TWA 800: FBI slams missile theory

Ian Goddard (
Wed, 18 Sep 1996 02:39:13 -0400

Modern technology may be no match versus a controlled media, plus
a gullible population. I told people as we watched the TV reports
of over 100 witnesses of a missile hit, that this will all be covered
up in a few weeks. Nobody believed me: " Ian, there it is right on TV,
over a hundred witnesses! How could they possibly sweep this away ? "
Well, they are, with NO contrary evidence, and everyone is buying it
without question -- are you? Here's govt-media truth-control in action:

(free 2 forward)--------------------------(free 2 copy(*)



" O U T R A G E O U S "

by Ian Williams Goddard

The Associated Press (9/16/96) reports that the FBI slamed
non-governmental Internet reports that TWA flight 800 was
taken out by a missile from a military boat. The FBI's
chief crash investigator James Kallstrom, reportedly said,
``It's just not true... It's an outrageous allegation.''

How can Mr. Kallstrom be so 100% sure ? Is he conducting
an investigation or a cover-up ? Let's look at the facts:

On July 23, ABC News reported that investigators of the
TWA flight 800 crash had gathered over 100 eyewitnesses,
including two active duty military pilots, who said
that flight 800 was hit with a flare-like object that
streaked toward the plane immediately before it blew-up.
The military pilots who witnessed the object and ensuing
explosion called the flying object "a missile." Over 100
witnesses is OVERWHELMING evidence of a missile hit.

The Washington Times (7/24) mentioned the ABC News story:

"Several eyewitnesses, including an Air National
Guard pilot flying in the area when the explosion
occurred, have told the FBI they saw a bright,
flare-like object streaking toward the jumbo jet
seconds before it blew up. ABC News said yesterday
that the investigators had more then 100 eyewitness
accounts supporting the theory." ^^^

When asked at a news conference if the flying object was
ascending or descending, an FBI spokesman said that all
witnesses said it was "ascending," i.e., it was rising
from the ocean up toward the plane, as if from a boat.
But now this is suddenly "outrageous." Big Lie 101.

On July 19, the Associated Press reported that radar had
picked up what appeared to be an object racing toward
flight 800, but then secret gov agents stuff the report:

"There were reports that radar detected a blip
merging with the jet shortly before the explosion,
something that could indicate a missile hit. But
Pentagon officials, speaking on condition of
anonymity, said government analysts have studied
several radar reports of the area and the blip
was found to be a spurious signal."

100+ witnesses AND radar reports of an approaching object.
Obviously the initial report of a " blip " moving
toward the doomed flight came from those who witnessed
the "blip," while the follow-up came from an official
requesting secrecy who represents the branch of govt that
stands to be directly IMPLICATED by a missile hit. Gee,
you don't have to be a rocket scientist to add this up.

REPORTER: Over 100 witnesses saw a missile hit the plane,
two witnesses were military pilots, and radar showed
a "blip" moving toward the plane. Mr. military official,
it sounds like this could have been military missile hit.

MILITARY OFFICIAL: No, NO ! Those signals were spurious,
who can trust military equipment. D'oh, I mean... uh uh.
It was those witnesses, ya, they were, uh, were on drugs,
ya ya, that's it. We're innocent, PLEASE BELIEVE ME."

REPORTER: OK. The military is innocent. Back to you Dan...

Can you imagine a court case with over 100 witnesses who
all tell the same story, plus the "photographic" evidence
of radar ( there is even a photograph taken right before
the hit that was shown on many stations and can be seen
at--> ). Would
such a court case be a blow out or what ? People, wake up.

IAN GODDARD <> FREEDOM: to have it, give it.
visit Ian Goddard's Universe ----->