11 ms·

The lawsuit[0] is worth a read and goes into quite a bit of detail about the claimed timeline. Roughly: * Upgraded missile defense systems were deemed a nation

by ruddct 4y ago

The lawsuit[0] is worth a read and goes into quite a bit of detail about the claimed timeline. Roughly: * Upgraded missile defense systems were deemed a national security priority around this time * Navy ships compatible with these systems were 5 years out, so… * Live missile testing happens at a compatible land base in New Jersey, under congested airspace * Multiple civilians report seeing missile tests in & around the date of the TWA crash * Missile test hits TWA jet. Instead of the NTSB running the investigation (like normal), the CIA and FBI are immediately put in charge * CIA/FBI confiscate records, run PR campaign claiming the crash was “NOT A MISSILE”, mislead the families and general public about the incident * Missile tests continue post-crash Damning if true, to say the least. [0] https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/Massachusetts_District_Court/1--22-cv-11032/Krick_et_al_v._Raytheon_Company_et_al/docs/6.pdf https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/Massachusetts_District_Cou...

aliqot 4y ago
- drstewart 4y ago
  Uh, what?
xhkkffbf 4y ago
I distinctly remember how very soon after the crash, the TV announced that the DOD put out a statement that there were no ships nearby and the plane wasn't hit by a missile. Before anyone accused anyone of anything. It seemed a bit too suspicious for that to be among the first things on the news.
- cyanydeez 4y ago
  Eh, you're aware there's always knowledgeable people tracking activities and just because there's no immediate discussion in public doesn't mean those watchers arnt questioning. Ergo, this is a useless factoid.
raldi 4y ago
I don't understand the New Jersey connection; the plane went down quite far from the NY/NJ border: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800#/media/File:TWA_800_flight_path.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800#/media/File:TWA...
- ok_dad 4y ago
  There’s a naval weapons station right to the southwest of that track, about 50 miles away maybe. A navy SM-2 missile has an unclassified range of 90 nautical miles. It’s likely that they would have been testing some variant of this missile for vertical launch, perhaps with some new phased array radar experiments and such. Up to the 90s, the navy was still using rail launched missiles and traditional radar emitters and the article talks about ships several years out that can’t be used for these tests, which I assume are thee first of current AEGIS ships.
woodruffw 4y ago
I feel terribly for these families, but the evidence presented in this filing is circumstantial at best: it adds nothing to contradict the overwhelming evidence (including the recovered fuselage) that nothing collided with the aircraft. It’s easy to see ghosts everywhere, and sometimes they really are there. But TWA 800 probably isn’t one of those cases.
- StanislavPetrov 4y ago
  As someone who lived on Long Island at the time, I can tell you that there were dozens, if not hundreds, of eye witnesses from both the beach and the water that claimed to have seen a missile fly up and hit the plane. There was explosive residue consistent with a missile found on on the wreckage of the plane. One of the lead investigators thought it was a missile, and he was shuffled out of the investigation.
  - jliptzin 4y ago
    Don’t know why you are being downvoted, I am also from Long Island and remember the same accounts at the time
    - woodruffw 4y ago
      Because it’s exactly the kind of circumstantial, already-mediated evidence we’re talking about: can you, as a civilian, reliably distinguish a missile arc from a burning fuselage at dusk from miles away? I know I can’t.
      - cool_dude85 4y ago
        The one's going up and the other's coming down.
        woodruffw 4y ago
        If you read the NTSB’s report, you’ll note that they address this explicitly: the front half of the plane more or less sheared off, causing the back half to pitch up before descending.
some_random 4y ago
I'm really not convinced, the linchpin of the missile argument is that the CIA and FBI were put in charge to cover up a missile shootdown, but it's pretty well documented that they were put in charge because it was a suspected terrorist attack. Everything else is circumstantial evidence at best. I'm certainly interested in what shakes out of this court case, but as of right now it just seems like a typical conspiracy theory to me.
- leetrout 4y ago
  From the paperwork: 45. Two other eyewitnesses, Air National Guard pilots, Captain Christian Baur and Major Frederick “Fritz” Meyer, similarly stated that they witnessed events that indicated a missile struck TWA 800. 46. On the day TWA 800 went down, Captain Baur and Major Meyer were flying in a Black Hawk helicopter near the area of the TWA 800 incident. Captain Baur recalled seeing an object with a “rocket type motor . . . moving quick” toward TWA 800. After the crash, Captain Baur flew to the area and conducted a search and rescue.
  - jeffbee 4y ago
    None of that is new. They said that at the time. Dozens/hundreds of witnesses said same. Exactly zero of whom have ever seen a missile before and would know what one looks like.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - StanislavPetrov 4y ago
      In fact many of the witnesses were active duty military and military veterans who knew exactly what a missile looked like.
      - jeffbee 4y ago
        Just like in civilian life, most people in the military are truck mechanics, cooks, and suchlike. Imputing expertise upon such people is misdirection, just the same kind of misdirection this filing is using to impute authority on a person by citing him as "a physicist" and consistently referring to him as "doctor" out of context.
pxmpxm 4y ago
Exactly which part of this is new evidence? What you wrote is the basis of the original conspiracy theory, that NTSB rejected. Also we have multiple recent events of a commercial jet being shot down by a contemporary AA system, in each of those the causality is pretty obvious. eg: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENykmLaXkAAGslH.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENykmLaXkAAGslH.png
thaumasiotes 4y ago
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-destruction-of-twa-flight-800/ https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-destruction-of-...

by ruddct 4y ago

aliqot 4y ago

drstewart 4y ago
Uh, what?

xhkkffbf 4y ago

I distinctly remember how very soon after the crash, the TV announced that the DOD put out a statement that there were no ships nearby and the plane wasn't hit by a missile. Before anyone accused anyone of anything. It seemed a bit too suspicious for that to be among the first things on the news.

cyanydeez 4y ago
Eh, you're aware there's always knowledgeable people tracking activities and just because there's no immediate discussion in public doesn't mean those watchers arnt questioning. Ergo, this is a useless factoid.

raldi 4y ago

I don't understand the New Jersey connection; the plane went down quite far from the NY/NJ border: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800#/media/File:TWA_800_flight_path.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_800#/media/File:TWA...

ok_dad 4y ago
There’s a naval weapons station right to the southwest of that track, about 50 miles away maybe. A navy SM-2 missile has an unclassified range of 90 nautical miles. It’s likely that they would have been testing some variant of this missile for vertical launch, perhaps with some new phased array radar experiments and such. Up to the 90s, the navy was still using rail launched missiles and traditional radar emitters and the article talks about ships several years out that can’t be used for these tests, which I assume are thee first of current AEGIS ships.

woodruffw 4y ago

I feel terribly for these families, but the evidence presented in this filing is circumstantial at best: it adds nothing to contradict the overwhelming evidence (including the recovered fuselage) that nothing collided with the aircraft. It’s easy to see ghosts everywhere, and sometimes they really are there. But TWA 800 probably isn’t one of those cases.

StanislavPetrov 4y ago
As someone who lived on Long Island at the time, I can tell you that there were dozens, if not hundreds, of eye witnesses from both the beach and the water that claimed to have seen a missile fly up and hit the plane. There was explosive residue consistent with a missile found on on the wreckage of the plane. One of the lead investigators thought it was a missile, and he was shuffled out of the investigation.
- jliptzin 4y ago
  Don’t know why you are being downvoted, I am also from Long Island and remember the same accounts at the time
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    Because it’s exactly the kind of circumstantial, already-mediated evidence we’re talking about: can you, as a civilian, reliably distinguish a missile arc from a burning fuselage at dusk from miles away? I know I can’t.
    - cool_dude85 4y ago
      The one's going up and the other's coming down.
      - woodruffw 4y ago
        If you read the NTSB’s report, you’ll note that they address this explicitly: the front half of the plane more or less sheared off, causing the back half to pitch up before descending.

some_random 4y ago

I'm really not convinced, the linchpin of the missile argument is that the CIA and FBI were put in charge to cover up a missile shootdown, but it's pretty well documented that they were put in charge because it was a suspected terrorist attack. Everything else is circumstantial evidence at best. I'm certainly interested in what shakes out of this court case, but as of right now it just seems like a typical conspiracy theory to me.

leetrout 4y ago
From the paperwork: 45. Two other eyewitnesses, Air National Guard pilots, Captain Christian Baur and Major Frederick “Fritz” Meyer, similarly stated that they witnessed events that indicated a missile struck TWA 800. 46. On the day TWA 800 went down, Captain Baur and Major Meyer were flying in a Black Hawk helicopter near the area of the TWA 800 incident. Captain Baur recalled seeing an object with a “rocket type motor . . . moving quick” toward TWA 800. After the crash, Captain Baur flew to the area and conducted a search and rescue.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  None of that is new. They said that at the time. Dozens/hundreds of witnesses said same. Exactly zero of whom have ever seen a missile before and would know what one looks like.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - StanislavPetrov 4y ago
    In fact many of the witnesses were active duty military and military veterans who knew exactly what a missile looked like.
    - jeffbee 4y ago
      Just like in civilian life, most people in the military are truck mechanics, cooks, and suchlike. Imputing expertise upon such people is misdirection, just the same kind of misdirection this filing is using to impute authority on a person by citing him as "a physicist" and consistently referring to him as "doctor" out of context.

pxmpxm 4y ago

Exactly which part of this is new evidence? What you wrote is the basis of the original conspiracy theory, that NTSB rejected. Also we have multiple recent events of a commercial jet being shot down by a contemporary AA system, in each of those the causality is pretty obvious. eg: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENykmLaXkAAGslH.png https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENykmLaXkAAGslH.png

thaumasiotes 4y ago

https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-destruction-of-twa-flight-800/ https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-destruction-of-...