MANPADS vs Standard: Appearance

MANPADS vs Standard: Appearance

Joined: October 2nd, 2000, 12:44 pm

October 15th, 2000, 1:40 pm #1

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 3rd, 2000, 7:58 pm

October 15th, 2000, 4:49 pm #2

Rick,

Intriguing that, because it fits some of the witness statements very well.

What concerns me is, that knowing all this was already out in the public domain how could 'they' expect to deep-six the notion that it was a missile?


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 2nd, 2000, 6:46 pm

October 15th, 2000, 7:31 pm #3

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
It's called a cover-up, Trevor. The only questions are how deep, how wide, and why?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 4th, 2000, 5:42 pm

October 15th, 2000, 8:55 pm #4

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
You guys are killing me. All this talk of vertical launch missles and submarines and now the "satelite confirmation". What a hoot.

FYI, imaging satellites used by the US intelligence community are ORBITED not placed. A satellite could not be "positioned" over a particular spot. The only satelites than can be positioned are those in geo-stationary orbits at 22,300 miles.

"Spy" satellites are placed in very high inclination orbits (i.e. they pass over very high lattitudes). Their orbits are also very low, about 90-130 miles high. Consequently, they are only over any one particular spot for about 18 minutes. In order to guarantee satellite coverage of a missle test, this would be a MAJOR, MAJOR exercise and planned months in advance.

Now if it is an "Accidental Shootdown" by the NAVY during a systems test, that means that analysts from the National Reconaisance Office (NRO), the US Navy, the Department of Defense, the contractors(no tests of experimental weapons are ever conducted without the contractors in the loop), the FBI, the NTSB were ALL complicit in the coverup.

Think about that for a few days......then come up with a better conspiracy.
Quote
Like
Share

800
Joined: October 9th, 2000, 9:41 pm

October 16th, 2000, 2:11 am #5

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
The CIA video released by the FBI on Nov. 18, 1997 says: "The fuel's subsequent ignition and blaze produced a dramatic cascade of flames, visible to eyewitnesses more the 40 miles away, and detected by an infrared sensor aboard a U.S. satellite."

So arguing that a satellite would probably not happen to be there at that time is meaningless, for it seems there was a satellite over the area at the time of the crash.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2000, 12:22 am

October 16th, 2000, 6:16 am #6

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
Mr Alexander: A few verifiable facts seem to have placed your "couple of flaws here" rationale in jeopardy. And your
intimate knowledge of the in's and out's of "spy satellites"
and their various orbits, geo-stationary or otherwise could
lead some to question where this expertise was acquired, and
why it is being dissiminated as dis-information.

Verifiable Fact #1. NFOB provided the link for verification of
Vertical Launch Capability in Los Angeles class submarines.

Verifiable Fact #2. I provided documentation of the Seawolf class of submarine's planned utilization in "littoral" warfare, i.e. shallow water, as well as the completion in early July, 1996, of sea-trials of the Seawolf herself; and Groten, Connecticut, home of the Electric Boat Co., her builder, is just a few miles (as the boat floats)up the coast from Long Island Sound.

Verifiable Fact #3. James Kalstrom and the US Navy both confirmed that submarines and/or "significant naval units" were
"engaged in classified maneuvers" that night.

Verifiable Fact #4. Tom Shoemaker and James D. Sanders independently arrived at documentation of a MAJOR, MAJOR exercise
known as GLOBAL YANKEE 96 taking place. (Which, I agree, must have taken "months of advance planning.)

Verifiable Fact #5. Rick Savage provides links to documentation of Whiskey 105 being activated at the time of the shoot-down, and Ian Goddard's graphic illustrates the extent of maritime activity di-di-mauing to the south without rendering assistance in a disaster in violation of several Maritime Laws.

Verifiable Fact #5. Commander Donaldson has de-bunked the volatility of JetA 1 fuel and the explosiveness of a empty fuel tank/phantom micro-milli-joule spark combination as the initiating event claimed by the NTSB/FBI.

Verifiable Fact #6. If Jim Sanders' civil lawsuit against the federal government survives the intensive attacks of desperate officials in fear of loss of their careers or their freedom and is heard by a jury and covered by a objective press, then the acts of government lawlessness in the "red residue" affair and the coverup of government culpability in the shoot-down will be exposed.

Verifiable Fact #7. I don't want to appear to be picking on Bob Donaldson, but in another post,in reply to Savages defense of Jim Sanders, he said no one had seen Sanders evidence. Fact. He is wrong. I have seen it. Thousands of people, including large groups of TWA employees, current and retired, as well as FAA and other pilot organizations have been attendant at meetings all over the country where Jim has presented compelling evidence of a "'Accidental Shootdown' by the NAVY during a systems test"

And YES, Mr Alexander, that means that the National Reconaisance Office (NRO), the US Navy, the Department of Defense, the contractors in the loop, the FBI, the NTSB, plus the Justice? Department and "mainstream media", were and continue to be,ALL complicit in the coverup. Some as shills, some as pimps, and some as criminals.

In reality, Mr Alexander, it's pretty much a no-brainer, so a few days thought on the subject isn't necessary.....you CAN'T come up with a better conspiracy.

And that's a fact.

Anjin





Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2000, 12:22 am

October 16th, 2000, 6:31 am #7

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
Sorry 800.

Your timely and insightful fact, using the CIA/FBI "cartoon"
as documentation for the satellite scoffed at by Mr.
Alexander, inadvertantly became entangled in a "senior
moment" sponsored by my Oldtimers Disease. I pray you
will overlook my omission. It was not intentional, I assure
you.

Regards

Anjin
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 4th, 2000, 5:42 pm

October 16th, 2000, 1:42 pm #8

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
My knowledge of satelite orbits, and everything else that I know about this subject, has been gleaned from reading publicly available materials. My purpose in posting is NOT to advance a particular theory but to pose serious questions to ANYONE who is advocating a particular scenario.

The evidence collected and analyzed by Cmdr. Donaldson is overwhelming and convincing. TWA800 was shot down. The NTSB's stated cause of the "accident" is a coverup. But a coverup of what? This site does not ADVOCATE a particular theory. Yes, the terrorist missle attack is indicated as the MOST LIKELY. However, Cmdr. Donaldson will readily admit that the evidence for the missle origins is incomplete.

All I am doing is pointing out some of the obvious inconsistencies of the theories being ADVOCATED by posters.


I have no quarrel with your stated Facts #'s 1-4. "Fact" number 5 is a little harder to fully digest. you have no proof (that I have seen) that any of the boats headed south actually knew of the disaster.

IMO, Fact #6 is the lynchpin of this entire sordid affair. This is a hard, cold fact, tested, tried and unrefuted. But it does NOT tell you who fired the missle. When all of the other FACTS pass the same test as this one, then and only then will the source of the missles be found.

The last 2 Facts are shrouded in a "who said what" controversy.

It is my opinion that the large number of people who would have been witness to this "Accidental Shootdwon" theory, would be too large to coverup as succesfully as has been done. IMO, only a US Navy hunt for a terrorist missle team followed by a US Navy, NTSB, FBI coverup is really plausible AT THIS TIME. Until more cold hard FACTS(such as the Jet-Fuel demo) are established we will not know what happened.









Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 2nd, 2000, 6:46 pm

October 16th, 2000, 5:53 pm #9

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
I'm glad you brought that up, because that was my next target.

Lets put 1 and 1 together and see what we come up with. Kallstrom admitted to several surface vessels on classified operations off Long Island. The Navy places 2 or more L.A.-class 688's in the same area. What can we conclude from those revelations?

We can conclude that the subs and the surface vessels were acting together in the same operation. Why? Because you don't have two separate operations going on in the same area at the same time. That is a recipe for disaster, so it isn't plausible. So if the Navy were hunting terrorists, why would it send subs to the area? Subs can't intercept missiles or search the surface for suspicious small boats. All they could do was get in the way of cruisers patrolling the coast and maneuvering for an intercept shot. The subs would be nothing but underwater collision hazards for the cruisers, therefore dispatching them to the area makes no sense whatsoever under the "Failed Terrorist Missile Intercept" scenario.

The presence of subs proves that the nature of the classified operations off Long Island was NOT to hunt for terrorists. Therefore, it must have had some other purpose. What was that purpose? At this point we can only speculate. But the presence of L.A.-class 688's proves that this was either a test mission gone bad or an intentional intercept. The presence of subs alone disproves the notion that the Navy was hunting terrorists off L.I. that night.

And without the "Failed Terrorist Missile Intercept" scenario, there is no way for ARAP to explain the damage to the nose of FL800. And with no way to explain that damage, the entire MANPADS scenario falls apart.

Therefore, one has to conclude that the FL800 shoot-down was either a test gone bad or an intentional engagement by US Navy forces.

And ARAP has stood on its head trying not to seriously consider either one.

It's long past time for that to change.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 2nd, 2000, 6:46 pm

October 16th, 2000, 6:01 pm #10

Ian Goddard is one of my favorite sources. The following quote is from

http://users.erols.com/igoddard/twa-fact.htm

My question regarding the following quote: wouldn't this description rule out a MANPADS?



FACT 7: Satellite images also proved that a soph-
isticated guided missile tracked and hit TWA 800.
As the Times of London (07/22/96) reported:

An American spy satellite position-
ed over the Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory on Long Island is said to
have yielded important information
about the crash. A law enforcement
official told the New York Post
that the satellite pictures show
an object racing up to the TWA jet,
passing it, then changing course
and smashing into it.

About the spy satellite over the area, the Boston
Globe (07/24/96) reported: “the satellite was pro-
bably the CIA’s Satellite Data System II...equipped
with a long-range, high-resolution TV camera with
a sensor, known as the Heritage, that detects ob-
jects by the heat they emit.”

The existence of such images was also confirmed in-
dependently by Newsday, which reported (09/01/96)
that the images show “something rising, tracking to-
ward the plane, circling to the front of the plane
and then disappearing in the plane’s underbelly.”



Tannehill
I suppose the "Terrorists with MANPADS in Scuba Gear" scenario will be ARAP's next theory.
Quote
Like
Share