Saw this on our local news channel's website. Has anyone else followed this? It's really got me thinking...

From wnep.com :

A former military pilot says he saw a missile shoot down TWA Flight 800, backing up a Montoursville area father, who believes the government is lying to him and other victim's families.

Our investigation brought us to Long Island New York. In July of 1996 TWA Flight 800 crashed after blowing up in mid-air.

The National Transportation Safety Board says a spark probably triggered a fuel tank explosion. The agency said the jet was not shot down and even the CIA agreed.

However, Fred Meyer, a retired military pilot insists he saw a missile streaking through the sky seconds before Flight 800 exploded. Meyer was flying for the New York National Guard that night on a training excercise.

"I saw a trail. A rocket motor trail. It was so smooth," said Meyer.

The former Vietnam War pilot said he will never forget what he saw in the skies off Long Island.

"It was red-orange in color, and it was moving very rapidly. I watched it until it's termination. Then about a second lapsed when I saw nothing. Then I saw an explosion of military ordinance," said Meyer.

Remember, the government says Flight 800's center fuel tank exploded causing the crash. Meyer says he has seen fuel explode in combat and the first blast he saw was not caused by fuel.

Meyer said, "What I saw was something like an anti-aircraft shell going off in the air. A bomb going off. I've seen an awful lot of those go off."

Meyer is backed up on several fronts. It can be found in the government's own reports. Meyer's co-pilot described an object with a "rocket motor." "It came from the left and made the object on the right explode." "Like anti Aircraft fire".

Then there are dozens of FBI reports. Witnesses saying they saw something red leaving the surface and heading skyward.

There is also a report by the aerospace workers union. It disputes the NTSB's conclusion that a spark may have caused a fuel explosion. While not using the word missile, the report states: damage to one area of the jet "Appears to orginate from the exterior of the aircraft"

One former National Transportation Safety Board member is Vernon Gross. In a phone conversation with Newswatch 16, Gross told us a missile attack on the jet was possible.

Fred Meyer says it's more than possible. He says saw a missle!

Bob Reyolds-Newswatch 16: "So what you're telling me, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that in your heart of hearts, TWA Flight 800 was hit by at least one Missile? Fred Meyer: "At least one missile yes. Bob Reynolds:"And that's based on your military experience?" Fred Meyer: "Yes sir"

All of this is Emotionally painful for Don Nibert. His 16-year-old daughter Cheryl, a student at Montoursville High School died on flight 800.

Don Nibert believes our government is covering up. "To many indications that something happened and I don't think we're being told the truth," Don Nibert said.

For Fred Meyer, it has a deeper meaning. He said, "Had the administration faced the fact that this was probably a terrorist attack in 1996 which killed 230 people, they might have been prepared to avoid the death of 6000 people in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon"

And there's more to this.. The former chief NTSB investigator tells me Flight 800's radar data was not immediately turned over to the F.B.I. Instead, it was sent to the White House. No one seems to know why.

As for Don Nibert, he insists he'll never rest until the government tells the truth about what happened to his daughter Cheryl and the rest of the victims.

-- Wondering what others think (none@this.time), February 28, 2002

Answers

Terrorist or Government screw up. There s sssoooo much we don't that they get away with. Some that would probably scare the living #%#* out of us if we really knew!

-- Novina in ND (homespun@stellarnet.com), February 28, 2002.

IMHO I don't think it was shot down. What's this got to do with homesteading anyway?

-- cowgirlone in OK (cowgirlone47@hotmail.com), February 28, 2002.

Don't think it has anything to do with homesteading either but...it gives you food for thought and the concerns and pain that other fellow homesteaders are feeling. I live very close to the town where the school children were from that died on that flight. Small world I guess. Back then we would never have thought that someone would shoot one of our airlines down. But today is a different situation altogether. I do believe that the government just tells us enough to keep us content and happy. I think if we really knew everything we would probably have citizens uprising against the government. How much do we really know...not from the news stations. So sometimes forum like this get us thinking and checking into news like this.

-- Helena (windyacs@npacc.net), February 28, 2002.

Hello Wondering,

It is true that the topic DOES NOT relate to homesteading but, it is a good reason to homestead! Get out of those CITIES and move to a safer place in the country!

Sincerely,

Ernest

-- http://communities.msn.com/livingoffthelandintheozarks (espresso42@hotmail.com), February 28, 2002.

What was it that the pilot said as the plane went down?

-- Lynn (lynnannmb@hotmail.com), February 28, 2002.

Amen to that, Ernest!

Homesteadin, living a good life in a natural environmentis what this forum is all about. The above postings are a perfect example of the REASONS why people should remove themselves from an unnatural setting and set about learning how to live simply, creatively, and AWAY from concrete, steel, and asphalt.

But too many never will, and more's the pity. We grieve every day for the precious lives lost, and celebrate the time they had on this earth. And we pray for those they left behind, that they find peace and make a secure future for their children.

Off my soapbox, no more ranting. Not good for me. Goin' out back to watch the sun through the pines and the maples leafing out. Listen to the birds sing and watch the spring bulbs come through the dirt.

Peace to all.

-- HarleyinFL (cruisindog@juno.com), February 28, 2002.

The original poster, "none@this.time," which is not a valid e-mail address, repeats a media news story that has holes big enough in it to drive a 747 through sideways.

"Bob Reyolds-Newswatch 16: "So what you're telling me, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that in your heart of hearts, TWA Flight 800 was hit by at least one Missile? Fred Meyer: "At least one missile yes. Bob Reynolds:"And that's based on your military experience?" Fred Meyer: "Yes sir" "

The reporter leads the newsmaker to a conclusion. The respondent is answering only from his own opinion and what ever he might have seen. If he is a pilot with the military, he knows full well not to trust what he sees, especially in night flying.

"All of this is Emotionally painful for Don Nibert. His 16-year-old daughter Cheryl, a student at Montoursville High School died on flight 800."

Media ploy to bring in sympathy to the point to be maid. Reporter Reynolds can not possibly know whether or not "all this is emotionally painful for Don Niebert." Unless he can see inside Niebert's head, that is. He can assume, as we all can, that it was painful. His remarks, however, are not objective and can only serve an end that is not objective journalism. Anybody remember objective journalism?

"Don Nibert believes our government is covering up. "To many indications that something happened and I don't think we're being told the truth," Don Nibert said."

Great quote to fuel suspicions and the story. The remark is without any documtation or source or specifics.

"For Fred Meyer, it has a deeper meaning. He said, "Had the administration faced the fact that this was probably a terrorist attack in 1996 which killed 230 people, they might have been prepared to avoid the death of 6000 people in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon"

Now that sentence is full of holes. Reporter Reynolds can not possibly know what is going on in Fred Meyer's head. The quote repeated, if accurate, is exaggeration. That knowing a missle had been fired at an aircraft in 1996 somewhere has absolutely nothing to do with trying to be prepared for a terrorist move of the enormity of the 9/11 event.

I go through all this only to illustrate that if you will only follow news without emotional involvement, you can come to better understand what is going on and what is serving only media interests in making money for corporate owners and stirring uneasyness that some Media Consultants say will bring you back to watch their next "show."

To learn the truth, or at least to feel you've made a good try, forget US TV, forget US "talk radio" with its own brand of irresponsibility and use your head. A good short wave radio might help learn what is really going on outside the borders of the U.S. (and get a more objective view of some things going on inside the U.S. that never make the nightly news show's sound bites. Closer to home, where you live, there no longer is a responsible attempt at local radio broadcasting in the public "interest, convenience and necessity," as the law once stipulated. Ownership is corporate and elsewhere, pay won't equal McDonalds, and no one is there to teach responsibility or give time to check facts. A scanner radio will tell you more.

Musings from an old media journalist at home deep in the Arkansas Ozarks.

Vern M

-- Vern M. (modeland@runningriver.com), February 28, 2002.

Vern : You respond to: "Bob Reyolds-Newswatch 16: "So what you're telling me, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that in your heart of hearts, TWA Flight 800 was hit by at least one Missile? Fred Meyer: "At least one missile yes. Bob Reynolds:"And that's based on your military experience?" Fred Meyer: "Yes sir" "

The reporter leads the newsmaker to a conclusion. The respondent is answering only from his own opinion and what ever he might have seen. If he is a pilot with the military, he knows full well not to trust what he sees, especially in night flying.

John: I ask you this. He sees what he sees, has more than the "average" amount of experience and interprets what he sees based on his experience yet he's not supposed to at least entertain the thot that his interpretation of events are possibly correct? Of course its his opinion. Who elses should he use?

"All of this is Emotionally painful for Don Nibert. His 16-year-old daughter Cheryl, a student at Montoursville High School died on flight 800."

Media ploy to bring in sympathy to the point to be maid. Reporter Reynolds can not possibly know whether or not "all this is emotionally painful for Don Niebert." Unless he can see inside Niebert's head, that is. He can assume, as we all can, that it was painful. His remarks, however, are not objective and can only serve an end that is not objective journalism. Anybody remember objective journalism?

John: I agree. The media loves to play up emotional sensationalism. "So sorry your son just got killed. How do you feel about that?" Duhhh!

"Don Nibert believes our government is covering up. "To many indications that something happened and I don't think we're being told the truth," Don Nibert said."

Great quote to fuel suspicions and the story. The remark is without any documtation or source or specifics.

John: Agreed, certainly not conclusive but not out of hand dismissable either.

"For Fred Meyer, it has a deeper meaning. He said, "Had the administration faced the fact that this was probably a terrorist attack in 1996 which killed 230 people, they might have been prepared to avoid the death of 6000 people in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon"

Now that sentence is full of holes. Reporter Reynolds can not possibly know what is going on in Fred Meyer's head. The quote repeated, if accurate, is exaggeration. That knowing a missle had been fired at an aircraft in 1996 somewhere has absolutely nothing to do with trying to be prepared for a terrorist move of the enormity of the 9/11 event.

John: Strictly speaking I agree but if a missle was indeed fired, as some seem to have reason to believe its not much of a stretch at all to attribute a missle attack on a terrorist. It wasn't the boy scouts. If there is even a suspicion that it was a terrorist the appropriate response might indeed have prevented 9/11 because of the beefed up security.

I go through all this only to illustrate that if you will only follow news without emotional involvement, you can come to better understand what is going on and what is serving only media interests in making money for corporate owners and stirring uneasyness that some Media Consultants say will bring you back to watch their next "show."

To learn the truth, or at least to feel you've made a good try, forget US TV, forget US "talk radio" with its own brand of irresponsibility and use your head. A good short wave radio might help learn what is really going on outside the borders of the U.S. (and get a more objective view of some things going on inside the U.S. that never make the nightly news show's sound bites. Closer to home, where you live, there no longer is a responsible attempt at local radio broadcasting in the public "interest, convenience and necessity," as the law once stipulated. Ownership is corporate and elsewhere, pay won't equal McDonalds, and no one is there to teach responsibility or give time to check facts. A scanner radio will tell you more.

John: All in all, probably good advice Vern but just because a story is poorly reported doesn't make it less true IMO. I'm not saying it is true but I'm not saying its not either. I do not trust the government to tell me the truth about anything.

-- john (natlivent@pcpros.net), March 01, 2002.

Thank you, everyone who contributed.

When I originally read this story, my thoughts went in many directions. I tend to examine both sides of any issue, most of my musings were mentioned in the above postings of others. I have not formed an opinion on the cause of the crash. Without more information, it would be impossible for me to do so.

Vern you wrote; The original poster, "none@this.time," which is not a valid e-mail address, repeats a media news story that has holes big enough in it to drive a 747 through sideways.

I agree. My point is that when stories such as this get people thinking,(as it did myself) people naturally ask questions to satisfy their "curiosity." (for lack of a better word) With so MANY unanswered questions, people NEED to start asking questions. I'm also speaking generally here, this story is only one in the big pool.

I also must say Vern, that coming from an "old media journalist", I'm surprised that your post tended to tear apart the story presented rather than investigate its cause.

-- Wondering... (none@this.time), March 01, 2002.

I guess I made my point, which is/was to not let a bent tree give you an impression of having seen the forest. I took apart the one news story as presented to show some early flags that should get you to thinking for yourself and not going along with what has become a too pervasive theme of "conspiracy!" Ya done good. Now, pass it along.

As a life-long seeker of truth, this writer tried to never put anything on the air or into print that did not stand the test of checking sources and asking hard questions of them. Today's journalists are much too easily accepting anyone's opinions, accusations and self-serving comments.

In a society of sophisticated liars, we need more than ever to be alert to be really informed. Never let thinking for yourself get out of style. Teach those who depend on you how to do it and just how important that may be to surviving as well as understanding.

Vern

-- Vern (modeland@runningriver.com), March 01, 2002.