibly fast, opposite direction." "In the opposite
direction?" asked the controller. "Yes sir, and the time was 2107 (Greenwich
mean time). It was too fast to be an airplane." The controller asked another
aircraft if its crew saw anything like a missile in the area. The reply was
negative. He then asked the Swissair pilot again how far above the plane it
was. "It was right over us, right above, opposite direction, and, and I don't
know, two, three, four hundred feet above. All that I can tell, 127, is that
(we) saw a light object, it was white, and very fast." Investigators
interviewed the captain and first officer on Aug. 10, 1997. The flight
engineer hadn't seen the object and was not interviewed. The report, filed
under NYC97SA193, said the flight was opposite John F. Kennedy Airport at
5:07 p.m. Eastern time - near the area where TWA Flight 800 went down July
17, 1996..... The transportation safety board report said the Swissair
captain saw the cylindrical object for less than a second. He did not see any
wings and was not sure it was an aircraft. "He had never been so close to
other traffic before," said the report. "It passed over the cockpit, slightly
right of centerline. If it had been any lower, it would have hit the
aircraft. "As the object passed by, there was no noise, no wake turbulence,
and no disruption or anomalies with any of the flight or engine instruments."
The plane was flying in clear weather to Boston from Philadelphia at the
time. The sun was at the pilot,s back. He apparently did not have time to
take evasive action. "There was no exhaust or smoke, no fire, and he could
not accurately discern its size. The captain reported his total time as
15,000-plus flight hours. He had never seen a missile in flight." The first
officer, whose flight time totalled 7,500 hours, said he was bent over to
adjust the volume on his headset when he looked up and saw the object pass
overhead "very quickly." "It was close enough that he ducked his head because
he thought it would hit them. . . . He thought it passed about 100 to 200
feet above the airplane and between the right side of the fuselage and the
No. 3 engine." The first officer said no markings were visible and the object
appeared to be the size of a thumbnail held at arm's length. He said he had
previously encountered a weather balloon over Italy, and the object did not
look like the balloon. He had witnessed missile launches from the ground
previously, the report said. The report said the nearest weather balloons are
launched from Upton, N.Y., 43 nautical miles northeast of JFK twice daily, at
7 p.m. and 3 a.m. Eastern time and usually take 25 to 28 minutes to reach
23,000 feet. Balloons are light tan or brownish, or black and red, said the
report, adding the wind was blowing from the north, almost at right angles to
the aircraft. Investigators also checked radar data and plotted the plane's
flight path. "There was no evidence of an opposite direction target, either
beacon or non-beacon," said the report.
SWR 127: Center - Swissair 127
Controller -1: Swissair 127 - go ahead.
SWR 127: Yes sir. I don't know what it was but it just overflew like .. like
a couple of hundred feet above us .. I don't know if it was a rocket or
whatever but incredibly fast in the opposite direction.
Controller -1: In the opposite direction?
SWR 127: Yes sir. And the time was 2107. It was too fast to be an airplane.
Controller -1: OK. Thank you.
Controller-1: US Air 986 - Did you see anything like a missile in your area -
perhaps off to your right?
US Air: I'll take a good look but if it's goin' that fast I probably won't
get a chance. We just saw Swissair go by ..
Controller-1: OK. Thanks
SWR 127: Swissair 127. We had no TCAS (collision avoidance) warning. It was
way too fast I guess.
Controller -1: Swissair 127 - Thank you.
Controller -1: Swissair 127 - How far above you was it?
SWR 127: It was right over us - right above .. opposite direction ... and
... I don't know two, three, four hundred feet above us.
Controller-1: OK. Thank you
SWR 127: All I can say, 127, is that the three of us saw a white object - it
was white and very fast.
Controller -1: Swissair 127 - Thank you.
Controller -1: Northwest 550. Did you see anything similar to a missile or a
UFO in your vicinity - maybe about three minutes ago?
NW 550: We heard that report but we haven't seen anything - Northwest 550.
Controller -1: USAir 8900 you didn't see anything either?
USAir: We saw nothing ...
Controller -1: Hey Chris. Swissair 127... he had a UFO or a rocket or
something almost hit him in my airspace.
Controller -2: A UFO or a rocket almost hit the Swissair 127???
Controller -1: Yea, it went right above him - two or three hundred feet he
says. Some kind of white object. They're checking into it here but if he says
anything to you .... just to let you know.
Controller -2: OK. Thank you.
The following two images are of Krieger's and the military's photos respectively
Photo taken that evening
On the evening TWA Flight 800 went down, Heidi Krieger was taking pictures from a boat off the coast of Long Island. One of her photos appeared to show at least one missile contrail. The FBI confiscated Krieger's negative and stated that the photo did not show a missile contrail, just the effects of "debris on the negative." Krieger did mantain the original photo and scans of this photo were obtained by independent researchers. These researchers have verified the validity of the following image.
Military photo of an Arrow-2 missile contrail after launch.
A month later, in August of '96, during a test launch of an Arrow-2 missile, a military photographer captured the conrtrails of a previously launched missile on film.
And something else, this is the Cabot photo, taken outside that evening at a party. Blown up, you can clearly see the profile of a missile in flight. Look closely and you can even make out the stabilizer fins in the mid section. Remember now that this is the smoking gun because the Navy has always contended that no missiles are ever fired any where near that vicinity for safety reason. Yet, here is a missile in flight on that night in that area.
Things to make you say:
An optimist robs himself of the joy of being pleasantly surprised
Pilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 12 Reply 15, posted (13 years 5 months 15 hours ago) and read 3148 times:
I have just one question to ask you folks... if the government really shot down a 747 full of people by mistake, do you think they would cop to it and say, "oops. We made a slight miscalculation in it's trajectory. We're sorry."
If you believe that I've got some magical beans that I'm willing to sell you. Name your price.
Carioca Canuck From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (13 years 5 months 9 hours ago) and read 3138 times:
In the late 60's to early 70's a civilian jetliner was shot down by an F-104 "Starfighter" of the Italian Air Force at the air weapons range near Decimommanu, Sardinia during live fire exercises.
It was covered up for years until the story was broke.
I served 6 years in the Canadian Armed Forces from 1976 to 1982 and have personally seen two live fire demonstrations of the "Blowpipe" and the Stinger predecessor, the "Redeye", shoulder fired short range air defense missile systems.
I just spent the better part of 4 hours reading every piece of the TWA800 website as well as other information that is available online and I have a knot in my stomach that is the size of a basketball.
The government has a multitude of reasons to cover up a military accident......or for that matter a terrorist attack against a civilian airliner. Having been an intelligence officer in my armored regiment I can assure all of you here first hand that if this was a military accident, it would be extremely easy to ensure the silence of the few people that would be "in the know".