WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO FLIGHT 587?
HOME
MEDICINE
MESSAGES
ABOUT US
WEBRADIO
SPIRITUAL
FHU
OBAMA
SURVIVAL
GUNS


WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO FLIGHT 587?

When all the mediawhores and government suits told us that the American Airlines flight 587 crash of November 12, 2001 was "an accident," one would only have had to look at the known facts -- overlaid with the Law of Probability -- to know that they were lying. Consider: The federal government is on record as saying the crash was "an accident" -- "some sort of engine failure" -- long before they had the voice recorder or the flight data recorder. Curious and suspicious to a very high degree as it's highly unscientific and unprofessional. This even though they have no records of previous airplane crashes showing such unusual "separation of parts" prior to accidental crashes, on the same or similar planes, as was seen in this so-called "accident." Instead, they specifically, clearly and IMMEDIATELY released statements that break with investigatory patterns involving conclusive statements pointing to causes of previous crashes. Highly suspicious, to say the least.
The engine separated from the plane, as did at least one major section of the airfoil structures (tail fin, shown above, being recovered from the waters off of New York, not long after the crash). Reports from multiple pilots -- including one who witnessed the crash and the engine's separation from the plane -- say they saw 2 explosions, coming from where the fuselage meets the wing. The NTSB's nonsense ignores the fact that experts have NEVER heard of mere engine failure, or turbulence, to make engines and tail fins fly off of airplanes -- in this or any other modern aircraft of its type. The facts point to a clear, unmistakable cover-up.

Not only would it be seen as a huge blunder on everyone's part, but it would be seen as a type of victory for terrorism, something our government would loathe to admit. The federal government has been exhibiting -- forever -- a lack of trust and faith in the ability of the American people to handle the truth. They don't think you are "mature enough" to handle the truth. Yes, the lies are mounting up to the sky, and they aren't finished yet. Throughout our recent history, from the JFK assasination, to Jonestown, from flight 800, to Waco, Ruby Ridge, OKC, and 911, We The People "couldn't handle the truth". Even when a host of FBI and BATF agents were clearly cold blooded murderers of innocent American women and children in Waco, anything but the truth was made known, even though what we were told was way beyond preposterous.

With flight 587, they tried the "catastrophic engine failure" story. then, when all the evidence blatently pointed away from that, they had to come up with a different lie. Then they tried out the "turbulence" line. Even though the plane that was supposed to have caused the turbulence was 8 miles away, over 3 miles outside the range that could have any effect on flight 587. Your government doesn't trust you, believe in you, have faith in you, respect you or your judgement and certainly doesn't believe you can deal with the fact that flight 587 was downed intentionally. They want you to keep your head in the sand. How do I know they will never admit this was an attack? From the first news reports, they put out their spin that this was an accident, once they start the lie they never look back.

If your government doesn't trust you, isn't honest with you, lies directly to you, hides facts and avoids discussions of known facts while trying to lure more money out of your pocket and safety from your life..., what does that say about their opinion of you? There is no doubt in my mind that if Richard Reid, the attempted "shoebomber" of ANOTHER American Airlines transatlantic flight, in December 2001, had been successful in setting off his shoebomb, and took down the plane over the ocean, the professional liars in the government and media would be telling us that the crash was caused by "catastrophic engine failure", or by a flock of seagulls being sucked into the jet engines. And no doubt the majority of American people would be sitting there like idiots, believing every word of it, and it would soon be forgotten, just like flight 587.

But what cannot be explained away by the NTSB or FAA is how or why the stabilizer parted company with the aircraft at precisely the point where it joins the fuselage proper. Look at the enlarged photograph above very carefully. It shows very clearly shows not "a piece" of the vertical stabilizer, but all of it. It was a clean break, not torn away unevenly. This flies in the face of the lies the media and the NTSB have told us. Pictures of this critical piece of evidence are now very hard to find, and exactly what the government did with the stabilizer is not clear.

There are absolutely no dents, scratches, on the leading edge or on the panels. This proves the vertical stabilizer was not struck by any other object, in turn proving it was the first component to detach from the aircraft. Clearly this had to be sabotage. Trickier still for the NTSB, FAA and Airbus Industries, was explaining (or NOT explaining) to the general public why, with prima facie evidence proving catastrophic separation along a critical attachment line, the FAA and Airbus Industries failed to immediately ground all Airbus A300-600 models worldwide. This in order to conduct black light inspections of the stabilizer spars, panels, attachment pins, bolts and other critical components. Not only is grounding of this nature a normal operating procedure, it is also a legal requirement. Most readers will remember that all Concorde aircraft were grounded for more than a year after the crash of Air France 4590 at Paris. Concorde's grounding was based mostly on speculation, and partly on trivial circumstantial evidence, flimsier by far than the prima facie evidence already existing in the case of American Airlines Flight 587. In order not to ground all Airbus A300-600 series, the NTSB, FAA and Airbus Industries would have to be convinced that the reason for the crash of Flight 587 was strictly unique, a one-off that could not occur under similar flight conditions to any other Airbus A300-600 worldwide. The only reason unique enough to fit this requirement is an act of terrorism.

The US Government fixated on the co-pilot of Flight 587 noting 'wake Turbulence' from a Japanese Airlines 747 ahead of them. The media took it's cue and was drawing elaborate diagrams of the Airbus A300-600 tearing itself to pieces in the 'tornado-like' wake left behind the JAL 747. This was absolute rubbish, perhaps best illustrated by some of the higher forces all aircraft are designed to withstand. Mach 2 fighters fly in close aerobatics formation all the time. Basically this is a "Diamond Four", where the "boxman" is located at the back center of the diamond, slightly behind and slightly below the leader, with the two wingmen on either side. Though located slightly below the leader to minimize discomfort from his wake turbulence, our vertical stabilizer was intermittently battered by a full 20,000 pounds of thrust from his twin turbojet engines, at a range of only 100 feet, at speeds up to 400 miles per hour. Sure it was uncomfortable, but do you really believe it would be done it at all, if there was the slightest chance of the vertical stabilizer falling off?

Though wake turbulence can be hazardous at times, it really only poses a serious threat to tiny lightweight aircraft like two-seat Cessna and Piper trainers. The notion that the residual wake turbulence from a jumbo one and a half miles on front of American Airlines Flight 587, could have torn its vertical stabilizer off, is absurd. If that were even remotely possible, most of the world's fleet of "heavy" jets would have crashed years ago. But here is the NTSB, with 265 dead, and God knows how many mourners, giving us this claptrap about the tail falling off mysteriously. "No tail fell off, not before the explosion. I swear to that," said retired firefighter Tom Lynch, who was doing his exercise march along Rockaway Beach Boulevard on Nov. 12. "I had my head up taking in that beautiful, clear day and was staring straight at the plane. "It made a bank turn and suddenly there was an explosion, orange and black, on the right hand side of the fuselage. It was a small explosion, about half the size of a car. "The plane kept on going straight for about two or three seconds as if nothing had happened, then 'vwoof' - the second, big explosion on the right wing, orange and black. "It was only then that the plane fell apart. It was after the explosion and I'm telling you, the tail was there until the second explosion."

Lynch, who lives near the crash site in Belle Harbor, claims he has 13 people who saw the plane on fire before the breakup. Until the explosion the tail was intact. He contacted the FBI, NTSB, Rep. Anthony Weiner, and Sens. Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton. "I got no response from anyone," said Lynch, "Sabotage? That's for other people to decide. At first, we hear there were seagulls in the engine, the plane was caught in a jet stream and the tail fell off. No damn tail fell off until after the second explosion." Jim Conrad, who retired last month as a police lieutenant after 34 years, accidentally met Lynch in a dentist's office one week after the crash. "I saw exactly what Tom saw. I was near a stop light at the Marine Parkway Bridge. First, the small explosion.

The plane kept on going, tail intact, then the big explosion and the plane nose-dived. The first thing I said was: ?The bastards did it again.'" For the NTSB to seriously speculate that the tail fell off in the face of so much evidence that it didn't happen, was beyond arrogance. They were treating us all like a bunch of morons. But NTSB spokesman Ted Lopatkiewicz still had the nerve to say: "We don't have any evidence of an explosion [after searching] the wreckage or from the cockpit recorder. It doesn't mean it didn't happen." The government was frantically trying to halt the slide in the airline industry and stock market brought on by the September 11, 2001 attacks in November 2001. The last thing they would have admitted is that this was a terrorist attack. But all of the shrill government lies, and lapdog media nonsense cannot change the fact that everything they said flew in the face of hard and clear evidence.

Marion Blakey, chairwoman of the NTSB, said an initial listen to the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) found nothing "to indicate a problem that is not associated with an accident." What kind of politically correct double-talk was that? In order to include the possibility of a terrorist act, Ms Blakey presumably required a voice with a heavy Arab accent saying: I have a fruit knife in my jacket pocket Captain; fly this aircraft into a building immediately, or I will kill you! But what else could bureaucrat Marion Blakey say? One is reminded of the words of George Orwell, which now seem to mock us from the grave: "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. And as they've done with so many other outrages, they kept lying about flight 587, until the memory of it faded off into the distance. And as it was with flight 800, Jonestown, and Waco, it's been forgotten.

















E-Mail: NORTHSTARZONE@YAHOO.COM

HOME
MEDICINE
MESSAGES
ABOUT US
LISTEN
SPIRITUAL
FHU
OBAMA
SURVIVAL
GUNS