2006-07-15 14:36:57 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Travel ➔ Air Travel
The answer to your question is a flat out YES, to the cover up . But it was not shot down by any missile. The plane came down because there was a small bomb on Bord. It was placed there so that a man in jail and on trial for another bombing could clam his
innocence, in another airline bombing. The F.B.I. dropped the ball. by letting the terrorist make contact with other terrorist and he gave them instructions on how to recreate the bomb that had brought down another flight, that he was on trial for at the time. His thinking was that it would make him look like he was innocent of the charges if another bomb of the same kind brought down another plane. It was the FBI that allowed him to make contact with his fellow terrorists. That's why they had the cover up.
2006-07-15 16:20:06 · answer #1 · answered by loudowsonjr 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Anyone who watches enough military shows on TV has seen a brief cased sized missile launcher that could have taken that plane down. I do not believe it was a U.S. missile though. Is it possible that the same group of people who were responsible for 9/11 were also responsible for Flight 800? I think so.
2006-07-15 14:45:40 · answer #2 · answered by Nc Jay 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do think something strange happened to that flight. If the FAA really believed it was the gas tanks, there would have been a major rehauling of the 747 fleet to correct that problem.
The eyewitness accounts on the Jersey shore saw something shoot up towards the plane and them bamo.
The government lies about so much stuff that you begin to question anything they say. Didn't they learn about lying in grammar school!?!
2006-07-15 14:41:14 · answer #3 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i don't recognize. If it replaced right into a missile strike, I doubt it replaced into terrorists. For a worry attack to artwork, the fellow or team doing it may declare duty. So, IF it replaced right into a missile, it replaced into likely an unintended strike by skill of "pleasant hearth". which could nevertheless be complicated to cover up; it takes somewhat some people to launch this style of missile, and someone may have come ahead by skill of now. nevertheless, it really is plausible. I favor to attend to work out what arguments and information are recommend to counter the valid version.
2016-12-10 10:12:10 · answer #4 · answered by mundell 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi,,, ever since the Kennedy assination,,, i dont trust the Govt one bit.... no kidding,,,
its a cover up........
good luck
2006-07-15 14:41:54 · answer #5 · answered by eejonesaux 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it wsa shot down by the military-belive me i would tell you my source but might get in some troble
2006-07-15 14:43:00 · answer #6 · answered by dalbirmann13 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think there is more to the story than is being disclosed....
2006-07-15 14:40:09 · answer #7 · answered by Gravy Czar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No
2006-07-15 14:40:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i really do not rightly know
2006-07-15 14:47:25 · answer #9 · answered by likeskansas 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
oh I don't think so ...
what do u think ?
2006-07-15 14:40:37 · answer #10 · answered by Samurai 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋