Re: TWA 800 - Friendly Fire?

<pstira@escape.com> wrote:
> The one thing I have been thinking about, since the very beginning, is 
> am I the only person who feels this might have been somewhat less than
> unintentional?  It sure would be easy to take those rights away if
> everyone is afraid for their "lives"...
> Look at what has been happening in the news lately, and look at how 
> much is "unexplained" or flimsy evidencially speaking, in the very 
> least.
> If, for instance, the government wanted to cut down on civil
> liberties/civil rights, it would seem MIGHTY CONVENIENT that so much 
> is "accidentally" happening so close together.
> Ditto with the Olympics thing.
> I vote something is QUITE fishy, and I guess I hope I'm not the only 
> one paranoid enough to feel the same.

Sure something's fishy. Look at the technological capabilities they
have, and we're not keeping up with them. One example:

L.A. riots, 1992. 6,500 or so fires, unknown arsonist(s). But very
convenient for clearing certain properties if you're putting in a new
freeway or subway tunnel, and you don't want to have to fight with all
the riffraff who might be resistant to getting up and moving.

So how do you light all those fires? Do it the hard way - plant the
stuff (6,000-plus times!) and hope nobody catches your guys, or light
'em up from satellites, using "new experimental" focused energy. Gosh,
Mr. Bill, would they do that? Guess it depends on what you're willing to
believe. Remember what Tom Wolfe wrote about? "The reason the folks on
the East Coast (circa 1700's) were such easy victims for the pirates was
the fact that they couldn't comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the
pirates really were." (quote approximate).

Okay, I'm not paranoid, but I *do* see that something's fishy.

How come the whitehouse Chief of Staff announces just a few days 
after the explosion that an explosive chemical residue was found, and
then -- the whitehouse distances itself from his report?!?!

Supposedly now, we're hearing that the early tests were ruled 
"inconclusive".  Hmmmm.  I'm curious what criteria determines whether or 
not a test can be considered "conclusive".  Might political volatility 
have something to do with it?

The US has our best men working on this - they are professionals.  Of 
course if an early test came up positive, they would devote all 
necessary resources at the highest priority to investigate that
angle completely, and immediately clear up any doubts about the validity 
of the test in question.  For this reason, I can't swallow that "they 
didn't know" about the chemical residue until recently.  Especially with 
the Chief of Staff's early remarks.

We've been told since day one that this investigation were being handled 
"as if it were a crime."  In my mind, I've been hoping that this might 
shed some positive light on the contradictory signals we're being fed.  
Although it's pretty clear they're definitely withholding information, it 
just _might_ be that this is being done in a fashion intended to help 
with the investigation.  Remember the World Trade Center investigation?
They knew immediately what type of vehicle the blast was in - but they 
deliberately gave false information to the media.  They said they were 
looking into a blue stationwagon or some such BS, and the culprits believed 
it!  Federal agents staked out the rental agency where the _van_ was rented
from and caught one of the buggers, who thought the investigation was way 
off track.  Yes!!!

In other words, I'm willing to wait patiently for the truth to come out, 
if the professionals in charge deem it advantageous for the course of the 
investigation.  

Of course the NTSB is behaving like a puppet.  I'm sure the Navy & FBI can 
do a much better job at the investigation than the NTSB could ever hope 
to do.  This is as it should be.

But if we find out *AFTER* the presidential election that it was friendly 
fire which downed TWA 800, then...  words fail me regarding such a scenario.

(FYI One witness described hearing "a sonic boom" (which is consistent with 
the supersonic flight of a missile.)  It is significant that he described 
it as a sonic boom.  He described first hearing it, then looking up to 
witness the explosion.  He was interrogated at length about this detail, 
since as with lightning, the sound should have followed the explosion by 
several seconds.  Unless of course, it was a true sonic boom caused by a 
missile on its way up to the plane.  Recall the other reports of "streaks of 
light" leading up to and hitting the plane.  Hmm!!!)

ObCrypto: Learning the truth about the government's use of the media, 
especially regarding when & how we are manipulated, can tell us _much_ 
about the relevancy of crypto in our daily lives.  In particular, 
learning the truth is a skill we cannot allow to atrophy if this is the 
same political entity which seeks to implement key escrow.  I say, the 
thread is relevant.  Fortunately this forum reaches some of the most
intelligent and well-informed minds on the net.

"Douglas B. Renner" <dougr@skypoint-gw.globelle.com> writes:
> with the investigation.  Remember the World Trade Center investigation?
> They knew immediately what type of vehicle the blast was in - but they
> deliberately gave false information to the media.  They said they were
> looking into a blue stationwagon or some such BS, and the culprits believed
> it!  Federal agents staked out the rental agency where the _van_ was rented
> from and caught one of the buggers, who thought the investigation was way
> off track.  Yes!!!

I recall that the perp rented the vehicle and gave a $400 cash deposit.
He subsequently returned to the rental agency, stated that the vehicle
was stolen, and demanded his cash back. And the Oklahoma City perp was
caught speeding with no licence plates.

Shit. Whoever recruits those terrorists needs a better h.r. department to
screen for stupidity. :-)

> thread is relevant.  Fortunately this forum reaches some of the most
> intelligent and well-informed minds on the net.

Why, thank you!

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM writes:

>I recall that the perp rented the vehicle and gave a $400 cash deposit.
>He subsequently returned to the rental agency, stated that the vehicle
>was stolen, and demanded his cash back. And the Oklahoma City perp was
>caught speeding with no licence plates.

>Shit. Whoever recruits those terrorists needs a better h.r. department to
>screen for stupidity. :-)

No, actually they are doing an outstanding job of finding a bunch of
usefull idiots to do the dirty work for them. And of course, serving them
up to law enforcement for punishment, while they remain behind the scenes.

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
> "Douglas B. Renner" <dougr@skypoint-gw.globelle.com> writes:
> with the investigation. Remember the World Trade Center investigation?
> They knew immediately what type of vehicle the blast was in - but they
> deliberately gave false information to the media.  They said they were
> looking into a blue stationwagon or some such BS, and the culprits 
> believed it!  Federal agents staked out the rental agency where the 
> _van_ was rented from and caught one of the buggers, who thought the 
> investigation was way off track.  Yes!!!

> I recall that the perp rented the vehicle and gave a $400 cash
> deposit.
> He subsequently returned to the rental agency, stated that the vehicle
> was stolen, and demanded his cash back. And the Oklahoma City perp was
> caught speeding with no licence plates.

> Shit. Whoever recruits those terrorists needs a better h.r. department 
> to screen for stupidity. :-)
> thread is relevant.  Fortunately this forum reaches some of the most
> intelligent and well-informed minds on the net.

> Why, thank you!
> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
> Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013,
> 14.4Kbps

Per the tendency of federal agencies to let it be publicly known that 
they lie openly to trap suspects (and apparently this technique has been 
OK'd for local enforcement as well):

This is going to backfire on them (and us), and probably has already.
If govt. protects its "sources and methods", however nefarious, to the 
extent that the public is never asked to assent to these methods (even 
though a few of us know about them anyway), then the public doesn't have 
to become overtly cynical about what's going on.

On the other hand, whether you think the people have this much right to 
know or not, when the public consciousness embraces the concept that the 
police openly and regularly lie (and that it's a "good thing" they do), 
the result will be greater public cynicism, distrust, paranoia, hatred, 
and anarchy (the bad kind).

Last night I started reading "Main Justice," by Pulitzer-winner Jim McGee
and Brian Duffy, about the DoJ's recent history of organized crime/drug
war fighting and wiretapping. 

The book describes how Federal agencies have been granted more leeway in
terms of entrapment thanks mostly to a conservative Supreme Court. Scary
stuff. 

-Declan


On Mon, 9 Sep 1996, Dale Thorn wrote:
> 
> Per the tendency of federal agencies to let it be publicly known that 
> they lie openly to trap suspects (and apparently this technique has been 
> OK'd for local enforcement as well):
> 
> This is going to backfire on them (and us), and probably has already.
> If govt. protects its "sources and methods", however nefarious, to the 
> extent that the public is never asked to assent to these methods (even 
> though a few of us know about them anyway), then the public doesn't have 
> to become overtly cynical about what's going on.
> 
> On the other hand, whether you think the people have this much right to 
> know or not, when the public consciousness embraces the concept that the 
> police openly and regularly lie (and that it's a "good thing" they do), 
> the result will be greater public cynicism, distrust, paranoia, hatred, 
> and anarchy (the bad kind).
> 


// declan@eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan@well.com //

I think the other big, if not worse, question is, why is it that Flight 
800 is still so STEADILY in the news, even now?  They seem to be really 
good at fighting back and forth with themselves with the same outcomes.
I don't like this, one bit.

I haven't seen this much annoying trash on the news since OJ Shrimpson 
was around.

I don't watch the news anymore.  I don't want to know what I am becoming 
a part of (outlawing illegal immigrants from being able to go to school, 
nationwide ID cards, being a number (and this only began in the late 70's),
and so on and so forth -- we are becoming that which we sought to escape 
in the 1400's, and that frightens the hell out of me.)

--Millie.

OBcrypto:  There is a product in beta-testing stage now called Secure 
Mail (and secure web protocol).  I haven't gotten around to testing it 
yet, but have the facts, if anyone wants them -- I'd like to see this 
pseudoencryption go down the toilet.  It makes me ill, though not as ill 
as the original subject of this post... :)

Have a nice day.