Could there be a connection?
Sep 19th, 2001, 03:16 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Could there be a connection?
I have been thinking about other airline crashes in wake of the WTC disaster, and something occurred to me. I'm posting these details from memory, so correct me if I have something wrong.
Before the Atlanta Olympics, TWA flight 800 crashed after departing from New York. The circumstances of the crash made the investigation difficult, as it crashed in water. After a long investigation, we were told that the flight crashed because of a spark in a nearly-empty fuel tank. No plane before or since ever crashed in this fashion, even though this fuel system design has been used for a really long time without a failure over millions of flights. The fuel tank was allegedly nearly empty, even though the plane was about to make a trans-Atlantic flight. Reports that there was a flash in the sky before the main explosion were discounted.
More recently, we had the Egypt Air crash. An Egyptian pilot with no signs of mental illness or depression makes some sort of religious statement and then deliberately crashes the plane into the sea. I believe the jet took off from New York.
Then, of course, we have 4 planes hijacked last week.
I am starting to think that these events could be connected. Is it possible that TWA 800 crashed due to a terrorist attack (bomb), but the government, well, hushed it up to avoid the sort of hysteria we are now seeing that is destroying the travel industry and the economy? Is it possible that the Egypt Air pilot was an operative of Bin Laden, and the government either never learned that or decided to keep it quiet? It is certainly curious that these things have all happened near New York, and it wouldn't be the first time the government has withheld information from the public . . . for its own good, of course.
Normally, I don't buy conspiracy theories, but this seems worth considering to me. Perhaps no one here can shed any real light on it one way or the other, but it did occur to me, so I thought I'd see what you all think.
Before the Atlanta Olympics, TWA flight 800 crashed after departing from New York. The circumstances of the crash made the investigation difficult, as it crashed in water. After a long investigation, we were told that the flight crashed because of a spark in a nearly-empty fuel tank. No plane before or since ever crashed in this fashion, even though this fuel system design has been used for a really long time without a failure over millions of flights. The fuel tank was allegedly nearly empty, even though the plane was about to make a trans-Atlantic flight. Reports that there was a flash in the sky before the main explosion were discounted.
More recently, we had the Egypt Air crash. An Egyptian pilot with no signs of mental illness or depression makes some sort of religious statement and then deliberately crashes the plane into the sea. I believe the jet took off from New York.
Then, of course, we have 4 planes hijacked last week.
I am starting to think that these events could be connected. Is it possible that TWA 800 crashed due to a terrorist attack (bomb), but the government, well, hushed it up to avoid the sort of hysteria we are now seeing that is destroying the travel industry and the economy? Is it possible that the Egypt Air pilot was an operative of Bin Laden, and the government either never learned that or decided to keep it quiet? It is certainly curious that these things have all happened near New York, and it wouldn't be the first time the government has withheld information from the public . . . for its own good, of course.
Normally, I don't buy conspiracy theories, but this seems worth considering to me. Perhaps no one here can shed any real light on it one way or the other, but it did occur to me, so I thought I'd see what you all think.
Sep 19th, 2001, 03:57 PM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
While there were numerous theories thrown about for TWA 800, aviation expert John Nance was on Nightline (or some other show) last week and, when the topic of the Egyptair crash came up, Nance asserted that was no scenario he was aware of that explained it other than an intentional dive by the relief pilot, presumbly to commit suicide.
As I recall, the flight data recorder showed flaps on one wing raised and flaps on the other wing lowered, presumably indicating some kind of a struggle between the relief pilot, and the primary pilot who had returned to the cabin, as the plane dove toward the water.
When Ted Koppel interviewed a representative of the Egyptian government back around the time of the crash, he asserted that a suicide would be "impossible" since Islam forbids suicide. When Koppel asked him about suicide bombers, he said something like "that's different", a curious distinction at best.
As I recall, the flight data recorder showed flaps on one wing raised and flaps on the other wing lowered, presumably indicating some kind of a struggle between the relief pilot, and the primary pilot who had returned to the cabin, as the plane dove toward the water.
When Ted Koppel interviewed a representative of the Egyptian government back around the time of the crash, he asserted that a suicide would be "impossible" since Islam forbids suicide. When Koppel asked him about suicide bombers, he said something like "that's different", a curious distinction at best.
Sep 19th, 2001, 04:28 PM
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Is that really true that the fuel tank was nearly empty? How could that be true for a plane just beginning a transAtlantic flight???? I don't remember hearing this before....
One of the young girls on the plane lived in our town and, in fact, had been in a school play with one of my daughters. Such a tragedy to lose her and everyone else on that flight.....
One of the young girls on the plane lived in our town and, in fact, had been in a school play with one of my daughters. Such a tragedy to lose her and everyone else on that flight.....
Sep 19th, 2001, 06:07 PM
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Egypt Air crash was thoroughly investigated by both US and Egyptian intelligence agencies. In the end, both concluded that this was a sabotaged flight and there was never mention of outside influence.
If a terrorist attack is not publicized as such, the terrorists' objectives cannot be met. Publicity is critical.
I have to believe that if either of these flights were downed due to terrorist schemes, that the trail of incrimination would have been obvious, and intentional.
If a terrorist attack is not publicized as such, the terrorists' objectives cannot be met. Publicity is critical.
I have to believe that if either of these flights were downed due to terrorist schemes, that the trail of incrimination would have been obvious, and intentional.
Sep 20th, 2001, 04:51 AM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think some of you misunderstand what I'm trying to say about the Egypt Air flight. Yes, it was thoroughly investigated and found to be a suicide, and I concur. What was never determined was why this otherwise stable pilot would want to kill himself, let alone a plane full of innocent people. If he was a follower of Bin Laden, the motive becomes clear, no?
As for whether publicity is crucial for terrorists to achieve their objective, Jack, you are correct. And that would be yet another reason that our government might deem it best to keep any connection to Bin Laden quiet.
As to whether I have too much time on my hands, well, at least I'm not proposing that people in high-rise buildings be given parachuts.
As for whether publicity is crucial for terrorists to achieve their objective, Jack, you are correct. And that would be yet another reason that our government might deem it best to keep any connection to Bin Laden quiet.
As to whether I have too much time on my hands, well, at least I'm not proposing that people in high-rise buildings be given parachuts.
Sep 20th, 2001, 05:20 AM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
This subject isn't funny, but the part about the "hush up" by "the government" made me laugh.
I worked in the federal government for 20 years, and I can tell you that if there's one institution that cannot keep a secret, it's the federal gov't. All it takes to break the secrecy are one disgruntled ex-employee or one person with a hankering to write a book.
"Government secret" is a contradiction in terms.
I worked in the federal government for 20 years, and I can tell you that if there's one institution that cannot keep a secret, it's the federal gov't. All it takes to break the secrecy are one disgruntled ex-employee or one person with a hankering to write a book.
"Government secret" is a contradiction in terms.
Sep 20th, 2001, 05:54 AM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
How naive fed is. Fed, there have been government scandals and cover-ups in the past that took a long time to come out. The Tuskegee syphillis experiment is one. The fibs about the casualty figures in Vietnam are another. Give me a few minutes and I can come up with more, not to mention the ones we still may not know about.
Sep 20th, 2001, 06:44 AM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Have you taken time to read the NTSB reports on TWA and Egypt Air? This organization, under Jim Hall's leadership, conducted thorough investigations. These were not terrorist acts, although that was many's first conclusion in the heat of the event. Ciao
Sep 20th, 2001, 09:46 AM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
L, I recall that when the NTSB issued its report on TWA 800, there was actually some disagreement. Some people who understand these things believed that you really can't build a convincing case for the "spark in the fuel tank" scenario and believe the cause should have been left as "unknown."
My dad is an airline mechanic, and he always thought the random spark in the tank theory was really not very credible. He also thinks that since so many planes have flown this design for so long under so many different conditions without incident, it is unlikely that there was just a random failure and bad luck. Because the plane crashed in water, he doesn't see how you can exclude the possibility of an incendiary device near the tank.
And of course, L, if it was deemed best that the "real cause" not be disclosed to the public for national security reasons and to avoid hysteria, the fact that the NTSB report dismisses terrorism as a cause isn't really conclusive, is it?
On Egypt Air, I haven't read the reports myself, but I'd be surprised if the NTSB ever explained why the pilot committed suicide. The last I heard, the cause of his behavior is unknown, which is why Egypt still refuses to believe it was a suicide.
And no, I haven't read the formal NTSB reports. Even I don't have that much time on my hands.
My dad is an airline mechanic, and he always thought the random spark in the tank theory was really not very credible. He also thinks that since so many planes have flown this design for so long under so many different conditions without incident, it is unlikely that there was just a random failure and bad luck. Because the plane crashed in water, he doesn't see how you can exclude the possibility of an incendiary device near the tank.
And of course, L, if it was deemed best that the "real cause" not be disclosed to the public for national security reasons and to avoid hysteria, the fact that the NTSB report dismisses terrorism as a cause isn't really conclusive, is it?
On Egypt Air, I haven't read the reports myself, but I'd be surprised if the NTSB ever explained why the pilot committed suicide. The last I heard, the cause of his behavior is unknown, which is why Egypt still refuses to believe it was a suicide.
And no, I haven't read the formal NTSB reports. Even I don't have that much time on my hands.
Sep 20th, 2001, 10:52 AM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
No, Egypt never accepted the suicide finding. There was no scientific basis, only a cultural and diplomatic one. Egypt never povided any science to support their assertion. NTSB would not normally seek to explain the reason for a suicide as causation, merely that the evidence at their disposal (reasonable amount) pointed clearly in that direction as causative. The tapes they released appeared to affirm that viewpoint. I suppose it is interesting to speculate that astruggle for the plane brought it down, and that did appear to have occurred, but not because the plane was on course to attack something in the US. But it is interesting nonetheless. In the TWA case, it may be so that a spark in an empty fuel chamber was a reach, but it might be deemed reasonable compared to other ideas. The claim of sabotage or an errant Navy missile firing seemed ludicrous at the time and still does, given the paltry evidence to support them. I suppose one cannot dismiss out of hand various conspiracy theories, but with the NTSB, I would need more than a supposition. NTSB is quite professional in its investigatory work, and I'd be shocked if it were corrupt. All the same, you raise an interesting question about the Egyptian plane. I suppose the FBI will need to revisit the case in this new context. Ciao
Sep 20th, 2001, 11:25 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Actually, L, a fair amount of investigative work may have been overlooked at the time based on what we knew then, and you are right that some of it could be re-visted in light of what we know now.
Aside from checking more carefully into the background of the Egypt Air pilot, perhaps they ought to review maintenance records and schedules to gather a list of ground workers who had access to TWA 800 before the crash. Then we could see if any of them might have connections to the Taliban or bin Laden. At this point, it wouldn't surprise me if they found someone on the ground crew who was in the country illegally, had ties to the Taliban, etc.
It's at least worth a look.
Aside from checking more carefully into the background of the Egypt Air pilot, perhaps they ought to review maintenance records and schedules to gather a list of ground workers who had access to TWA 800 before the crash. Then we could see if any of them might have connections to the Taliban or bin Laden. At this point, it wouldn't surprise me if they found someone on the ground crew who was in the country illegally, had ties to the Taliban, etc.
It's at least worth a look.
Sep 20th, 2001, 01:32 PM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hey Duh & Duh-er, this site is for travel tips, questions,& suggestions.The disaster had very little to do with travel and everything to do about some crazed indiviuals who hijacked planes. I suggest you and 'Starting to Wonder' ought to hook up and watch CSI together.
Sep 20th, 2001, 02:16 PM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bubba, consider this:
You have a laughably narrow view of what is related to travel. There was a hideous TRAVEL disaster, the TRAVEL industry lies in ruins, people are afraid to TRAVEL, the government is considering bailing out part of the TRAVEL industry, people in the TRAVEL industry are getting laid off in droves, and many people are very worried about the security measures in place to prevent this sort of TRAVEL tragedy in the future. Whether you agree with Starting to Wonder or not, past and future safety in the TRAVEL industry is properly on this board.
Now run along to your local tractor pull.
You have a laughably narrow view of what is related to travel. There was a hideous TRAVEL disaster, the TRAVEL industry lies in ruins, people are afraid to TRAVEL, the government is considering bailing out part of the TRAVEL industry, people in the TRAVEL industry are getting laid off in droves, and many people are very worried about the security measures in place to prevent this sort of TRAVEL tragedy in the future. Whether you agree with Starting to Wonder or not, past and future safety in the TRAVEL industry is properly on this board.
Now run along to your local tractor pull.
Sep 20th, 2001, 06:02 PM
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Duh-ee, I thoroughly enjoy the way you try to take ten loose threads and weave a rope (a metaphor in case you wondered). I agree this was a terrible tradegy and yes it did happen to involve an airplane. Are you now going to tell me that we should analyze every car wreck since it also involves a form of transportation? I would even bet that some of them have near empty gas tanks. Hmmmmm-a connection? You & Wonder are truly missing the boat (a pun, in case you're still able to follow along) about the true nature of this site. I would simply say (IMHO)that most Fodorites would prefer to read about travel and fun / leisure, not some 6th degree separation nonsense involving possible empty fuel tanks. Sorry, I got to run as I'm about to succumb (I let you look it up) to the tractor fumes.
