T R U T H I N F L A M E S BACK TO MAIN PAGE
Fraud in The NTSB Report
Confronted with The Truth
Warning: Due to hijacking some links will not
work pending repair
Truth in Flames -- A book in works by H. Michael Sweeney on what really happened to Flight 800, and the conspiracy to cover up the truth of how and why 230 souls perished on the evening of July 17, 1996 off the shores of Long Island, N.Y. What you will find on these pages are concrete proofs of fraud and cover up by the NTSB -- using actual NTSB documents and NTSB supplied photographs of wreckage as evidence.
The condensed Truth in Flames excerpts offered here conclude with Three Simple Proofs that we have been lied to by government and media about Flight 800. Media will ultimately have much more to answer for than government, in some respects. But the lies born of this partnership were not perfect, for they were not hatched carefully in advance, but reactionary inventions born of an unexpected and terrible event. Here then are the tell-tale clues that government and media could not hide, clues which give us a score card with truth seekers 9, lie tellers 0. Game point. The conspiracy is fact, not theory:
Truth in Flames may never see the light of day as a result of September
11th. Those events caused the author to shift focus to a much more important
work, Fatal Rebirth, which
reveals broader tuths behind 9-11 which, like Truth in Flames, point
to 'friendly fire.' That far more massive effort (four volumes) documents
many crimes of the intelligence community and secret government - to include
in part, Flight 800. In fact, I assert, Fatal Rebirth is more important
for one very good reason: it can save your life.
Shortly after the material facts herein were made public at this Web site and additionally through Commander William Donaldson at a public press conference sponsored by Accuracy In Media (AIM) and subsequent letters to the NTSB and to Congress, NTSB took the unprecedented (documented here) step of altering the official record to conceal evidence. This criminal act was undertaken in the guise of clarification, but even a superficial examination of their basis will reveal fraudulent disinformation. Subsequently to that, someone tampered with this Web site.
could such a massive conspiracy even be possible? Implicit in any such
revelation of NTSB wrongdoing and the existence of a cover up is the willing
participation of FBI, the U.S. Navy and Pentagon, Justice, CIA, NSA, the
White House, and select members of Congress, and of course, a silent and
unquestioning media. That any conspiracy on such a grand scale could be
launched and effectively orchestrated could be explained in only one way...
would require only one thing... would be driven at its very core by only
It is all too easy for anyone within the Military, the Intelligence Community, the White House or Congress... to at will declare ANY issue a matter of National Security. Once so claimed, valid or not, resistance to any other perceptions of fact or truth must necessarily (if not conveniently in a cover up) yield to a need to protect some real (or engineered) threat to American security. Any such declaration is usually not public, but reserved for discrete and selective use to obtain cooperation in maintaining confidentiality.
Where engineered, silence and willing participation in a cover up then becomes a simple matter, one backed up with the implied threat that any violation of confidences with respect to the issue at hand, being a violation of National Security by arbitrary definition, make the talkative party subject to harsh Federal laws and punishment -- essentially being branded and tried as a kind of traitor. So much for whistle blowers.
With Flight 800, a National Security-level security blanket was indeed early invoked, seemingly from the White House. President Clinton, early in the affair, revoked the Whistle blower's Act for the Naval Special Warfare Development Group - the very military umbrella collective involved in the War games on the day of the Flight 800 event and who provided resources to FBI in the investigation. This unprecedented act in itself becomes even more suspicious when it is learned that once the this and other civilian investigators became aware of this action, the official public record of the President's edict itself vanished from the archives. One asks why? Why National Security? The analysis below may tell.
1) Terrorist Attack: If indeed a missile brought down Flight 800, the first logical supposition would be terrorist attack. If terrorists from a foreign nation were to have launched an attack by missile against an American aircraft (civilian or otherwise), the political repercussions both at home and abroad would be staggering. It would therefore logically be a significant matter of National Security that the matter be quickly and quietly determined, that a proper course of action could be elected - actions which might best be decided and taken in the vacuum and safety of public ignorance of the process. Hence, National Security would be logical in such a case. But were it determined that a terrorist did not bring down the plane, then the National Security veil could be lifted, and the public could be informed of the true findings. This has yet to happen with Flight 800. Why, if as NTSB claims, the aircraft crashed due to mechanical failure?
Friendly Fire: If indeed a missile brought
down Flight 800 and as just seen, terrorists were not responsible, then
the only logical conclusion which remains is 'friendly fire. This would
not be an entirely legal basis for National Security, because 'friendly
fire' is more a crime of unintentional manslaughter than an issue of National
Security. Thus any prolonged application of National Security would be
more rightly termed 'cover up.' Thus, only if there is a cover up, can
the National Security blanket have cause to remain. Just follow the
logic of the facts as shown below:
Take this two-minute
test of logic:
FACT 1: Altitude and range factors, and shooting location vs. hand-held missile operational performance limitations
INESCAPABLE CONCLUSION: PROOF OF A COVER UP & OF FRIENDLY FIRE EXISTS
The proof lies in the actual body of evidence presented by NTSB, which as will be seen here, fraudulently claims the Center Wing Tank somehow exploded by unnamed cause and destroyed the aircraft. According to NTSB, and FBI, and the Navy, it was NOT A MISSILE. If true, and in the absence of acknowledged proof of ANY ARMED WARHEAD missile fire, then there should be NO REASON FOR CONTINUED SECRECY ENFORCED BY NATIONAL SECURITY. Especially if there were no military vessels capable of firing missiles as claimed by Navy and FBI. It is therefore interesting the Navy lied when it said there were no U.S. Warships in the area at the time. Later, it was discovered that there were three U.S. Submarines and radar tracks showing at least one surface vessel, and they all lay within the immediate vicinity of the firing box if not directly within it. Why the lies? Especially if it is true, as proclaimed by Navy and FBI, and the venerable Jane's authority on Naval capabilities, that submarines cannot fire surface to air missiles.
Another clue that again points to 'national security' as a cover up tool is found in the strange story of what happened to the submarines after the incident. The details for the first two are not verifiable, but they apparently immediately undertook orders to leave American waters for other assignments, something not common to vessels on a war game exercise, which normally return to port for training debriefings. Yet what happened to the third is even more strange, as discovered by one of the civilian investigators who followed up on a tip from a Navy officer's wife. She advised the ship was indeed to report back to port, but that it, like the others, had been diverted elsewhere.
Where? To NASA's Kennedy Space Center, where there is absolutely no Naval station presence involving submarines - but where, coincidentally we might presume, the commanding officer of live-fire missile tests for the Navy generally conducts his command and control affairs. There, according to crewmen, the ship was docked and the crew forbad to leave the vessel for some time. Even stranger, the Captain and Executive Officer, the top two commanders on the ship, were relieved of command, but reportedly DID NOT RETURN HOME. Eventually, FBI interviewed the crew and boarded the ship and told the world boldly that no missiles were missing and the ship did not fire any missiles (which Jane's and Navy had already told us was impossible.) The treatment of these subs and their crews by Navy makes sense only under the banner of National Security, and clearly suggests deliberate suppression of facts through lies similar to those denying the factual existence of these ships in the first place. Why might this be necessary? If the Navy had no warships in the area except for the submarines, and the submarines were not shooters, why National Security and attendant lies? The answer is shocking.
indeed it can be shown that the NTSB report is fraudulent... then it follows
that an orchestrated cover up of the truth exists in the name of National
Security. This, as seen in the logic trail above, can only mean friendly
fire. But, remember, that there were no U.S. vessels capable of firing
missiles in the area. How then, can friendly fire be true? The answer is
that there were other friendly vessels in the area. Operation
Global Yankee is an annual collective of joint allied military war
games executed at various places and times all around the world. Involving
perhaps a dozen nations at any given time, Operation Global Yankee was
openly discussed on Military Web sites, including such details as times,
locations, participants, and goals of past and future war games. Yet a
funny thing happened when I and other civilian investigators began looking
into the possibility that certain British, Canadian, and Dutch missile-platform
warships (assigned to NATO Fleet operations and believed partaking in Operation
Global Yankee) WERE IN THE AREA that fatal night. In a matter of hours,
virtually ALL information on Operation Global Yankee vanished from the
Web. Contacted about this mystery, the Military simply stated it was a
matter of National Security. Why? After three years of it not being
National Security, why now?
Standing Naval Forces Atlantic (NATO)
HMCS Charlottetown (FFH 339) image montage w launchable
Commissioned Sept. 9, 1995 [Less than a year's experience as a crew]
|Speed: 29+ knots [radar
speed of vessel leaving crash sight,
29 knotts is too fast for anti-sub warfare claimed underway]
Range: 4500 Nautical miles (at most economical speed)
Complement: 225 officers and non-commissioned members
[Only a handfull of CCS and Bridge Officers would need know
the outcome of a launched missile gone wrong]
|Newly added: 4/2001
And it gets stranger. Recent inquiries to Naval resources now indicate there is NO national security issue associated with Operation Global Yankee - a change of affairs which has taken place quietly subsequent to the original posting of this material questioning the issue publicly. According to Navy, Operation Global Yankee was and is only a medical response exercise, not a war game exercise. This contradicts information earlier obtained, but is in complete agreement with the NOW available Web resources, resources which before the Navy itself had said were taken down for reasons of National Security. Again, I ask why, if only medical games and not war games, would the National Security banner have been necessary? Why did Navy remove the Web data under that banner immediately after our inquiries into Global Yankee as part of our Flight 800 concerns?
The answer, of course, is that the NATO ships and American submarines and air units were likely involved in war games there that night, and were likely involved in and had the capability to fire dummy warhead missiles in mock combat. A radar track shows a large navel vessel of missile frigate size rapidly steaming AWAY from the downed Flight 800 - completely contrary to Maritime Law regarding distress and rescue at sea. This it did even though only minutes away from the crash site. Why? The answer is that they did NOT WANT TO BE IDENTIFIED as being present, and so the U.S. Government conceals their presence when asked about warships in the area. The United States apparently did not want to embarrass a friendly power with accusations of friendly fire. There is only one problem with this notion. The act of shoot down, accidental or otherwise, is a violation of American law and, at the hands of a foreign power, is also a violation of national sovereignty. To cover up this crime is itself a crime. That crime has a two names:
T R E A S O N and T Y R A N N Y
Treason is any crime against your own country to the favor or benefit of another country, normally one thought to be an enemy, but not necessarily so. To subvert by violation of law the entire natural will and purpose of the Justice Department, FBI, Department of Defense, the Navy, and Congress to the benefit of a foreign power is indeed TREASON.
Tyranny is oppression of the people by their government, typically expressed as denial of rights and denial of due recourse under the law. For a government to so run roughshod of the principles of Democracy and Freedom, over the very will of the people... to sacrifice the lives of murdered citizens as accidental death... to then destroy, fabricate, and conceal evidence of same... to punish the manufacturers and operators of the aircraft and rather than admit the true cause... to then buy silence with fat military contracts and foreign sales... to put journalists and other civilian investigators under investigation, to threaten them with arrest by FBI or actually arrest... and try to them on trumped up charges and imprison them to enforce their silence... to do all of this in violation of the Constitutional Rights of all involved... that is TYRANNY. But there are two more crimes involved, and they, too have names.
O N S P I R A C Y to O B S T R U C T J U S T I C E
More than one wise lawyer, including prosecuting attorneys for the State of New York, have further stated that if they were convinced that a cover up was undertaken to conceal the truth, then those participating would be subject to harsh criminal prosecutions for such things as CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, and ACCESSORY TO MURDER. Now, need we ask once more about why National Security remains in place? The answer seems clearer in light of the fact that National Security is all that stands in the way between status quo and prosecution for criminal acts.
Make no mistake. If you read the Three Proofs offered here, each with three separate analytical methods or examples provided, you will come to no other conclusion: Flight 800 was shot down by a dummy missile; a cover up exists; treason and tyranny abound; someone is guilty of conspiracy to obstruct justice and accessory to murder. Someone, indeed many someones... needs to go to jail.
By that conclusion you will learn that you can no longer trust your TV and newspapers, nor any other traditional news media. They are just as unable to bring you the truth as government would have you believe the Internet to be. Truth in Flames is as much about the process of subversion of truth in media and disinformation... about how government assassinated the good name of Internet along with Pierre Salinger... and about how the back-door deals to silence giant corporate players were undertaken. In short, it is the full story about how truth went down in flames that day.
else fell into the sea that day, too. The government fell head over heels
into the burning sea. We just haven't heard the crash, yet. When Clinton
and his bidders-do tied their necks to the rope of Tyranny and Treason,
it may as well have been tied to the tail of Flight 800. Eventually, history
and likely, the courts, will see it that way. It has been said 'you
can fool some of the people all of the time, and some of the people all
of the time...' but you can't fool an entire nation forever with a
Three Simple Proofs are confirmed herein with three documented
examples each. By no means are these the only proofs or examples available,
but for the means of simplicity, the discussion is limited to 3x3, alone.
There are likewise available documented proofs against FBI/Justice, Navy/DOD,
CIA/NSA, the White House/Congress, and media, for their various roles in
the conspiracy. But the challenge and focus here is to solidly demonstrate
the Conspiracy exists, not to define its fullness in partnerships and complexities.
on the other hand, maps out the entire cover up, illustrates
the mechanics of deceit, and names the culprits.
Virtually all proofs herein are derived from the official CD-ROM version of the NTSB report on Flight 800 supplied by NTSB itself -- shown below with appropriate truth in labeling provided by the author. Should anyone care to challenge the conclusions in this review, they will be challenging not only the view of this author, but also the view of Boeing and TWA engineers, former crash investigation experts, a former NASA scientist, former FAA, military, and other experts.
Click for Proof Number 1: That the initiating event which brought Flight 800 down was NOT any kind of internal event, certainly not center wing tank explosion as claimed by NTSB: Three separate scientific proof methods will be applied with the same inescapable conclusion.
Click for Proof Number 2: That deliberate falsifications, alterations and other forms tampering with evidence has taken place within the NTSB report in order to conceal the truth: Three separate examples of actual tampering will be shown.
Click for Proof Number 3: That missile fire is the more likely cause based on NTSB findings. Three separate analytical methods will be offered with identical results implicating dummy-warhead missile fire as the more likely cause of the crash.
for Grand Summary: In the grand summary will be revealed how NTSB
'cooked' the fuel tank explosion tests to favor their conclusion and to
provide an emotional advantage which, upon careful examination, actually
provides additional confirmation proofs which demonstrate visually why
the CWT theory is a fabrication- that it did NOT explode.
Within a matter of days of the NTSB fraud material (the Three Proofs) being offered at my Web site and as shared through the Donaldson/AIM Press Conference with Admiral Moorer, NTSB took the unprecedented steps of attempting to conceal evidence by altering contents of the official NTSB Factual Report. The critical Flight Recorder information which NTSB claims is 'old data' from a previous flight was printed in full in the original report. I and Donaldson both refuted that claim using NTSB's own prior statements about how flight data recorders function with respect to old data, and the actual data itself to demonstrate that it was impossible for it to have been old data because...
a) according to early NTSB statements, flight recorders first erase old data prior to recording new data, and there was clearly no erased portion ahead of the recorded portion - and since recording heads and erasure heads must be physically separated with respect to tape position, there would need to be an actual blank space at the end of current flight data before encountering old data. If NTSB is correct about how FDR's work, they are LYING about the old flight data and the data is instead FLight 800 data screaming to be evaluated (update 7/2001: NTSB still refuses to honor FOI requests which will resolve this issue, despite court rulings, Congressional instructions to comply);
b) if actually old data, the plane in that flight was, in many key characteristics flying with exactly the same performance variables, a near impossibility with respect to odds and probabilities, more so because the plane was in a relatively brief climb maneuver at the time rather than the long time span of a cruise at nominal altitudes and performance settings (where you might expect similarities).
c) if actually old data, the old flight was also crashing - and why hadn't we heard about the crash?
We asserted that, therefore, it logically followed that the flight recorder was screaming evidence as to what happened, and, as the Three Proofs illustrate, it was screaming missile fire. IN RESPONSE, NTSB SIMPLY DELETED THE DATA IN THE PUBLIC RECORD - QUIETLY, AND WITHOUT EXPLANATION. Below, find an image which reveals the before and after proof of the alteration.
upper image comes from the original NTSB Factual Report on Flight 800 taken
from the Official NTSB CD. The CD is dated Nov 26 1997, but was not publicly
released until the NTSB Public Hearings on 12/8/97. My public evaluation
of this data, critical of NTSB findings, was approximately two weeks later
and was passed along to Donaldson. Similar evaluation was offered by Donaldson
at the AIM Conference on 1/8/98. In early March, I mailed versions of the
Three Proofs to every member of the House Aviation Subcommittee, select
media, and posted it on my Web site.
The NTSB response, within weeks of these revelations was to modify the official record to conceal the data used against them. On April 8, 98, the NTSB on-line archive (public record) version of the Report was modified, and the earlier CD version was no longer available from NTSB.
The new version is at the bottom. The NTSB documents are .pdf files which require Adobe Acrobat to read. What is shown here is the actual screen shots of what it looks like to pull up the two versions and look at the exact same page, red arrows added here to show the alterations. Note that:
a) in order for the alteration to be useful as cover up and combat the arguments offered in the Three Proofs, it was even necessary for the data associated with the 20:31:12 timeline to be vanished, even though NTSB admits that at this timeline, the Flight Recorder was still operational;
b) the Adobe Reader page view (left arrow) shows the nature of the modification was done in a way which confuses Reader - it being unable to display a miniature view of the page. Software experts suggest this implies the means used was OTHER than simply editing the original computer file, but rather, direct modification of the Adobe file. Very suspicious, to say the least. Who, how, why?
Page 42 from the NTSB Factual Report, Exhibit 10A (Flight Data Recorder)
Upper Image from original NTSB provided CD version of Report, published 12/8/97
Lower Image from NTSB Web site (CD removed from circulation), altered 4/8/98
These are screen shots of Report as viewed by Acrobat Reader, red arrows added
|Confronted with Truth, Top NTSB
On 12 December, 2000, a special private/closed meeting was held between key NTSB Flight 800 team leaders and three civilians. Heading the meeting was non other than NTSB Chairman, Jim Hall, with the presence of Dennis Grossi, lead FDR specialist on the Flight 800 matter and chief signatory to the official NTSB Report, and three others - two of which were 'Advisors' to Jim Hall with no other apparent official duties or responsibilities. The topic was Flight 800 Flight Data Recorder discrepancies contained within the official Flight 800 report from NTSB under the investigative leadership of Bernie Loeb and, his boss, Jim Hall. The meeting, and what happened afterwards at NTSB, did NOT make news, but they should have. Americans might ask why media thought otherwise...
Civilian investigators have long maintained that Navy and or FBI have tampered with Flight Recorder and Cockpit Voice Recorder data tapes, and or manipulated their reports to conceal or ignore evidence contained therein - some of which is documented in The Three Simple Proofs on my <http://www.proparanoid.net> Web site. One of the victim families (husband and wife) had obtained the services of Mr. Glen H. Schulze, a Flight Data Recorder expert and consultant, who had in turn worked closely with several of the civilian investigators still battling an unfulfilled Freedom of Information Act request for a true copy of the FDR tapes. Readers might ask why NTSB has repeatedly stonewalled this FOI request and refused to obey the law. What happened at the meeting may provide an answer, as found in minutes kept by Mr. Schulze - NTSB didn't seem to want to keep any such minutes.
Jim Hall opened the two-hour meeting with acknowledgement of the fact that he was aware of the claim by civilian investigators and Mr. Schulze, that 4 seconds or more of flight data might have been omitted from the end of the FDR - concealing critical clues about what really happened. Schulze then carefully presented a logical step-by-step discussion using flip charts to make his case, one which is based on the technical construct of data on the tape, and similar matters. This is in contrast to the presentation I make in the Three Simple Proofs which looks at the actual data contained in the first few 'missing' seconds and shows it perfectly viable and useful as evidence of what actually happened.
Schulze closed the introductory presentation with a summary statement. No NTSB staff member commented or objected to his presentation or his facts, no rebuttal was made, no corrections offered. Jim Hall instead elected to 'attack the messenger' and 'change the topic', two of the 25 Rules of Disinformation, by objecting to the harsh wording in a letter from Schulze to Hall in which the expression 'bungled forgery of the actual TWA FL 800 FDR tape' was used. Schulze apologized and offered to 'rewrite' the letter, and then proceeded to offer technical proofs in greater detail about the validity of the missing four seconds. This summary closed with an explanation in support of evidentiary claims that the FBI/NTSB had not published all of the FDR data, which happened to include GMT information, among other things.
At this point Grossi offered a minimal objection which underscores the ridiculous nature of the entire Flight 800 treatment by government. In part, he stated "We no longer publish FDR embedded GMT times because it is too accurate" Then another NTSB FDR specialist present, a Mr. Cash, insisted that a particular element of Mr. Schulze' argument had a simple explanation tied to "the result of the erase head loosing AC power." Yet Schulze countered with two point blank questions which contravened the intent and implied logic of the remark - apparently an effective rebuttle. Cash could not answer the questions, and made no attempt, effectively recanting. The disinformational subterfuge in these questions by Cash seems obvious, as described by the minutes, and more so when carefully following the technical dialog itself.
Hall then again attempted to divert dialog by asking Schulze about his affiliation with the University of Texas (Schulze confirmed), as if that had any bearing on scientific and material facts under discussion. Hall then employed another disinformation tactic by lauding the great effort of NTSB in the matter, stating that "the NTSB had performed above and beyond the usual level of effort on TWA FL 800 to the amount of $100m." Noting this was taxpayer money, he said that he hoped all present were taxpayers. Again, what is the relevance, and how does it answer the challenges of fraud put to him and his experts by Schulze? IF the money had been well spent, and had obtained true and correct results, why could his top specialists not answer Mr. Schulze' questions in response to their own commentary?
Next, Mrs. (victim family member name withheld to observe their privacy) asked what the NTSB had found regarding the short sound at the very end of the Cockpit Voice Recorder tape. This is an important question as also demonstrated in The Three Simple Proofs, NTSB has failed to properly address CVR sound analysis, a critical matter because, like the FDR, it literally screams evidence as to what actually happened - evidence ignored by NTSB. Schulze added two specific technical aspects to be addressed in the NTSB response, and reminded the NTSB of their own findings on such matters in prior investigations, findings which narrow any possible answer significantly, but which do not preclude missile fire scenarios. Schulze and the family also asked for true copies of the CVR tape.
The questions were not answered or even acknowledged, according to the minutes. There was instead a dialog about the request for the tape, the legality of it, and a suggestion the request be put into writing. The meeting was terminated by Jim Hall at this point, the only result of which put the responsibility for follow up upon the shoulders of Mr. Schulze, to write two letters to NTSB. One, a rewrite to soothe Jim Hall's ego, the other to request officially the CVR tape. NTSB escaped with no commitments to answer any of the tough questions and charges faced at the meeting. In other words, the NTSB held a meeting with family members and civilian investigators which was specifically intended to answer concerns about the accuracy and legitimacy of the NTSB investigation. At that meeting, the NTSB asked questions of the civilians but answered no questions by the civilians. This is like a courtroom convened to try a killer but instead of asking the killer any questions, only the prosecuting attorney is put on the stand.
Four days later, on a Saturday if
information is correct, both NTSB Chairman Jim Hall and Flight 800
Investigation Team Leader Bernie Loeb resigned their posts without fanfare.
This clever tactic not makes impossible any answer to the Schulze questions,
and in point of fact, makes the entire meeting moot and void. Done over
a weekend, Hall and Loeb never had to return to work if they did not want
to. What better way for a quick exit, stage left? There is
no proof that the resignations are tied to the meeting and the NTSB's inability
or unwillingness to answer serious questions about the accuracy of the
NTSB investigation, inaccuracies which any civilian investigator could
easily see, which were confirmed by experts in the field, but which NTSB
choose not to see. There is no proof that the resignations were not
for personal reasons, political reasons tied to the incoming administration,
or some other 'justified' reasoning - and no such public statements are
known to have been offered at this writing. There is no proof, and
that is because Jim Hall, Bernie Loeb, and the NTSB has elected not to
offer it - just in the same manner the elected not to respond to proofs
of fraud. In absence of any proof in their favor, and in the presence
of proofs to their discredit, the reader must decide. Why the resignations
if there is no cover up and no fraud?
Almost immediately after the resignations of top NTSB staff, apparently due to civilian investigators confronting NTSB with evidence of a coverup, yet another dramatic event took place which highlights concerns over tampering with the CVR and FDR data. To preface these events, I must first take the reader back to a point in the investigation shortly after the black box recovery had been announced by FBI and Navy late in 1996.
Civilian investigators had long cried foul that the U.S. Navy, chief suspect in any friendly fire scenario, should be allowed to be the primary agency dedicated to searching the ocean for evidence, chief among which was the black boxes containing FDR and CVR data. Ever suspicious of any claims made by Navy, we were on the prowl for any signs of wrongdoing.
One such sign came in the form of a contact from the U.S. Coast Guard. An unnamed CG informant, stated that his ship had intercepted Navy radio confirmation of recovery of the black boxes some 2 days before the actual announced date. This would have given Navy or anyone else so inclined plenty of time to tamper to their hearts content. In attempting to follow up on this story, a copy of the ship's log was obtained, since it had been stated that the log contained an entry regarding the radio message (the CG was assisting Navy in the search.) However, the log copy contained no such entry. Later, the CG source claimed the copy obtained to be fraudulent, but there was no proof. So, the matter was dropped and has never been part and parcel of the civilian case against government in this matter. But now, the relevance becomes more key.
That is because new information has surfaced which literally proves tampering, provided by civilian investigator Jack Seaman. In any criminal investigation, there is this little precept that evidence must be handled properly to avoid contamination or tampering. Any hint of wrongdoing invalidates evidence as suitable proofs, and must be investigated as a crime - typically starting with whomever had motive and opportunity (in this case, that would be USN on both counts.) Let's follow the chain of evidence for the CVR, for instance, but indulge me please - we will do it in reverse order from the NTSB findings backwards in time towards the first recovery of the box.
NTSB Investigator James Cash states
on page 4 of Exhibit 12a of the CVR Factual Report (part of the official
NTSB CD-ROM version of the Report on Flight 800) in summary (worded differently
and using footnotes to achieve the same impact on
A Fairchild model A-100 cockpit voice recorder (CVR) s/n UNK was brought to the audio laboratory of the National Transportation Safety Board... The CVR unit arrived in the lab in a large cooler still submerged in water. The exterior of the CVR was extremely dented and distorted. The front panel of the CVR was ripped from the unit and was only being held on by the under-water locating beacon mount. The normal carrying handle was missing. The data plate that is normally attached to the front panel was also missing and never recovered.
Whatís wrong with these pictures?
This left image is a screen shot of the CVR from a TLC special on Flight 800 which replayed footage of a press conference. The man speaking in the background is non other than Bernie Loeb, who in audio states the device we are seeing is Flight 800ís CVR. Clearly visible is both the handle and the data plate, with its serial number, which we can't quite read in the image, of course. Someone is not telling the truth, it would seem...
The second image from the same show shows the underwater recovery in progress. The handle and data plate are both visible even here. Many people remember seeing news coverage on CNN where a diver actually holds the CVR up for the camera by the handle. Why does the CVR have a handle and data plate underwater, and even in the presence of Bernie Loeb at a press conference, but not in the Lab at the time of actual analysis? This implies the existence of two CVRís and thus, two tapes, one a copied and edited version of the other.
This perfectly coincides with the penetrating questions by Schulze put to Hall's people. There are clear data discrepancies in both the FDR and CVR which indicate careless editing ('bungled forgery' per Schulze) to compact the time line and conceal evidence. There is also a matter of noted contrivances with respect to transponder information, all of which point to missing seconds in the official account of the event. No wonder NTSB did not want to use GMT times - they would likely make the missing seconds even easier to spot.
There is an interesting complication. The day before, angry families berated NTSB investigators with harsh remarks and hard questions. The day of the recovery, announcement of the fact had a pacifying effect on these collateral victims of Flight 800. The interesting complication lies in the fact that this was the day President Clinton was scheduled to speak with the families. More than one person has noted this with a skeptical remark about a 'staged event.'
Cash was with Hall at the meeting with the family and Schulze. It was Hall and Loeb who resigned after hard questions about these errors. Given this new evidence which tends to support the Schulze claims and the Three Simple Truths, can Cash be far behind? When rats desert a sinking ship, the biggest rats often leave first, but their tails are easily bitten by the small ones left behind.
Given that the motive and opportunity
is demonstrated, and that clearly the evidence has been tampered with,
and that according to the errors found by Schulze and detailed by me in
the Three Simple Proofs, the tampering appears intended to conceal
friendly fire, perhaps the reader might be moved to question these events.
Moreover, I would hope, they would ask why media does not question them.
Several civilian investigators of the Flight 800 crash have suffered various attacks by the intelligence community, as referenced in the Older Posts Available, above. Cited therein are several hacking incidents, which is interesting to me because at least one of the known disinformationalists who has continually sought to destroy the credibility of the civilian investigators and their arguments and proofs is Ron Lewis, who has visible ties to both the intelligence community and to a company which specializes in what is called 'ethical hacking'. Many of the employees of this company are also 'former' intelligence community types, including U.S. Navy Office of Naval Intelligence - who were specifically trained in INFOWAR technology (which, among other things, includes hacking technology for national defense applications.)
Flight 800 crashed in July of 1996. This Web site was posted in update to the Web in July of 1999. At that time I advised other civilian investigators to please review my work for any errors or suggested improvements. A few suggestions were entertained, but no essential errors in factual content were cited. In November of 2000, I had reason to modify my resource page, and attempted to FTP my changes to the Web site, only to discover that the ISP host system did not like my password. I was locked out of my own Web site. This had happened twice, before with other ISP hosts. In each instance, there had been made material changes to my site, such that whole portions of the site no longer worked or displayed properly, if at all. Naturally, I would be advised by a visitor, eventually, and the errors would be addressed - again to discover that my passwords no longer worked. In one instance, as experienced and reported by at least one other Flight 800 investigator, assigning a new password DID NOT fix the problem. Even with a new password assigned, the password was rejected. Why? Because someone had installed a 'bot' on the host system which scrambled the password for the account (and only that account) every few seconds. No matter how quickly one tried to use a new password, by the time the new password could be entered, it had already been changed again in the system.
The most recent incident has not involved a bot. However, the changes to the Web site were subtle, and almost unnoticed. On the top of this page very early is mentioned the date of the crash of Flight 800. Since I must rule out a typo (the work having passed inspection by my peers), it would appear the date had been changed by someone from 1996 to 1998. One asks why? One answer is obvious, to me, because I am regularly moved to contact officials, media, or other key persons on the topic, and invite them to review the proofs of NTSB fraud at my Web site. They often are moved in response to consult with others, including NTSB, no doubt (since they regularly visit my Web site.) What better way to defuse the impact of any proofs I might offer, and destroy my credibility, than to be able to respond: "I wouldn't take anything he says too seriously - he didn't even get the date right."
More recently, in March of 2001, the entire Web site was sabotaged such that where before, robotics testing of the links revealed only one broken link in the entire Site, more than two dozen links were no longer working, including the three most important links for Flight 800 information. At the same time this was discovered, it was also discovered that the transaction logs for the site had been tampered with - a total of 7 days worth of logs (one file per day) removed from their proper place on the ISP's hard drive. Five of these were found in an entirely incorrect folder elsewhere, almost as if someone had tried to replace them after modification, but put them into the wrong location. These files are created and accessed ONLY by automated ISP software, and permissions preclude even this author from manipulating the files in the way discovered.
Update: In early 2005, the entire
site was hijacked, presumably by 'men in black,' since they are demanding
$157,800 to get it back. That figure is roughly one-hundred thousand times
higher than any traditional 'hijack for profit' scheme and thus is clearly
an attempt to keep proparanoid 'off the air.' The only ones who benefit
from such a move are those within government who have something to hide.
For more solid evidence government may have been involved, click