Re: TWA 800: THE CAT IS OUT !!

Michael Lorrey (
Wed, 13 Nov 1996 20:17:11 -0500

Ira Brodsky wrote:
> Michael Lorrey,
> I can't argue with most of your last post. Just one point:
> >Witnesses and the public statement of a DEMOCRAT who has long experience
> >in White House and other high level government business. 157 eye
> >witnesses corroborating each other is a much bigger statistical lump to
> >dismiss than just a few confused reports. If facts are not true, they
> >typically are widely varied in being described by witnesses. When they
> >all agree, that typically means that is accceptable as a fact.
> I thought the witnesses said they saw what looked like a missile -- not
> that they specifically saw a missile fired by a US Navy vessel.

If 157 people all said some form of: "I saw what looked like a missile,
I saw a missile, I may have seen a missile, etc" chances are that there
is some truth to their statements. If there are on the other hand many
wildly contradictory stories, then an investigator assigns probability
values to various pieces of each story based on the amount of

> BTW, I have never said the investigators should rule out the Navy as a
> possible suspect. Honest investigators will go through many suspects, but
> hopefully they will only accuse the one who is actually guilty.
> But maybe I have missed something. Please tell me what factual evidence
> there is that TWA Flight 800 was shot down by a Navy missile. I still
> don't know who is the "AI" on this list, so maybe I also missed the Navy
> missile evidence.

Eyewitness accounts are considered factual evidence, are they not?
The fact that much remains classified is a smoking gun in and of itself.

Using your pet theory, that the French Intelligence servicess are
somehow stirring things up, I can also see a possible scenario: that
French Agents were escaping US jurisdiction on the plane with some
extremely dangerous intelligence. Navy Captain, at the direction of the
DIA or NSA, says, " Fish food, anyone?" This idea is only as implausble
as your rationalization.