Missile theory to be probed in '96 TWA Flight 800 crash

[thomastmc]

And if it were a terrorist missile there would have been no reason to cover it up.

I partially agree. I can think of many reasons why they would have covered it up, but whether those reasons actually warranted a cover up (at least with hindsight) is questionable.

 

It wouldn't be the first time something was covered up by government that made the cover up more of a scandal than what was being covered up though.

 

If it was a missile, I think it was an accidental launch.

 

Terrorists would want to take credit and get publicity.

 

That is a good point.

[Noir Angel]

I agree re: friendly fire. Weapons inventories are tracked multiple ways, especially missiles, so a missing one would be obvious and as you say secrets like that largely aren't kept long. Some crewman would have blown the whistle by now.

OTOH, a Stinger or Russian SA-16/18 left over from some third world rathole getting smuggled into the shipping lanes? I can see that happening.

 

I agree, it's wholly possible a terrorist's missile could have hit it, I just can't fathom a reason for the US government wanting to cover a terrorist attack up.

 

If it was a missile, I think it was an accidental launch.

 

Terrorists would want to take credit and get publicity.

 

The US government has never covered up terrorism, if they do anything they over publicise it to relay messages of strength and to send the messages that they're still in control. If you have any other theories however I am interested to hear them

[DocM]

I agree, it's wholly possible a terrorist's missile could have hit it, I just can't fathom a reason for the US government wanting to cover a terrorist attack up.

>

The US government has never covered up terrorism, if they do anything they over publicise it to relay messages of strength and to send the messages that they're still in control. If you have any other theories however I am interested to hear them

This was 1996, the middle of the Clinton administration. Look at just a bit of what was going on -

Jihadists had been "at war" with the US since at least the 1993 WTC bombing, but the US was tied up with a contentious election and 2 years into the Paula Jones sex scandal & lawsuit (Clinton eventually paid her $850k.) The administration was also still under fire for the deaths resulting from the Ruby Ridge incident (1995 GAO report found the administration mishandled it, and the govt settled with the Weaver family for a total of $3.1 million) and their mishandling of the Branch Davidian incident at Waco. The 1995 bombing if the Federal office building in Oaklahoma City was largely in response to the administrations actions at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Not good. Lots of negative press.

The last thing they needed was to admit they had dropped the ball again, allowing another attack on NYC, that we were in a one-sided war with jihadists and that they had faild to respond to their first volley. Even after the 1998 bombing of the US embassy in Kenya and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole they were hesitant to admit it.

Covering up Flight 800 would have been just one more f'kup and denial in a chain of them.

[Hum]

I agree, it's wholly possible a terrorist's missile could have hit it, I just can't fathom a reason for the US government wanting to cover a terrorist attack up.

 

 

The US government has never covered up terrorism, if they do anything they over publicise it to relay messages of strength and to send the messages that they're still in control. If you have any other theories however I am interested to hear them

 

 

The US government wouldn't necessarily know who was behind a particular attack.

 

And if it was an accidental launch, by our guys, there is ample reason to suppress it.

[Chris123NT]

I've always been a firm believer in the missile theory since I saw the plane explode that night.  I was only 10 when it happened but it's a memory that will stick with me for the rest of my life.  I was out with my father and I saw something going up into the sky and being 10 I said look dad firework!  And just as I said that I saw this huge explosion, and my father said that was no firework.

[Noir Angel]

This was 1996, the middle of the Clinton administration. Look at just a bit of what was going on -

Jihadists had been "at war" with the US since at least the 1993 WTC bombing, but the US was tied up with a contentious election and 2 years into the Paula Jones sex scandal & lawsuit (Clinton eventually paid her $850k.) The administration was also still under fire for the deaths resulting from the Ruby Ridge incident (1995 GAO report found the administration mishandled it, and the govt settled with the Weaver family for a total of $3.1 million) and their mishandling of the Branch Davidian incident at Waco. The 1995 bombing if the Federal office building in Oaklahoma City was largely in response to the administrations actions at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Not good. Lots of negative press.

The last thing they needed was to admit they had dropped the ball again, allowing another attack on NYC, that we were in a one-sided war with jihadists and that they had faild to respond to their first volley. Even after the 1998 bombing of the US embassy in Kenya and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole they were hesitant to admit it.

Covering up Flight 800 would have been just one more f'kup and denial in a chain of them.

 

That makes sense, all I can say is if it's true I hope the evidence finally comes out. The families deserve an answer either way