Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 2 votes

TWA 800 Shot Down by a Military Missile?


  • Please log in to reply
307 replies to this topic

#31    Lilly

Lilly

    Forum Divinity

  • 16,226 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Female

  • "To thine own self be true" William Shakespeare

Posted 14 November 2011 - 02:22 PM

When I spoke about 'proving a negative' I was referring more along the lines of argumentum ad ignorantiam, this means basically 'a lacking of evidence to the contrary'. This asserts that a claim is true because it has not yet been proven false, and this is indeed a logical fallacy (albeit, an informal one). So, while "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", the lacking of evidence does nothing (either way) to support or deny a claim for existence.

"Ignorance is ignorance. It is a state of mind, not an opinion." ~MID~

"All that live must die, passing through nature into eternity" ~Shakespeare~ Posted Image

#32    Scott G

Scott G

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,203 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 14 November 2011 - 02:43 PM

View PostLilly, on 14 November 2011 - 02:22 PM, said:

When I spoke about 'proving a negative' I was referring more along the lines of argumentum ad ignorantiam, this means basically 'a lacking of evidence to the contrary'. This asserts that a claim is true because it has not yet been proven false, and this is indeed a logical fallacy (albeit, an informal one). So, while "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", the lacking of evidence does nothing (either way) to support or deny a claim for existence.

Oh, yes, I certainly agree with that. I believe that I've provided a great deal of evidence that supports the assertion that the official story isn't correct, but I'm fairly sure there are those here who would disagree with me.


#33    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,547 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 14 November 2011 - 04:24 PM

View PostRafterman, on 12 November 2011 - 02:10 AM, said:

"TWA flight 800 was shot down by a U.S. Navy Aegis missile...."

For anyone that knows anything about US Naval weaponry, that statement alone should pretty much discredit the "journalists" who wrote this piece.  Hint, AEGIS is a system, not a missile.

Not to mention - and where all of these idiotic theories fail - the 400 or so crewmen and women all had no problem living with the fact that their ship shot down a 747 and killed several hundred innocent poeople.

By the way, which Ticonderoga class ship was it?  Surely these vaunted "journalists" could have easily figured that one out.
Well, i don't know, the Vincennes seemed to have a bit of a problem identifying civil from military ... Not to mention that not a great deal of remorse ever seemed to come out of the USN then.
really, the Aegis system was notoriously dodgy, many have said so; I hope that the latest versions are a bit more trustworthy.

Edited by 747400, 14 November 2011 - 04:26 PM.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#34    Travelling Man

Travelling Man

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,148 posts
  • Joined:03 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • And you are asking... Why?

Posted 14 November 2011 - 04:46 PM

View PostScott G, on 14 November 2011 - 03:14 AM, said:

A civilian posing as a Special Forces flight controller. He get into any trouble for that? You ever wonder if perhaps he was working for a U.S. intelligence agency? CIA, NSA, something like that? Have -you- read Captain Russell's affidavit? There was also Pierre Salinger's statements as well.
He didn't get into trouble for impersonating an officer - he got in trouble for impersonating a DOCTOR that headed a clinic on Long Island.  http://articles.latimes.com/1996-12-04/news/mn-5555_1_sentenced-impostor-crash  

No, he wasn't from an alphabet organization.

Yes, I've read Russell's affidavit AND Salinger's report. Both ignore perfectly sound science, evidence and reasonable reporting. You accept them at face value because they fit your agenda.

You are missing Lilly's point. The investigators - the ones that actually had their HANDS and EYES on the recovered jet - found that the plane blew from the inside, out - that no missile or projectile impacted it. Russell wasn't THERE. Salinger is basing his info on a mystery piece of paper that a covert agent gave him in a cafe?? PLEASE! This brings to mind Monty Python and the Holy Grail, where an entire basis of government was based on a saucy tart lobbing a broadsword at a youth.

Like most CTers, you are calmly ignoring one glaring problem with your fallacy. An Aegis cruiser has a crew complement of how many? How about 250! Of these, only about 60 have security clearances. That leaves about 190 free to talk about shooting a missile south of Long Island on July 17th, 1996. How many have? Quick - hold up ZERO fingers and count them.

My gods man! The most uber-secret thing in the history of the US was known for several years before the Manhattan Project was officially unveiled. Even oral sex in the oval office was known - and there were only TWO people involved!! This level of secrecy, where the ONLY people that "know" anything are those that didn't have anything to do with the operation!

The only "conspiracy" I saw was from the media, where alleged journalists were cutting chain-link fences to get pictures of bodies as they were brought to the docks. The FBI was very proud of the collection of expensive cameras and recording devices that were confiscated and kept on display.

Superior firepower will win over superior numbers - every time!  G.A. Custer
Superior numbers will win over superior firepower - every time!  S. Bull

My credentials

#35    Lilly

Lilly

    Forum Divinity

  • 16,226 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Female

  • "To thine own self be true" William Shakespeare

Posted 14 November 2011 - 04:52 PM

View PostScott G, on 14 November 2011 - 02:43 PM, said:

Oh, yes, I certainly agree with that. I believe that I've provided a great deal of evidence that supports the assertion that the official story isn't correct...

However, evidence that the official story is incorrect isn't the same thing as evidence that the United States Military shot down a commercial airliner.

Because premise 'A' might be false does nothing to support that premise 'B' is correct. Let me further explain, this is called denying a conjunct (and it's a logical fallacy).

It can't be that both A and B are true.
B is not true.
Therefore, A is true.

The conclusion does not logically follow as it could be that both A and B are not true.

So, logically speaking, refuting the official story does not automatically support that any  other story must be true. The burden of proof still remains to support the veracity of any other scenario being put forth as being true.

"Ignorance is ignorance. It is a state of mind, not an opinion." ~MID~

"All that live must die, passing through nature into eternity" ~Shakespeare~ Posted Image

#36    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,578 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 14 November 2011 - 05:39 PM

View PostScott G, on 14 November 2011 - 03:11 AM, said:

Prove it.



I took a look at that "analysis". It doesn't even -mention- Captain Richard Russell's email, not to mention his affidavit. It's easy to write some hit piece against those who disagree with the official story. What Captain Richard Russell did was much harder; he faced media scorn and even went so far as to file an affidavit, apparently against the government's version of events. Did you even read it?

Why do I have to "prove it" - you're the one making the claim that flys in the face of the accepted story.  Seems to me the burden of proof falls to you.  

As far as the Skeptoid piece is concerned - by the way, how exactly is it a "hit piece" - it refutes the primary claim that a missile hit TWA 800.  Once that is done, there is no longer any reason to even both with Captial Richard Russell and his affidavit.  By the way, you know that anyone can file an affidavit, right?  There's nothing magical about that.

"You can't have freedom of religion without having freedom from the religious beliefs of other people."

#37    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,578 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 14 November 2011 - 05:55 PM

View Post747400, on 14 November 2011 - 04:24 PM, said:

Well, i don't know, the Vincennes seemed to have a bit of a problem identifying civil from military ... Not to mention that not a great deal of remorse ever seemed to come out of the USN then.
really, the Aegis system was notoriously dodgy, many have said so; I hope that the latest versions are a bit more trustworthy.

And that matters in this discussion how exactly?

"You can't have freedom of religion without having freedom from the religious beliefs of other people."

#38    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,547 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 14 November 2011 - 07:01 PM

View PostRafterman, on 14 November 2011 - 05:55 PM, said:

And that matters in this discussion how exactly?
because it shows how the Aegis system was not foolproof, particularly with inexperienced operators.  The US Navy seemed to manage to live with the fact that their ship shot down an A300 and killed several hundred innocent people. In fact, Captain Rogers got a decoration when he returned home.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#39    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,194 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 14 November 2011 - 07:25 PM

View Post747400, on 14 November 2011 - 07:01 PM, said:

because it shows how the Aegis system was not foolproof, particularly with inexperienced operators.  The US Navy seemed to manage to live with the fact that their ship shot down an A300 and killed several hundred innocent people.

There are significant differences, however, between the situation surrounding the Vincennes incident and TWA 800. One can reasonably assume, for instance, that if there was a US warship in the area at the time of the TWA 800 explosion, it was not in an area where it was prone to be under attack by hostile forces, and as such, was probably not in direct conflict with foreign surface assets, as the Vincennes was at the time of the incident.

It was also shown that the Aegis system was not responsible for the incident, but rather the crew's interpretation and use of the Aegis data in giving Capt. Rogers incorrect / incomplete information.

Quote

In fact, Captain Rogers got a decoration when he returned home.

Irrelevant to the topic at hand, and also to the Iran Air 655 incident. His decoration was for his service on the Vincennes for the year prior to and after the incident. While the shooting down of the civilian airliner was definitely a tragic mistake, military investigators felt that Rogers acted correctly given the situation - engaged in small-arms combat with Iranian surface craft, their helicopter having been fired upon, and tasked with defending the USS Elmer Montgomery - and the information - erroneous as it was - he had on hand at the time.



Cz

Edited by Czero 101, 14 November 2011 - 07:36 PM.

"Thinking is critical, because sense is not common..." - GreaterSapien

"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." – H. L. Mencken

#40    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,547 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 14 November 2011 - 07:48 PM

View PostCzero 101, on 14 November 2011 - 07:25 PM, said:

There are significant differences, however, between the situation surrounding the Vincennes incident and TWA 800. One can reasonably assume, for instance, that if there was a US warship in the area at the time of the TWA 800 explosion, it was not in an area where it was prone to be under attack by hostile forces, and as such, was probably not in direct conflict with foreign surface assets, as the Vincennes was at the time of the incident.

It was also shown that the Aegis system was not responsible for the incident, but rather the crew's interpretation and use of the Aegis data in giving Capt. Rogers incorrect / incomplete information.



Irrelevant to the topic at hand, and also to the Iran Air 655 incident. His decoration was for his service on the Vincennes for the year prior to and after the incident. While the shooting down of the civilian airliner was definitely a tragic mistake, military investigators felt that Rogers acted correctly given the situation - engaged in small-arms combat with Iranian surface craft, their helicopter having been fired upon, and tasked with defending the USS Elmer Montgomery - and the information - erroneous as it was - he had on hand at the time.



Cz
But heavens, if someone had committed an error of that gravity (the U.S. wasn't even at war with Iran), what you might expect was that he'd be given a court martial when he got back, not a medal, surely. I think that if an accident of this magnitude had happened during an exercise, the first instinct would surely have been to deny everything; and only the crew on duty with their eyes on the actual radar would have had any idea that such a mistake may have been made, so it doesn't seem completely outrageous that those in charge might have managed to cover it up.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#41    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,547 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 14 November 2011 - 07:52 PM

And it may, very possibly, have happened before ... http://en.wikipedia....avia_Flight_870

And it has, very possibly, happened since... http://en.wikipedia....nes_Flight_1812

Edited by 747400, 14 November 2011 - 07:53 PM.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#42    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,194 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 14 November 2011 - 08:27 PM

View Post747400, on 14 November 2011 - 07:48 PM, said:

But heavens, if someone had committed an error of that gravity (the U.S. wasn't even at war with Iran), what you might expect was that he'd be given a court martial when he got back, not a medal, surely.
What you or I might expect and how things actually happen are typically not the same. Civilians often try to impose their views and expectations on the Military and are almost always surprised to find out just how little they apply in most military situations.

As stated previously, military investigators found that Rogers acted properly and within the ROE he was under at the time (admittedly, those rules have come under some amount of scrutiny) given the information he had within the short time frame of the incident. You or I can think that the military should have done things differently, or that Rogers should have had further action taken against him, but (I can only assume) you and I are not in the military, you nor I were not privy to the full details of the incident, you nor I were not there on that day, and you and I are certainly not qualified to pronounce judgment on the man.

As for being at war with Iran, no, the US was not, but they were in the Persian Gulf at the time of the Iran Iraq war protecting shipping in the area. As said earlier though, the Vincennes was involved in combat action at the time of the shoot down. Whether Iran and the US were at war at the time is on little consequence given the events and actions on that day specifically, and in that period of time in general. I'm fairly sure the Iranians in the boats that shot at the Vincennes and its helicopter cared little as to whether there was an actual, formal declaration of war between the US and Iran.

Quote

I think that if an accident of this magnitude had happened during an exercise, the first instinct would surely have been to deny everything; and only the crew on duty with their eyes on the actual radar would have had any idea that such a mistake may have been made, so it doesn't seem completely outrageous that those in charge might have managed to cover it up.
Again, you are free to think anything you want and to have whatever expectations of the Military you desire, but as stated, those thoughts and expectations rarely coincide with the reality of Military life and situations.



Cz

Edited by Czero 101, 14 November 2011 - 08:29 PM.

"Thinking is critical, because sense is not common..." - GreaterSapien

"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." – H. L. Mencken

#43    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,404 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 15 November 2011 - 03:15 AM

View PostScott G, on 14 November 2011 - 12:06 PM, said:

Here is Richard Russell's original document:
***

"TWA flight 800 was SHOT DOWN by a US NAVY AEGIS MISSILE fired from a guided missile ship which was in area W-105 about 30 miles from where TWA flight 800 exploded. W-105 is a Warning Area off the southeast cost of Long Island and is used by the military for military operations including missile firing. It is believed that, while W-105 is a rather large area, budget constraints have dictated that missile firings be done closer to land so that the flight time for the P-3 monitor and tracking aircraft can be reduced.

  

This is what really happened. The explosion occurred in the center fuel tank of TWA 800 in sky om the same manner as what occurred on C-141, 0253 on the ground.

Posted Image


My link


To further add:

Posted Image

Air Separator
John Hickey, FAA Director of Aircraft Certification Service, holds a new device commonly called a 'air separator' that replaces oxygen in a aircraft fuel tank with nitrogen preventing potential flammable vapors seen here during a press conference July 16, 2008 at the National Transportation Safety Board training facility in Ashburn, Virginia. One day before the 12th anniversary of the crash of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island, the federal government Wednesday announced a new rule it said would eliminate the risk of exploding fuel tanks on jumbo jets.

My link

I have always said that the problem was in the fuel tank, and nothing to do with a missile strike.

Edited by skyeagle409, 15 November 2011 - 03:59 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#44    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,578 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:38 PM

View Post747400, on 14 November 2011 - 07:01 PM, said:

because it shows how the Aegis system was not foolproof, particularly with inexperienced operators.  The US Navy seemed to manage to live with the fact that their ship shot down an A300 and killed several hundred innocent people. In fact, Captain Rogers got a decoration when he returned home.

Well what exactly should the US Navy have done?  Decommission the entire fleet and disband?

The incident surround the USS Vincennes is certainly tragic and, while the actual facts of that day are still being debated, certian facts are clear.  The ship was operating in disputed waters less than a year after the USS Stark was almost sunk by an Iranian F14 firing Exocet missiles.

Last time I checked, warships are generally not attacked off the coast of Long Island.

"You can't have freedom of religion without having freedom from the religious beliefs of other people."

#45    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    Commander in the Secret Space Fleet

  • Member
  • 24,547 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 15 November 2011 - 07:42 PM

View PostRafterman, on 15 November 2011 - 06:38 PM, said:

Well what exactly should the US Navy have done?  Decommission the entire fleet and disband?


Something slightly less crass than welcoming Captain Rogers home with garlands and brass bands, perhaps.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users