Re: Goddard's fantasies???

Hara Ra (
Thu, 20 Nov 1997 23:16:14 -0800

OK. I've had enough. To all members of this list:

Is the endless ranting about TWA Flight 800 an appropriate topic
for this list? I don't think so....
- Hara Ra


Ian Goddard wrote:
> Abraham Moses Genen ( wrote:
> >
> >Since Mr. Goddard claims to have all this "proof" let him
> >supply us with the substantive and corroborated unimpeachable
> >documentation
> IAN: Below I confirm each evidentiary claim I made,
> which Abraham Moses Genen has requested that I do:
> CLAIM 1: There is PROOF that the military
> lied about their activities on July 17,'96.
> PROOF: At a Department of Defense press conference
> on July 23, 1996, DoD spokesman Kenneth Bacon said:
> Iím not aware [that] there were any
> military exercises in the area. Iíve
> been told by the Joint [Chiefs of]
> Staff that there were not. [DOC 1]
> However, after eight months of such denials, on March
> 22, 1997, Newsday [DOC 2] reported that the Navy finally
> admitted that there were (a) military exercises and (b)
> three Navy submarines in the area at the time of the
> TWA 800 accident. (Now the story has changed again,
> and the number of subs in the area is down to 2.
> Interesting: recently a woman contacted Richard
> Russell saying her husband was the captain of
> a sub off LI that shot down TWA 800.?? I'll
> have to see if the sub she named is the
> sub that just vanished into thin air.)
> Rather than repost it, here you will find many more, well,
> lies pertaining to military asset locations and activities
> on July 17, 1996:
> and a few here:
> CLAIM 2: There is proof the govt continues to lie about such.
> This proof is derived from many facts cited here:
> and the fact
> that just yesterday, James Kallstrom said at the FBI's
> closing press conference that there were no military
> exercises in the area on the night of the crash, which
> contradicts Navy admissions after the radar tapes were
> leaked:
> CLAIM 3: There is proof that the FBI has acted to cover up facts.
> Don't you have web access? I don't feel it
> appropriate to post such a large document:
> read that document, the proof's in there.
> CLAIM 4: There is photographic evidence of a military drone-
> type aerial device a few miles and moments from the crash.
> Here it is:
> The FBI says that their experts say it is
> a plane. Can you find a plane that is shaped
> like a rod with a luminous end? I can't. But
> I can find many target drones that fit the
> bill better than any manned plane. Atomist
> logic dictates that if Y is like X, but
> Y is not like Z, Y is more likely to
> be X than Z. Ergo: the object is
> most likely a target drone.
> CLAIM 5: There are over 100 witnesses of a missile-like
> streak rising from the ocean to impact TWA 800.
> Again, I cannot post here all I have at my
> website. I have amassed an extensive collection
> of witness accounts, including a triangulation