Time: Sun Dec 14 12:31:04 1997 To: <ignition-point@majordomo.pobox.com> From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: The Facts the FBI does not want you to Know Cc: Bcc: References: I did! I tah!! I tot I tah a pooddy tat!! Didn't I? I didn't? Imagine that, then! At 10:45 AM 12/14/97 -0800, you wrote: > WITNESSES ALLEGE NTSB COVERING EVIDENCE OF MISSILE ATTACK > > NTSB Claims Witnesses Didn't See What They Saw > > > Copyright c 1997, The WINDS. > ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. > http://www.TheWinds.org > > > > After an exhaustive examination, officials investigating TWA >Flight 800 say they still don't know what caused the crash. The >National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the FBI have spent >more than $40 million in the "most extensive examination of an >aircraft accident in history", and the best official guess of the >cause is the explosion of the center wing fuel tank from a spark of >unknown origin, but no final conclusion has been announced. > > The events, as viewed by independent investigators, are not >conclusive as to the exact source of the initial explosions that hit >the plane, but they are very definite that it was not the center wing >fuel tank that initiated the catastrophic explosion that destroyed >the aircraft, killing all 230 people aboard. > > Although the government's investigative agencies say they don't >know the exact cause, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency >have concluded that a missile was not the cause of the fiery crash of >the jetliner. "There is no way a missile brought down the plane,"CIA >spokeswoman Carolyn Osborn said. "Based on analysis using 244 >eyewitness reports, radar data, infrared data, and cockpit recorder >information, CIA analysts have determined that the eyewitness >sightings thought to be that of a missile actually took place after >the first of several explosions on the aircraft.... What these >eyewitnesses saw was, in fact, the burning 747 [jet] in various >stages of crippled flight, not a missile," Osborn said. (The >Press-Enterprise 9-25-97). > > The facts as revealed by independent investigators, however, show >an entirely different picture with a massive amount of supporting >evidence that runs counter to almost every detail of the official >conclusions. The WINDS recently talked with William Donaldson, a >retired navy commander, who has done extensive research into the >cause of the crash. He is a graduate of Crash Analysis from the >NavyPost Graduate School, with a twenty-five year career in the navy. > > Commander Donaldson's research has led to a congressional >investigation that is still under way into the circumstances and >causes that led to the crash. He said that he has "gotten access to >inside information which is disheartening", showing the duplicity of >the agencies responsible for the inquiry. "There are several >individuals internal to the investigation that don't like the way >this has gone", CDR Donaldson said. "I've gotten documents over the >months, and one of those documents shows the debris field. When it is >graphically displayed, it immediately refutes the entire scenario >that the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is pushing with >the way [they claim]the aircraft broke up. > > This former navy crash investigator said normally the debris field >evidence is a critically important facet in determining the sequence >and cause of a crash. He said, "this debris field shows that there >wasa tremendous hit made on the left side of the plane. The nose >itself was broken into four major groups of pieces." Donaldson went >on to describe how the plane was impacted. "Frame 240 which is >located approximately twenty feet back from the nose of the aircraft, >was dislocated more than 2,000 feet to the right of the extended >track of the aircraft in the debris field. In order to do that, you >must have a tremendous push operating perpendicular to the flight >path of the aircraft." > > Donaldson said, "even worse than that, when you go a little >further back along that nose section, frame 840 to 860, forward lower >left cargo compartment, the left side and center of that cargo >compartmentwas dislocated 3,000 feet to the right of the track of the >aircraft. You would expect normal dispersal of heavy parts probably >up to several hundred feet left to right of center line if they were >just falling off the aircraft. But that's not what happened. You have >maybe 200 feet to the left, but you have a 3,000 foot dispersal to >the right which means that either a freight train hit that plane up >there at 13,000 feet, or a missile, or some high energy object did." > > THE HIGH ENERGY OBJECT > > One of the leading eyewitnesses to the events that led up to the >explosion and subsequent fiery crash of TWA Flight 800 is Major >Fredrick C. Meyer. He and co-pilot Chris Bauer were with the >AirNational Guard and were practicing helicopter landings at the time >the plane came down. > > Meyer, an attorney from New York, spoke with The WINDS about his >observations and his eyewitness account of three separate explosions >involved in the crash of the TWA jet. While coming in for a landing >"I leaned forward in the seat to look up andlook forward and began to >scan the sky more intently than I would normally" because a small >plane had also been cleared for landing on the same runway. "At that >moment, I saw a streak of light moving to my left. It was very >curious because it looked like the streak that you would see from a >shooting star at night, except that it was broad daylight and the >streak was red-orange in color. It lasted three to five seconds. >There was an interval in which I saw nothing and then on the same >trajectory, further to the left, I saw a high velocity explosion >which to me looked like ordnance, a war-head exploding. Whether it >was a naval rifle, or a missile, or even a bomb, I couldn't >distinguish. Then a second high velocity explosion took place; it was >brilliant white light. The third event was the fuel explosion" [from >the jet]. > > What followed, "is a moment in time that I remember. We were >headed toward the lake of fire in the ocean [the burning aircraft] >and I looked up and saw debris still falling out of the sky, and I >told my co-pilot to 'slow it down, let the stuff fall' so that we >wouldnot fly under the falling debris." They were the first to arrive >at the scene, but found no survivors in the water. > > When asked whether he had formulated any sort of conclusion from >what he'd seen, Meyer said, "I stay away from it because I really >believe that I had a unique view and that it was my responsibility to >be as precise and as accurate and to make no assumptions. I really >believed that the NTSB would probably do video tapes of an interview >and be very interested in having a very accurate, very carefully >explained, but not analyzed eyewitness report to help them determine >thecause. I was wrong....That is what leads me to suspect, not to >know, but to suspect that they knew before they asked the first >question, what brought that aircraft down, because they did not seem >to be interested in anything they heard [from eyewitness accounts]." > > As a military pilot, Meyer has twenty-five years experience with >aircraft and he sees many fatal flaws in the NTSB, FBI and CIA's >official scenario. "Let's focus on the aircraft accident and a >rational determination as to what caused it", he said, "and the >[probabilities of an] explosion of a fuel cell with slosh quantities >of Jet A. It is an extraordinarily safe fuel. And all this talk about >wires [causing a spark to ignite the fuel tank]--there are no wires >in the center fuel tank. The electric [fuel pump] motors and the >wires areon the outside of the fuel tank. They are bolted to the >outside wall of the tank, the rotating shaft of the pump penetrates a >gland seal into the fuel tank, the impeller and the housing are >inside, but there are no wires in the fuel tank. > > "So then, the NTSB comes out and says 'there was an arc in the >wiring.' We're talking about a 12-volt system here, measured in >milliamps, and they say 'an arc between two 12-volt wires'. There are >no wires! Tell me that the NTSB doesn't know that? > > Could an overheated air conditioner be the cause of the aircraft >explosion? Major Meyer unequivocally says "no". "The circuit breakers >are set at 130 degrees Fahrenheit [temperature at JFK airport was in >the 70's]. People came to me who fly the 747and said 'if an >overheated air conditioner could set off the center fuel tank, I >wouldn't be talking to you. Because I've set on the tarmac at Riyad >[Saudi Arabia] in 130 degree ambient temperature, popping those >circuit breakers back on and keeping those air conditioners running >so that I wouldn't fry in the cockpit while I was waiting for >take-off clearance, with an empty center fuel tank! I am one of >five-hundred pilots who have done that since the 747 came out, and >none of them have ever exploded.' It doesn't happen. The [NTSB] >stories are scientifically impossible." > > HOW SAFE IS THE 747? > > According to Commander Donaldson, "jet airliners built by >the American aerospace industry have logged at least 150 thousand >years of flight time. Not oncehas there ever been a spontaneous fuel >tank explosion on any fuel tank while airborne." (Letter to NTSB >11-14-97). > > Consider that until TWA-800's purported midair fuel tank >explosion, the only Boeing 747's that came out of the air in pieces >were blown out. In 1978 an Air India jetliner was downed, in 1983 >KAL-007, in 1985 another Air India plane, in 1988 Pan Am-103 was >blown out of the air. All of these downings were due either to >bombings or missile hits. > > In a letter to NTSB director James Hall, Commander Donaldson said, >"no aircraft loaded with Jet A-1 [fuel] has ever had an internally >ignited fuel tank explosion due to latent fuel vapor in the ullage >[tank]. NTSB Safety Recommendations make the point clearly that there >has never been a fuel tank explosion in an airborne commercial jet >aircraft that was not ignited by an external source (hundreds of >millions of flight hours in all types of jet carriers)." > > THE EYEWITNESSES > > The FBI has interviewed 244 eyewitnesses and there are many more >who were not interviewed, according to investigators. This was not an >obscure event. It had high visibility over a wide area by hundreds of >individuals, many of whom are very credible. > > Witnesses were very clear in what they saw. > Those witnessing the events leading up to the explosion were > located along eleven nautical miles of shore- line. Some were in > aircraft, some in boats, some on the beach, some within their > homes. The nearest eyewitness reached the crash site in three > minutes by air. The eyewitnesses give similar descriptions of the > events they saw. > > "Several eyewitness like Mr. Roland Penney and his group of eight >not only saw a missile-like object rise up from the haze at sea, >leaving a thin gray smoke trail. They distinctly describe abright >white flash, 'like a flashbulb' when it hit TWA Flight 800." >(Donaldson letter 11-14-97). > > "We know what we saw. We weren't drunk," said [Jim Naples]. "I >looked up and my immediate response was, I never saw an alert flare >like that. It was projecting upward with a stream of smoke behind >it." On July 17, 1996, Jim Naples was out on his boat with his wife >and two daughters. Hundreds of other coastal people were out on the >water too, and scores of them saw what Jim Naples saw in the southern >sky: a white jet trail streaking up from near the horizon andarcing >through the sky for many seconds and later a fireball." (New York >Observer November 24, 1997). > > "It would be one thing if just three or four or five people saw >it," said Anita Langdon at her boat motor shop at the Senix Marina. >"But fifty or sixty people saw it in Center Moriches, well respected >citizens, and they know what they saw." ibid. > > "A commercial fisherman was out there south of Long Island putting >along. He sees on his left a missile [like object] rise over the >horizon, a reddish-orange flare. He watches it as it goes overhead >and he saw it smack into the plane. He didn't see TWA Flight 800 >until the missile [like object] hit it and then he said, 'my God! It >just hit a plane!' And then he watched Flight 800 as all the guts >came streaming out of it and down it goes." (James Sanders- Reagan >Radio Broadcast, Oct. 16, 1997). > > Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, >was interviewed by CNN two days after the disaster. His conclusions >come after 'various conversations' with government officials. > > "'I won't go so far as to say it was terrorism, but there was >sabotage here,' Hatch said. 'We're looking at a criminal act. We're >looking at somebody who either put a bomb on it or shot a missile, a >surface-to-air missile.'" Hatch said, 'the National Transportation >Safety Board should now turn the investigation over to the FBI >because the crash was not related to an aviation problem.... It's >very --almost 100 percent unlikely that this was a mechanical >failure,' Hatch said. 'It looks pretty darn conclusive that it was an >explosion caused either internally or externally by a criminal act.' >Investigators told CNN that there is no indication that the Boeing >747 suffered a catastrophic mechanical failure." (CNN 7-19-96). > > EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY EXCLUDED FROM NTSB'S PUBLIC HEARING > > The public hearing conducted by the NTSB in Baltimore seems to be >calculated to bring resolution to this major air disaster which still >has many unanswered questions. Yet, itseems doomed to failure from >the outset. Bringing closure to this tragedy will require honest and >candid evaluation of all the evidence, including what the hundreds of >eyewitnesses have seen. It will require more than pleadings from >James Kallstrom saying, "all I can do is try to impress upon them >[the family members] that we're telling the truth." > > As with any accident, eyewitness testimony is crucial in >establishing what actually happened and in what sequence. In a court >of law eyewitness testimony is essential in achieving accuracy and >justice and is indispensable before issuing a verdict. However, in >the NTSB's public hearing involving TWA 800, this critical evidence >will not be permitted. "Responding to pressure from the FBI on the >eve of the first public forum on the explosion of TWA Flight 800, the >National Transportation Safety Board has canceled the discussion of >eyewitness accounts and explosive residue at the five-day hearing >into the cause of thecrash." (Newsday , 12-8-97). > > Requesting that the NTSB avoid issues touching on the possibility >that a missile or bomb brought down Flight 800, James Kallstrom said >his agency found broad public acceptance after the FBI saidit >discovered no evidence of a missile or bomb. He indicated that the >agency has concerns that reconsidering the issue could create new >controversy. James Hall, NTSB chairman, agreed, stating that >"although it would normally be a part of NTSB practice to evaluate >eyewitness observations of a particular accident, we have agreed not >to do so." > > Officials conducting the week-long public hearing showed little >tolerance toward the suggestion of alternative causes of this >tragedy. When a reporter from Worker's World called for an >independent investigation, he was quickly removed from the hearing >while shouting, "we have to know the truth!" He was implicating the >navy as a possible source of a missile which downed the plane. > > FRENCH FAMILIES DENIED DOCUMENTS BY U.S. > > According to a November 29 AP report, French families of TWA >Flight 800's victims said they can no longer trust U.S. >investigators. They accuse American officials of "dragging their >feet" in investigating the crash. > > Michel Ney who represents the families said that the FBI and NTSB >had refused to hand over important documents to a French judge >studying the crash. Ney said investigating magistrate Chantal Perdrix >had requested copies of autopsy reports of French victims, results of >clothing analysis, chemical and metal tests conducted by U.S. >authorities, a copy of the cockpit voice recorder,and Boeing and TWA >maintenance reports. > > Ney said, "The judge received practically nothing, just a few >innocuous documents already made public." He indicated the U.S. >Justice Department wanted Judge Perdrix to promise to keep the >information confidential...and that she declined. "This is >unacceptable. We will do everything possible to find out the truth," >Ney said. > > THE DARK SIDE > > A recent airing of TV's Hard Copy discussed the mysterious >disappearance of Jeremy Crocker, a "renowned engineer" who had become >obsessed with the TWA explosion. Crocker, a Palm Springs resident, >had become convinced, after much research, that the government was >hiding the truth and he was determined to find it. > > Crocker's son Jonathan said his father was "somewhat of a >crusader. He wanted people to be accountable and honest and he felt >that wasn't happening. He was willing to dig for evidence that might >point fingers." > > Crocker's work had come to the notice of Peter Ford, a Los Angeles >radio host. Just five days before his disappearance, he had been a >guest on Ford's program where the subject was TWA 800. Ford indicated >that Jeremy Crocker was "absolutely convinced that there was a lot of >foul play involved" in the downing of TWA Flight800. > > Continuing his research on December 9, 1996, Crocker traveled to >Los Angeles where he put some of his current findings into an >envelope and mailed them to Ford. That was the last anyone has heard >from Jeremy Crocker. "The dark side theory would be that hewas taken >out. That someone, somewhere felt he was a threat", said Ford. The >Crocker family is still searching, but police have never found a >trace. They say he simply vanished. (Hard Copy, November 27,1997). > > THE FBI vs THE INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR > > James Sanders has been an independent investigator with an >interest in Flight 800 from the beginning. As a retired California >police officer, he began looking into the possibility of a missile >being the primary cause of the destruction of the plane. Sanders, >like Commander Donaldson, calls attention to the debris field.He says >it shows that the center fuel tank did not explode until eight >seconds after the break-up of the plane began, indicating the fuel >tank could not have been the initiator of the explosion. "Every >anomaly they have works with a missile but doesn't work with the >center fuel tank being the primary [cause]." (Reagan Radio). > > Sanders, who chronicled the information in his book,The Downing of >TWA FLIGHT 800, became the object of a Justice Department probe >inquiring into his telephone records. At issue is a small fragment of >the plane's seat fabric containing red residue which Sanders says >independent analysis proved was missile fuel. The seat fabric >originated from the investigative site at Calverton hanger in New >York. > > Sanders says the fabric showed up in his mailbox from an >undisclosed source. In August, however, Janet Reno issued a written >subpoena to Atlantic Bell for his telephone records. The FBI, in >collusion with the Justice Department, has been investigating how >Sanders obtained the fabric since his material was published earlier >this year. > > Sanders and his wife Elizabeth, a longtime TWA flight attendant >trainer, have now been charged with stealing "parts of a civil >aircraft involved in an accident," a felony, according to a criminal >complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn. Terrell Stacey, a >senior 747 pilot who has been with TWA for thirty-one years, is >charged with stealing government property, a misdemeanor offense for >supplying the scrap of fabric to Sanders. > > Jeff Schlanger, attorney for Sanders says, "the FBI has spent >millions creating a videotape and holding a lengthy press conference >to make sure their theory got the public's attention. Why are >theymoving to arrest a man who holds that up to a little scrutiny?" > > Sanders' claim that a missile was the primary cause for the >downing of the plane and that the red residue on certain of the >aircraft's seats is consistent with missile fuel, would at least >assign a sourcefor the elusive spark which the NTSB has thus far been >unable to place. > > In an interview with CNN, Sanders said he was being "harried by >the FBI for raising uncomfortable questions about the investigation. >Actually, what the feds want to do isget even. They are livid." > > Supporting Sanders' claim Mr. Kallstrom fumed, "this criminal >investigation is far from over. These defendants are charged with not >only committing a serious crime, they have also increased the pain >already inflicted on the victims' families. [Of course, this is not >mentioning the many families working for TWA who are made to believe >they have some responsibility in the disaster]. This investigation >will continue in an effort to identify any other individuals who may >have played a role in this scheme." The maximum sentence possible for >Sanders is ten years imprisonment. > > Schlanger said, "every action that he [Sanders] has taken in his >investigative reporting on the crash of Flight 800 was taken pursuant >to moral and journalistic imperatives protected by the First >Amendment's guarantee of a free press." (Newsday 12-10-97). > > In a move that may reveal the true implications of the red >residue, James Kallstrom contacted the NTSB asking that it not >discuss the residue during its public hearings. > > WHAT DO THOSE WITH EXPERIENCE SAY? > > Outlining his concerns, Commander William Donaldson wrote a series >of letters to NTSB chairman James Hall expressing his outrage at the >way his agency was conducting the investigation. "I have been closely >following the NTSB's position, your statements and congressional >testimony concerning the TWA Flight 800 mishap with with >ever-increasing alarm. > > "It is apparent to me and other professionals within the aircraft >manufacturing, airline, and petroleum industries that [regarding] TWA >800 your agency has been conducting a campaign in the media to >misinform the public and willfully assign the leastprobable cause to >this mishap. Your agency has been depicting the volatility of the >fuel as if it were nitrobenzene. > > "Because of your agency's successful permutation of facts >essential to this investigation, the incredible crash scenario you >have tabled apparently designed to subvert eyewitness testimony, and >your stonewalling of simple congressional questions, I have received >funding to conduct an independent investigation. > > "Mr. Hall's logic would have us believe that a pedestrian killed >by a hit-and-run driver in front of thirty eyewitnesses died from >unexplained natural causes. He would discount all eyewitnesses simply >because the victim's body showed no evidence of tire marks." >(Donaldson letter to Hall). > > Another man with twenty-five years experience flying military >aircraft is Major Frederick C. Meyer with the Air National Guard. He >was an eyewitness to the object streaking across the sky followed by >two aerial explosions into Flight 800. Meyer and others have been >incensed with the "show" the official investigation has been >producing. "Every time I move into a circle of pilots or mechanics or >anyonein the circles of private or commercial aviation, they all say >the same thing, 'it's such a bloody lie, it's ridiculous; we know >they're lying.' Meyer stated further that "I don't believe anything >of this magnitude has remained as guarded as it has without direct >intervention from the White House." > > MORE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE = MORE OFFICIAL MYSTERY > > Well over one year after the crash, more evidence was revealed >that focuses hard questions on the official version of the cause. In >September, 1997 it was disclosed that the nose gear doors on the >plane were blown inward. The doors are located well forward of the >center fuel tank and would not have been impacted by that explosion. >It was also determined that they were one of the first things to come >off the plane in flight. Exterior doors blown inward are strong >evidence of an outside event impacting the plane. > > One crash investigator told CNN that "the discovery keeps open the >question of whether the fuel tank explosion was the primary or >secondary event in the in-flight breakup of TWA Flight 800."(CNN >9-5-97). Officials are said to be "mystified" about the significance >of damage to the doors, "but Shelly Hazle, an NTSB spokeswoman, >downplayed the significance, emphasizing that investigators will have >to see how this newly discovered evidence fits into their theory of >how the plane blew up." (ibid.) > > CDR Donaldson said that "military warheads cause hundreds of P.S.I >overpressure, blowing in hatch doors, shearing off antenna.... The >hinges of the failed nose gear doors were pushed inward and came off >the plane very early. This is solid physical evidence, "one of the >smoking guns." Why do we hear about this only now, fourteen months >after the fact?" > > FBI, CIA AND NTSB'S "SOPHISTICATED WITNESS ANALYSIS" > > When asked by the Press-Enterprise about the eyewitnesses, CIA >spokeswoman Carolyn Osborn said, "our technical analysis concludes >that what these eyewitnesses saw was, in fact, the burning [Boeing] >747 in various stages of crippledflight, not a missile." > > "I know what I saw. I saw an ordnance explosion", declared >Frederick Meyer, the Air National Guard helicopter pilot. "The >explosion of the fuel was not the initiator of the event, it was one >of the results." Meyer said he contacted the FBI the second dayafter >the crash, but they did not ask any questions. He also spoke with >NTSB investigators who "spent about five minutes" with him, he said. > > "We know what we saw. We weren't drunk", said another group of >witnesses who saw the the ascending object rise in the sky, then >strike the plane. > > The New York Post reported that "witnesses to the fiery TWA crash >don't accept the FBI's explanation of the mysterious streaks they saw >in the sky that fateful night. The FBI concluded that the witnesses >were confused. (NYP 11-19-97). > > "I'm not satisfied at all," said East End fisherman Roland Penney, >who insists he saw a "streak of light" racing into the sky just >before the plane exploded. "I don't think they're being honest with >the people. They're telling us we saw something else than what we >say." > > In September, 1997 James Kallstrom said the FBI and CIA were still >doing "a sophisticated and detailed" analysis of witness accounts. >(AP, September 18, 1997). The CIA said that "based on 244 eyewitness >reports, analysts have determined that the eyewitness sightings >thought to be that of a missile actually took place after the first >several explosions on the aircraft." (Press-Enterprise , September >25, 1997). > > "I know what I saw," agreed Barbara Pacholk, a fifty-year old >housewife from Quogue. "I saw ... fires go across the sky. One hit >the plane at the tail and the second hit at the front, just before >the wings...I understand that when a plane bursts into flames the >flames fall, but this was a fire going up towards the plane." > > "The investigators' arrogance toward the eyewitnesses angered >Representative James Traficant Jr., Democrat of Ohio, who earlier >this fall...began investigating the possibility that the government >is shortchanging the citizens' views. 'Ms. Osborn said they were >mistaken in what they saw. That's not very professional, and it's not >the way to dispute eyewitness statements,' said Paul Marcone, press >secretary for the congressman." (NY Observer , 11-24-97). > > Perhaps the bottom line was best stated by Philip Weiss of The New >York Observer . "Now the FBI has reached its conclusion in the >matter. Its message to the eyewitnesses: shut up, you didn't see >anything." > > > > > Copyright c 1997, The WINDS. > ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. > http://www.TheWinds.org
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail