I asked my parents what they thought about Flight 800, and they said to me: "If the plane was shot down, why didn't they just admit it? It was an accident, and I'm sure everyone would understand".
Okay, I really doubt the govt could admit they killed 230 people due to negligence immediately after it happened and not generate massive outrage. They would have to wait months/years for it lose some of its emotional effect, and then admit to everyone that oh wait, we shot it down even though we told you it was a mechanical malfunction (or whatever the reason was). Basically, My parents' hypothetical solution is way too simple and basic for such an event of this magnitude IMO.
Where does the conspiracy on this originate from? NTSB found it was pilot error due to overuse of the rudder and in fact Airbus (the mfg of the plane) admitted there was a flaw with that piece of equipment.
Yeah I remember that one and thought it was suspicious. If I recall correctly....about 30 minutes after the crash the media and authorities were busy proclaiming "It wasn't terrorism! Just an accident!" when it seemed they couldn't POSSIBLY have had time to investigate and figure out what happened with any degree of certainty.
From what I remember, the initial comments were "terrorism is a possibility" - there was speculation that a terrorist launched some kind of a hand-held (shoulder mount? Not sure, I am not a weapons expert lol) rocket at the plane.
Yeah I remember that one and thought it was suspicious. If I recall correctly....about 30 minutes after the crash the media and authorities were busy proclaiming "It wasn't terrorism! Just an accident!" when it seemed they couldn't POSSIBLY have had time to investigate and figure out what happened with any degree of certainty.
Why didn't they just admit it? It was an election year. A tough one too.
Some might see a parallel to Benghazi.
Mistakes in an election year that cost American lives? ...uh-oh.
When this happened,I had complete and total faith in the veracity of what we were told. Today I see that power and political necessity are often a substitute for truth. And can be justified by many.
Today, Iam completely open to the possibility of a coverup.
So I decided to pester DH about this last night, lol. I asked him if I could ask him something about his time in the Navy, and after a joking "no, I didn't see anything about UFOs", (I used to watch too much x-files back in the 90s lol), I said no, not UFOs, something else. And he replied, "the navy didn't shoot down that plane". I was like, okay, HOW did you know I was going to ask about that!
Anyway, his opinion is that it was not a cover up of an accidental shoot down because if it WERE an accidental shoot down, they would have just hung the lowest ranking person out to dry for it. That it wouldnt have been worth a cover up when they can just have some low ranking person take the blame, and the officers are untouched. In other words, not big enough potatoes to risk a huge CYA.
I disagree, of course. And he did say that even if there was a cover up, he would not have seen/heard anything, since he worked Intel side, and it is the Operations side that would have been involved in the training exercises/any hypothetical coverup of a shoot-down, and that Intel and Ops DO NOT talk to each other. Or at least they didn't back in 1996.
He also said any cover up would not necessarily have involved lots of people, since any and all information is evaluated constantly, and decisions made before briefings as to whether that info gets passed up the chain (preserving plausible deniability for higher ups). It would have been shut down and compartmentalised fast. So any idea that a cover up might extend from say, the CNO all the way up to the President is unlikely. It would not even get to the CNO.
Anyway, that's all the info I got, until the doc comes out! :twocents:
But given the climate of the country at the time, wouldn't the hawks in the Bush admin have jumped all over themselves to have been handed yet another act of terrorism to inflame the public with? We were ramping up Afghanistan, and there was already talk about Iraq at the time, so I don't understand why they would have covered up a terrorist act. I'd think they'd have been positively GLEEFUL if it was (in fact, I have absolutely no problem picturing Darth Cheney uncorking some champagne over it!) terrorism. It would have been used as more fodder to justify the wars, wouldn't it?
If we're talking about the crash after 9/11, the only reason I can see the NTSB trying to cover it up would be if they were getting undue pressure from the FAA because at the time they (FAA and the airline industry) were in full scale damage control on trying to get people to feel safe when they fly.
I just don't see how there was a cover up when there are zero reports of an explosion to that plane. The plane went down basically on takeoff.
Remember that the TWA 800 investigation involved two seperate agencies doing two separate investigations (NTSB and FBI). So both agencies would of had to been in on it if it was in fact an accidental firing. Then ask yourself to what gain does the NTSB need to cover up for the Navy accidentally firing on an airplane as IMO I think it would benefit them from a safety aspect if it was not an internal issue with the airplane that caused the explosion.
So you're saying that it would have been of no benefit to the NTSB to aid in a cover up of a Navy shoot down?
(Trying to get it clear in my head)
If so, that's a good question lol. My impression of the NTSB has always been that they were fairly impartial and very thorough in what they do. Why WOULD they participate in a cover up?
When this accident happened, I could never have imagined that our government agencies had the ability to keep so much secret.
But recent disclosures...have made it understandable that these whistleblowers felt they needed to retire....before they could come forward and speak out.
A film was not the cause of the terror on Benghazi but our government told us that "version" affirmatively thru various media outlets. Our government told the grieving parents the same story at the funerals.
So false stories have uses. We do not always know the rationale. Perhaps the truth of Flight800 was inconvenient at the time...and the fuel tank explosion just as useful as the "film."