Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The guide to staging a major conspiracy: How to falsify accident evidence

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Anglo2 View Post
    Perhaps it is possible. NASA did a similar thing when faking the moon landings, with only those closely involved really knowing whats happening, and every one else (back room staff, public) being told otherwise.
    If you are going to smoke the good stuff, you have to share it with the rest of us.

    YHGTBFKM You really don't believe that do you?

    BB

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by mfeldt View Post
      Hi All, I noticed that in a number of threads here, suspicions are raised that accident investigators may be deliberately holding back evidence, creating false evidence or generally lying to the public. Now my question is ... if I wanted to hide the truth and create a more or less completely fictitious report - how would I do that? Who would decide to do it in the first place? Certainly it will not all be initiated by a single person, so there must be some kind of meeting with a number of people involved, all of which will know what is going on. How many will that be? What is the probability that all of them will remain silent over the years? On the other hand, if some of them talk, will they be regarded as credible? Then on the evidence - suppose I would want to have true evidence removed and false one planted instead - how would I do that? Who would actually do it and again, how many people would need to be involved? Questions... m.
      Can you say TWA 800?

      If you think that aircraft was not shot down, you better stick to the Microsoft flying only.

      BB

      Comment


      • #18
        Man, this is a funny thread.

        Comment


        • #19
          Is this thread some inside joke I somehow don't get ?
          Probably I'll have to spend more time here and up my post count drastically to understand the finesses of this site, no?

          BTW the moon-landings where real, that's 100% sure, the only thing they hide was that they found an alien city over there but since it looked too much like Birmingham,UK with the same types of Chavs they wisely forgot to mention it.
          Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries

          Comment


          • #20
            Never mind the inside jokes. The posts themselves are pearls.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
              Can you say TWA 800?

              If you think that aircraft was not shot down, you better stick to the Microsoft flying only.
              Oh look, we've got a live one!

              Comment


              • #22
                Seriously, though, with the sheer quantity of casualties involved and lawsuits that follow on behalf of the families and/or suppliers and whatnot, I find it very unlikely that highly suspect conspiracy theories turn out to be true in the case of major air crashes. In fact, if anything what feeds them is the lack of interest of the general public via lack of press coverage once the sensationalism wears off, these theories thus turning into urban legend.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Verbal View Post
                  Oh look, we've got a live one!
                  Was going to but, naaaaaaa (hey I sound like a lamb)

                  I have stood inside the rebuilt airframe in a hanger on Long Island.
                  Walked inside the center fuel tank. No way there was an internal explosion.

                  Go get the book Night Fall by Nelson DeMille, read it and let me know what you think.

                  BB

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                    Was going to but, naaaaaaa (hey I sound like a lamb)

                    I have stood inside the rebuilt airframe in a hanger on Long Island.
                    Walked inside the center fuel tank. No way there was an internal explosion.

                    Go get the book Night Fall by Nelson DeMille, read it and let me know what you think.

                    BB
                    Originally posted by brief description through Wiki
                    Night Fall is a 2004 novel by American author Nelson
                    DeMille
                    .
                    The story begins with the 1996 crash of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island, New York. A couple conducting an illicit affair on the beach witness the crash and flee the scene, having accidentally videotaped the crash and what appears to be a missile rising from the ocean towards the plane.
                    Five years later, Anti-Terrorist Task Force (a fictional FBI department based on the Joint Terrorism Task Force) detective John Corey is encouraged to
                    reinvestigate
                    the crash, officially blamed on mechanical failure, by his wife Kate
                    Mayfield
                    , who had worked on the original investigation.
                    The story is a sequel to The Lion's Game and reintroduces a number of characters from that novel. A sequel to Night Fall, titled Wild Fire, was released on November 6, 2006.
                    Night Fall debuted as number one on the New York Times Best Seller List on December 12, 2004,[1] and remained on the list for 11 weeks.
                    You know it is only a fiction adventure book, no?
                    Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                      Go get the book Night Fall by Nelson DeMille, read it and let me know what you think.
                      What I think is that no one has ever provided a shred of proof to support the shoot down theory. And a work of popular fiction does not qualify as proof.

                      Conspiracy theorists thrive for one reason. Whatever scenario they propose, using fragments of dubious "evidence" (a flash of light, a lost document, a furtive communication, etc.), it can never be disproved outright. Here's how it works:

                      Conspiracy Theorist: "TWA800 was shot down by a renegade Navy ship whose commander was working for the Israelis, the Cubans, and the Trilateral Commission."

                      Doubter: "Show me the proof."

                      CT: "No, prove me wrong."

                      D: "Your assertion is so preposterous that the chances it happened that way are vanishingly small."

                      CT: "Aha! You can't disprove it! So you admit that might be how it happened!"

                      If nothing else, conspiracy theorists provide entertaining late night radio talk show fodder for those long interstate road trips.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Verbal View Post
                        If nothing else, conspiracy theorists provide entertaining late night radio talk show fodder for those long interstate road trips.
                        I'm sorry, it's irresistible: indeed!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Twa 800

                          I will not banter this back and forth here, these are all hypothetical arguments anyway. I know what I know and have seen the wreckage first hand. I fly an average of 50 hours a month in 747/200's and 300's and I am not the least bit worried about the center fuel tank exploding in flight. I wounder why this was the FIRST (For ITS) time that the FBI removed pieces from an accident investigation, and never returned them to the NTSB for examination. Also if you check the records, an El Al 747 was airborne 18 minutes after the TWA aircraft. Theory is that it was the intended target. And no I do not support the theory that the U.S. Navy shot this aircraft down by accident. I believe it was a hyper velocity heat seeking shoulder fired weapon. The head of which has no explosive charge, it just pierced the number two pack and then went through the center fuel tank and out the other side. Probably went for another 4 or 5 miles and that is why it was no where near the debris field. There were numerous eye witness's to the accident including an ex-Viet Nam F4 pilot out in his sailboat. He testified to the fact that he saw a missile launched from a 25-30 foot speed boat. He stated that "I have seen first hand what a missile being fired looks like many times, and I am telling you that this was a missile". There were also 3 airline pilots in the air that saw the same thing, and over a dozen people on shore. The FBI's explanation is that the people saw burning jet fuel coming down from the aircraft. Go get yourself a pint of jet fuel, put in a jar (put some heat proof gloves on first) light it and pour it slowly onto the ground. Sorry buddy it don't work, I have tried it. But you believe what you care to, I have to go fly one of these old beasts to Osaka in a couple of hours from Hong Kong. I sure hope the damn center fuel tank holds up!

                          BB

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I believe it was a hyper velocity heat seeking shoulder fired weapon. The head of which has no explosive charge, it just pierced the number two pack and then went through the center fuel tank and out the other side. Probably went for another 4 or 5 miles and that is why it was no where near the debris field.
                            You clearly have never been in the military, A missile that strong (just force used from kinetic energy alone) going through the entire central fuel tank and entering and subsequently exiting the airlines skin and whatever else it came across could never be just a shoulder fired missile (only if it goes Mach 20 or so and god knows what that might do in terms of heat friction in an atmosphere).

                            We're talking Patriot/Nike, AIM54's or anything similar here, systems that need substantial launch facilities (Ship, battery , fighter jet) all of which would need more than just one rogue terrorist with his homemade rocket-project.

                            Go get yourself a pint of jet fuel, put in a jar (put some heat proof gloves on first) light it and pour it slowly onto the ground. Sorry buddy it don't work, I have tried it. But you believe what you care to,
                            Of Course that wont work, first vaporize it partially and then try again, you'll be more successful I promise you.


                            As far as Eye witnesses go, they'll give as many different opinions on what they think they saw as there are people seeing it.
                            Have some fun and just read the first hand reports on what the passengers experienced on the THY 738 crash that happened in AMS in the beginning of this year, I saw a program (on VPRO Dutch TV) and what was most striking was that almost every passenger they interviewed gave a completely different story on what they thought had happened so much so that it was actually quite funny.

                            I have to go fly one of these old beasts to Osaka in a couple of hours from Hong Kong. I sure hope the damn center fuel tank holds up!
                            Good flight to OSAKA, don't worry about the center tank, worry about the saké instead (too much of anything is never good)
                            Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Hazmat View Post
                              You clearly have never been in the military, A missile that strong (just force used from kinetic energy alone) going through the entire central fuel tank and entering and subsequently exiting the airlines skin and whatever else it came across could never be just a shoulder fired missile (only if it goes Mach 20 or so and god knows what that might do in terms of heat friction in an atmosphere).

                              We're talking Patriot/Nike, AIM54's or anything similar here, systems that need substantial launch facilities (Ship, battery , fighter jet) all of which would need more than just one rogue terrorist with his homemade rocket-project.

                              Of Course that wont work, first vaporize it partially and then try again, you'll be more successful I promise you.


                              As far as Eye witnesses go, they'll give as many different opinions on what they think they saw as there are people seeing it.
                              Have some fun and just read the first hand reports on what the passengers experienced on the THY 738 crash that happened in AMS in the beginning of this year, I saw a program (on VPRO Dutch TV) and what was most striking was that almost every passenger they interviewed gave a completely different story on what they thought had happened so much so that it was actually quite funny.

                              Good flight to OSAKA, don't worry about the center tank, worry about the saké instead (too much of anything is never good)
                              You would not believe what can be launched from a shoulder held weapon in todays age. I would tell you about them, but then I would have to kill you! I fly the stuff around all the time, we have it listed on the NOTOC or final mission briefing sheet as "Hazmat"

                              BB

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Why does Jetphotos keep letting the crazies in?


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X