Dog Breath
03-26-2001, 06:46 PM
I would like to discuss some of the more blatant lies perpetrated during the Clinton administration. I really don't want to dig into details as there is more information than can be dealt with here. I would like to start with TWA flight 800.
Most of you know I have worked in the aerospace industry and my home town is centered around it. This you might not know. During the early investigation my dad and a man he works with were asked to determine the possibility a shoulder fired missile took out the aircraft. They researched it and found the Russian red eye missile could easily hit the target at that range. Why then did the missile not hit the engine? Shouldn't that be the hottest spot? Nope they went to LAX and filmed that type of aircraft on takeoff and exactly where the explosion started is a heat exchanger for the cooling system used during takeoff. That was the hottest / highest contrast target. They filed that report. There were over 200 witnesses that saw something rise off the water and hit the plane.
Why did the FAA say there was "No chance that a missile was involved"?
The Masad told US inelegance before the investigation that there were two missiles one was fired and the other tossed overboard. A pair of men rented a boat shortly before the incident and returned it directly after neglecting to stop in for their deposit.
There is tons of evidence. Why are they so emphatic that there is NO CHANCE that the plane could have been shot down.
What about the report of a pilot in New Jersey a few weeks earlier that said he saw a rocket fly by the cockpit. Was that a first attempt?
What is the purpose of this lie? Ticket sales? I can't imagine why we can't be trusted with the truth.
------------------
Woof.
If it's so sick, why are you laughing?
<IMG SRC="http://sites.netscape.net/mydogbreath/dogbre2.gif" border=0>
Most of you know I have worked in the aerospace industry and my home town is centered around it. This you might not know. During the early investigation my dad and a man he works with were asked to determine the possibility a shoulder fired missile took out the aircraft. They researched it and found the Russian red eye missile could easily hit the target at that range. Why then did the missile not hit the engine? Shouldn't that be the hottest spot? Nope they went to LAX and filmed that type of aircraft on takeoff and exactly where the explosion started is a heat exchanger for the cooling system used during takeoff. That was the hottest / highest contrast target. They filed that report. There were over 200 witnesses that saw something rise off the water and hit the plane.
Why did the FAA say there was "No chance that a missile was involved"?
The Masad told US inelegance before the investigation that there were two missiles one was fired and the other tossed overboard. A pair of men rented a boat shortly before the incident and returned it directly after neglecting to stop in for their deposit.
There is tons of evidence. Why are they so emphatic that there is NO CHANCE that the plane could have been shot down.
What about the report of a pilot in New Jersey a few weeks earlier that said he saw a rocket fly by the cockpit. Was that a first attempt?
What is the purpose of this lie? Ticket sales? I can't imagine why we can't be trusted with the truth.
------------------
Woof.
If it's so sick, why are you laughing?
<IMG SRC="http://sites.netscape.net/mydogbreath/dogbre2.gif" border=0>