FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2014
CONTACT: Kristina Borjesson – fklb@optonline.net – 201-394-7412; Tom Stalcup, Ph.D. – stalcupt@gmail.com – 774-392-0856
Metro North Railroad Commuter Council Vice-Chairman Neal Zuckerman Will Discuss Call to Rescind Controversial MTA Appointment During a Meeting Next Week with MTA Chairman Prendergast
TWA 800 Project Investigative Team Calls on New York’s MTA to Withdraw Appointment of former National Transportation Safety Board Managing Director David Mayer as New Chief Safety Officer for MTA
Team Submits to MTA Chairman and CEO Thomas Prendergast Affidavit of Retired Senior NTSB Investigator Hank Hughes Detailing Mayer’s Questionable Activities During Crash Investigation
The TWA 800 Project Investigative Team, a group of high-ranking former crash investigators and safety advocates has sent a letter to MTA Chairman and CEO Thomas Prendergast requesting that he rescind the appointment of Dr. David Mayer to the position of Chief Safety Officer.
The team has asked Mr. Prendergast to review the details of an affidavit by Hank Hughes in which the retired senior NTSB accident investigator chronicles highly questionable activities on the parts of participants in the official investigation of the TWA Flight 800 crash, including Dr. Mayer. The team also submitted to Prendergast a DVD of the documentary, “TWA Flight 800” in which Mr. Hughes says of Mayer’s actions, “the things that he did technically were illegal.”
In the affidavit, Hughes describes Dr. Mayer, who was manager of the Flight 800 investigation’s wreckage location data base, making unauthorized and invalid changes to wreckage location tags. Upon confronting Dr. Mayer about it says Hughes, Dr. Mayer told Hughes that he had done so because he didn’t want to “confuse” then-NTSB chairman, Jim Hall.
Hughes also describes Dr. Mayer misrepresenting eyewitness accounts at the NTSB’s final hearing on the crash. During the crash investigation, Dr. Mayer replaced the NTSB’s Norm Weimeyer as Eyewitness Group Chairman after Weimeyer had released a report concluding that “96 out of 102” people who observed the origin of a rising streak of light before TWA 800 exploded in midair said it rose from the surface. Upon replacing Wiemeyer, Mayer replaced this report with his own, that drastically reducing the number of eyewitnesses who had seen the streak of light rise off the earth’s surface. Then, at the final NTSB hearing on the crash, Mayer misrepresented and thereby discredited the accounts of dozens professional and competent eyewitnesses in this group.
For the first time in the history of NTSB aviation crash investigations, eyewitnesses were specifically prohibited from testifying.
The TWA 800 Project Investigative Team’s letter and materials to the MTA’s Prendergast are an important part of a broader effort to expose serious flaws in the original investigation of the Flight 800 crash, hold accountable participants who undermined the investigation and to bring to light physical evidence that was suppressed, ignored or misrepresented. This evidence includes radar data indicating an ordnance explosion caused debris to leave the jetliner’s vicinity at Mach 4 (four times the speed of sound) or better, explosives evidence on interior and exterior wreckage, a random damage pattern to the plane’s interior indicating a high degree of separation of parts associated with an ordnance explosion, spike tooth fractures indicating a high-velocity explosion and eyewitnesses—including former military witnesses experienced with ordnance—who saw a rising streak of light go up to the plane’s location and then saw explosions resembling ordnance or “flak”.
TWA 800 Project Investigative Team members and their supporters include:
Hank Hughes – senior NTSB accident investigator in charge of reconstructing Flight 800’s interior
Robert Young – Chief Accident Investigator and lead investigator for TWA for Flight 800 investigation
Col. Dennis Shanahan, M.D. – NTSB forensic and medical consultant for Flight 800 investigation
Dr. Charles V. Wetli – Suffolk County medical examiner in charge of autopsies of Flight 800 victims
Rocky Miller – Party Coordinator for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union for Flight 800 Investigation
Tom Stalcup, Ph.D. – Physicist and Senior Science Advisor for “TWA Flight 800”
Copies of the team’s letter to Mr. Prendergast, the affidavit and a DVD of the investigative documentary, “TWA Flight 800” will also be sent to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, Governor Andrew Cuomo and other transportation officials with whom Dr. Mayer will be working closely. These include Metro North Railroad Chief Safety Officer Anne Kirsch, Long Island Railroad Senior Director of Safety and Training Loretta Ebbighausen, New York City Transit Vice President of Safety Cheryl Kennedy, VP of Safety Programs and Initiatives at MTA Bridges and Tunnels James Foley and MTA Capital Construction Vice President Peter Kohner.
The Metro North Railroad Commuter Council Vice Chairman Neal Zuckerman Will Discuss The Team’s Request at a Meeting Next Week with MTA Chairman Prendergast
Dutchess County Legislator Joel Tyner Has Joined TWA 800 Project Investigative Team In Their Call For Withdrawal of Mayer’s MTA Appointment.
Metro North Railroad Commuter Council (MNRCC) Vice Chairman Neal Zuckerman has reviewed the Team’s request and plans to discuss the matter directly with MTA Chairman Prendergast at a meeting scheduled for next week. The MNRCC will also discuss the issue at their next meeting. The Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA (PCAC – http://www.pcac.org) has also received the Team’s materials and will discuss the issue during their next meeting in early December. Dutchess County Legislator and PCAC member Francena Amparo will initiate discussion on the topic at the PCAC meeting, and Amparo’s fellow Dutchess County Legislator Joel Tyner has joined the team in their call to have David Mayer’s appointment rescinded.
###
July 17, 2014
For Immediate Release
Contact: Tom Stalcup, stalcupt@gmail.com, 774-392-0856
TWA 800 PROJECT INVESTIGATIVE TEAM RELEASES REBUTTAL OF CIA ANIMATION CLAIMING EYEWITNESSES DID NOT SEE A MISSILE AND WILL APPEAL NTSB PETITION DENIAL IN FEDERAL COURT
CIA Video Was Based on Falsified Eyewitness Reports and
CIA Team Knew the Crash Sequence Animation Was Inaccurate
See Rebuttal here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyluFVxqBlo
In a new video rebuttal of the CIA animation, The TWA 800 Project Investigative Team presents internal CIA documents and key eyewitnesses whose accounts were misrepresented to show how the CIA fabricated a false conclusion in their animation titled “TWA Flight 800: What Did The Eyewitnesses See?”. Mr. Randy Tauss and a team of CIA analysts produced the animation in which they claim that eyewitnesses who said they saw a rising streak of light were actually seeing TWA 800 climbing while on fire. This assessment does not match the radar evidence, black box data, or eyewitness accounts cited in the video. Excerpts from internal CIA memos presented in the rebuttal of the animation show Tauss’s team members acknowledging that the black box and radar data showed that the jetliner did not likely climb and that what eyewitness Mike Wire saw could have been “a missile rising up and striking the aircraft.” Nonetheless, Tauss released the video to the FBI’s James Kallstrom who in turn released it to the public. The misinformation first presented in the CIA video has been regularly cited by Kallstrom, NTSB representatives and the press ever since.
Originally mandated to assess whether or not an international terrorist act downed Flight 800, Tauss and his CIA team went beyond this mandate to produce an animation using false information to show that the eyewitnesses did not see a missile. The CIA, FBI and NTSB all agree that Flight 800’s demise was not caused by a terrorist act.
TWA 800 Project Investigative Team Will Appeal NTSB Petition Denial in Federal Court Before September 2, 2014
In their petition denial, the NTSB cited misinformation on key evidence while ignoring facts provided in the petition about malfeasance in which current NTSB Managing Director David Mayer engaged during the original official crash investigation. The NTSB also ignored the fact that Mr. Mayer’s subordinates reviewing the petition were in a conflict of interest position. Numerous other inaccuracies in the NTSB denial letter along with evidence and analysis the Team submitted in their petition showing original NTSB findings to be erroneous should result in a reversal of the NTSB’s decision and a re-opening of the investigation. The Team will file the appeal before September 2, 2014.
Misinformation on Key Evidence In Petition Denial
NTSB Managing Director David Mayer was Eyewitness Group Chairman during the TWA 800 investigation when he distorted the collective accounts of hundreds of eyewitnesses. He also singled out one critical eyewitness, Joseph Delgado, who clearly saw and drew sketches of a surface launched object rising and colliding with TWA 800. Delgado’s account was important because of his clear viewpoint and the landmarks (two buildings in the distance) he referenced over which the collision occurred. In his testimony at the NTSB’s final hearing on the crash, Dr. Mayer relied on erroneous compass bearing values of 185 and 187 degrees provided by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to misrepresent the actual bearing to where Mr. Delgado described seeing an object he saw an object hit Flight 800. At the final NTSB hearing on the crash, Dr. Mayer said that since two above Defense Intelligence Agency-indicated compass bearings were to the left of where TWA 800 exploded, Mr. Delgado was “not looking in the right direction to see Flight 800 when it would have been struck by a hypothetical missile”. The TWA 800 Project Team traveled to Washington DC with Mr. Delgado to allow him to correct the record. In front of NTSB General Council David Tochen, Chairwoman Deborah Hersman Chief of Staff Thomas Zoeller, and other high ranking officials, Mr. Delgado corrected the record. The TWA 800 Project Team also provided a Google Earth triangulation analysis showing how the line of site over one of the buildings Mr. Delgado referenced lined up precisely with where TWA 800 began its crash sequence, showing that Dr. Mayer misrepresented his observations based on false “compass bearing” data that was indicated by a DIA analyst when Mr. Delgado was not present.
Even after this thorough correction with first-hand testimony from Mr. Delgado and a corroborating triangulation analysis at a meeting at NTSB headquarters (transcripts of this meeting are available upon request), the NTSB’s letter of denial cited the same erroneous DIA “compass bearing” values to defend Dr. Mayers’s erroneous presentation at the final hearing on the crash:
NTSB: “NTSB docket material that ‘the magnetic bearing…185 degrees [and]…187 degrees’…is not consistent with the petitioners claims and the petitioners provide no factual documentation for the different magnetic heading information that they propose”.
The NTSB is clearly wrong. After the Team’s transcribed meeting with the NTSB in January 2014 with Mr. Delgado’s testimony, we provided the NTSB with all of our factual materials including the relevant Google Earth triangulation analysis. Furthermore, the NTSB has for nearly two decades been in possession of factual documentation in docket materials describing in detail the description and position of both buildings referenced by Mr. Delgado to locate them on Google Earth historic maps, which were included as part of our presentation. That factual documentation fully supports the “different magnetic heading information” we provided.
The NTSB also dismissed two radar analyses with the incorrect claim that absolute (as opposed to relative) data points were required for those analyses. This objection is equivalent to saying that only a clock synchronized to GMT time (and not a stop watch) can be used to time a sprinting athlete. In our analysis, as in professional competitions, the time was zeroed out before we made our calculations, as were the other data points. We never claimed to have determined the absolute positions of any objects, because we were only interested in their relative positions and speeds. We note that the NTSB used this same technique and radar data sets in their Addendum to the Main Wreckage Flight Path Study. The speeds gleaned from that analysis are consistent with the last known speed of the aircraft. So while the NTSB used this method for tracking TWA 800 after the first explosion, it now claims the same method is unreliable, and uses that false claim to deny this portion of the Team’s petition. Further, our analysis found that the object(s) were hurled between 1/4 and 1/2 mile perpendicular to the jetliner’s flight path, exactly consistent with the findings of an independent FBI-contracted radar analysis ordered during the original investigation. In the NTSB’s official scenario, no single piece of the aircraft does this.
The NTSB also dismissed the section of the Team’s petition on spike tooth fractures, claiming it contains no new information. The NTSB ignored the fact that erroneous information was provided for the record on spike tooth fractures and that these fractures comprise key evidence pointing to a high-energy explosion far more powerfulthan a fuel-tank explosion. The NTSB also mentioned consulting metallurgist Dr. Barry Shabel in connection with their dismissal of the spike tooth fracture evidence. However, Dr. Shabel told the TWA 800 Project Investigative Team that he did not have the expertise to assess spike tooth fractures or their importance as evidence.
In their petition denial, The NTSB also falsely claimed to have worked independently of the CIA on eyewitness evidence. In his March 15, 1999 letter to Chairman James Hall, CIA Director George Tenet wrote: “During the past 16 months, this [CIA lead] analyst has been working closely with Dr. Mayer of your organization to help with the NTSB’s analysis of the eyewitness reports.”
In its denial, The NTSB also failed to address Dr. Mayer’s malfeasance misrepresenting key eyewitness accounts as Eyewitness Group Chairman and his altering debris field evidence while in charge of managing the debris location database. The NTSB claims the petition provides no proof of Dr. Mayer’s malfeasance in the latter area. We refer the NTSB to Hank Hughes’s Affidavit and the Exhibits attached thereto, which were submitted to the NTSB prior to its denying our petition.
The TWA 800 Project Team will provide a more comprehensive rebuttal of the NTSB’s denial in the coming weeks. Additional information about the NTSB’s misconduct during the original official investigation and our serious concerns about the NTSB’s review process (borne out by the details in their denial of our petition) can be found in our letter of protest and Hank Hughes’s affidavit, both of which are available for review here: https://flight800doc.com/pr/
TWA Flight 800 Media Bulletin
Sources and Misinformation to Avoid
July 8, 2014
With the 18th anniversary of the crash of TWA Flight 800 coming up on July 17, 2014, The TWA 800 Project Team has published a list of commonly used sources on the subject who have persistently provided inaccurate information, along with a checklist of inaccuracies that have been persistently reported in the past along with corrections of those inaccuracies.
Reporters should find this bulletin helpful for avoiding disseminating inaccurate information.
Sources That Have Misrepresented Critical Facts:
Former FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom in charge of determining if the TWA Flight 800 crash was a criminal event: During his investigation, Mr. Kallstrom commissioned a small CIA team led by Mr. Randy Tauss to produce a video titled: “TWA Flight 800: What Did The Eyewitnesses See?”. This video replaced the work of Kallstrom’s own investigators who concluded that there was a “high probability” that a missile was involved in Flight 800’s demise. Kallstrom eventually held a press conference to unveil the CIA video, which was so full of inaccuracies it was tantamount to a disinformation piece. Broadcast nationally, Kallstrom’s press conference pre-empted the NTSB’s first public hearing on the crash by three weeks. Eyewitness evidence was scheduled for presentation at the hearing, but after showing the CIA video, Mr. Kallstrom wrote a formal letter to NTSB Chairman Jim Hall requesting that discussion of the eyewitness evidence be canceled and that no eyewitnesses be called to testify. Chairman Hall complied. To this day, Mr. Kallstrom continues to persistently repeat the inaccurate information and conclusions presented in the CIA video. For example, in June 2013 on the Fox News channel, Mr. Kallstrom said that “80%” of the eyewitnesses heard a sound before seeing anything associated with the crash. This false statement was used to incorrectly conclude that the eyewitnesses couldn’t have seen a missile since sounds from one exploding would have reached witnesses after the explosion. The TWA 800 Project Investigative Team has analyzed the CIA video to show where Randy Tauss’s team misrepresented the facts and eyewitness accounts to arrive at the false conclusion that the eyewitnesses did not see a missile.
Former NTSB Managing Director Peter Goelz: Mr. Goelz is not an airline crash investigator. While he did serve as NTSB Managing Director, his experience at the NTSB and elsewhere is in public relations. Even today, Mr. Goelz is a senior Vice President at O’Neal and Associates, a public relations and lobbying firm. Like Mr. Kallstrom, Mr. Goelz spread misinformation regarding TWA 800. In June 2013, he appeared on CNN’s “The Situation Room” where he misinformed the public throughout his appearance. See: http://youtu.be/9wEl8rMbXKA . Mr. Goelz echoed Mr. Kallstrom’s inaccurate statement that “nearly all” the eyewitnesses heard a sound first, and then looked up. Like Mr. Kallstrom, Mr. Goelz has resorted to insulting those who correct his inaccurate statements using official documents from the investigation.
Former NTSB Board Member John Goglia Mr. Goglia has persisted in making numerous erroneous statements about the evidence and certain facts. Goglia has misused his platform as a contributor to Forbes magazine to write multiple articles rife with inaccuracies. The TWA 800 Project Team revealed many of these inaccuracies here: https://flight800doc.com/fact-checking/fact-checking-john-goglia/
Former NTSB Metallurgist, Jim Wildey:
Mr. Wildey, who had no experience investigating the signatures of missile detonations on aircraft prior to TWA Flight 800, failed to adequately analyze critical damage patterns found throughout the wreckage that were consistent with missile damage. His lack of understanding of critical damage patterns is evident throughout his body of work on TWA 800. At the first NTSB hearing in Baltimore, after Alcoa metallurgist Dr. Barry Shabel—who had no experience investigating “spike tooth” (high energy) fractures—was questioned, Mr. Wildey dismissed the critically important spike tooth fractures found throughout the wreckage, because they were not isolated in one area of the wreckage as would be the case if a bomb had exploded on board the plane or if a missile had detonated upon hitting the jetliner. What Mr. Wildey either ignored or did not know was that a random pattern of spike tooth fractures throughout the plane was consistent with one or more proximity fuse missile detonations occurring a significant distance from where TWA 800 was flying. Along with the spike-tooth fractures, one or more proximity fuse missiles would cause occasional inward penetrations of the fuselage, which were also present. When reviewing two penetrations with “high velocity” characteristics, Wildey attempted to re-create them by firing projectiles out of a gun and into representative aluminum sheets. After not achieving high enough velocities with a gun to re-create the penetrations, Wildey abruptly ended his report and testing. He failed to continue his analysis to determine just how “high-velocity” those penetrations were. Meanwhile, Mr. Wildey has persisted in insisting that a low-velocity deflagration in the fuel tank caused the crash while never explaining how that could be consistent with holes with “high-velocity” characteristics, inward penetrations of the fuselage, spike-tooth fractures and explosives traces throughout the interior and exterior wreckage.
In a CNN documentary that aired on Anderson Cooper’s AC360 show in June 2013, CNN’s David Mattingly held up a piece of charred metal from a close-in detonation of a missile warhead, and Wildey said evidence like that was not found anywhere on TWA 800. Wildey’s statement was misleading because his answer gave the impression that no evidence of any kind of missile was found, when in actuality there is clear and abundant evidence that a proximity-fused missile designed to explode at a distance away from its target caused Flight 800’s demise. Supporting the previously discussed evidence are military witnesses who reported seeing (and FAA radar sites that recorded) a high-energy event that coincided with the beginning of the jetliner’s breakup.
NTSB Director of NTSB’s Office of Research and Engineering, Joseph Kolly: At a July 3, 2013 press briefing held by the NTSB in response to our Team’s submission of a petition to reopen the investigation into the Flight 800 crash, Dr. Kolly misinformed the attending press when he said that explosives like those used in missile warheads would not have been detectable on Flight 800’s wreckage because they would have dissipated completely when the wreckage was underwater. To counter Dr. Kolly’s inaccurate statement regarding explosives dissipating in water, TWA 800 Project Investigative Team scientist Dr. Tom Stalcup cited a Lawrence Livermore Laboratory study [ https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/244673.pdf ] that says explosives like those detected in TWA 800’s wreckage are “practically insoluble in water”. Dr. Stalcup also cited a United States Agency for Toxic Substances report that says “the solubility of RDX [another explosive detected in TWA 800 wreckage] in water is low to negligible. Dr. Kolly cited no first-hand experience in this field, but instead relied on an out-of-context NTSB citation of a study which determined that microbes in the nutrient-rich and shallow New Jersey bay water can dissipate explosives. However, this same study found that when the microbes were killed, there was no detectible dissipation of the explosives in the water. Crucially, Dr. Kolly did not mention this, nor did he mention the fact that the microbe density where TWA Flight 800 wreckage ultimately rested (in the nutrient-depleted waters eight miles offshore in 120 feet deep water) would more likely have resembled the microbe-free water in the study he referenced.
Commonly Reported Inaccurate/Misleading Information and Corrections:
Misleading: Most of the 670 eyewitness observations are consistent with the official cause of the crash. This is true but irrelevant because most of the eyewitnesses did not look soon enough to see the earliest events that caused the crash. Correction: The accounts of the earliest eyewitnesses—more than one hundred–are not consistent with the official cause of the crash because they reported seeing a “streak of light,” “rocket,” flare-like object,” or “missile” rise up and head to where TWA 800 was flying before it exploded. See: http://flight800.org/witness-review.htm
Inaccurate: There was no hard evidence consistent with a missile engagement. This is false. Hard evidence, including inward penetrations into the fuselage, high-energy fractures and explosives residue on interior and exterior wreckage were found. Also, FAA radar recorded debris moving away from the aircraft at speeds of at least four times the speed of sound, which could not have been caused by an exploding fuel tank.
Inaccurate: The NTSB investigation into TWA Flight 800 was painstaking and thorough. This is false. To date, the NTSB has not published an analysis of the high-velocity and radar-recorded explosion that caused the crash. Such a blatant oversight would not have been missed in a thorough investigation. Furthermore, even when this oversight was brought to the NTSB’s attention in a petition for reconsideration in June of 2013, the NTSB still refused to analyze it. Instead, the NTSB falsely claimed that an independent analysis of this data showing that it was from a high-velocity event that was not part of the official crash sequence was flawed. The NTSB incorrectly wrote in its criticism that absolute GPS-type positions (and not data from radar sites) were required, even though other NTSB reports relied on the same radar data to track other objects from the crash. For additional details about the NTSB’s failure to conduct a proper investigation of the crash, see the affidavit of retired senior NTSB accident investigator Hank Hughes, who was in charge of reconstructing Flight 800’s interior: https://twa800project.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/final-final-revised-affidavit.pdf
Misleading: The Victims’ Family Members do not appreciate independent efforts to reopen the case. The false impression here is that all the family members agree on this when in fact, many support the TWA 800 Project Investigative Team’s efforts to get the case reopened. Many family members signed the Team’s petition to reopen the case, and more than twenty family members wrote directly to the NTSB Board in support of the Team. Some of these and other family members participated in a video expressing their support, which can be seen here: http://youtu.be/MGV207dsGo4
Journalists, producers, and correspondents may also value our Team’s fact-checking of the some of the more egregious press reports. The fact-checked reporting can be found here: https://flight800doc.com/fact-checking/
Journalists with questions regarding the evidence pertaining to the TWA Flight 800 case and who seek answers backed by documentation can contact Dr. Tom Stalcup of the TWA 800 Project Investigative Team. Dr. Stalcup’s email is stalcupt@gmail.com and his telephone number is 772 394 7412
——————-
——————–
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Tom Stalcup 774-392-0856 stalcupt@gmail.com
JULY 3, 2014
NTSB Denial of the TWA 800 Project Investigative Team’s Petition Is Rife with Inaccuracies on Critical Evidence and Fails to Properly Consider Petition’s Numerous “Showing[s]” of Erroneous NTSB Board Findings
In its denial of the petition, the NTSB repeatedly claimed that the petitioners had presented no new data, which is one of two criteria for reopening an investigation, the other being “showing that the board’s findings are erroneous” which the NTSB failed to properly consider.
The TWA 800 Project team has reviewed the NTSB’s denial and found it rife with inaccuracies on key evidence. The denial also failed to address altogether the petition’s presentation of facts showing its original findings are erroneous. The key inaccuracies and erroneous original findings in the denial include:
Key Erroneous Original Findings and Inaccuracies in Petition Denial:
The NTSB invoked the same fraudulent distortions of military eyewitness accounts of high ordnance detonations that current NTSB Managing Director Dr. David Mayer presented at the final hearing on the crash. In its denial, the NTSB does not address or refute that Dr. Mayer misrepresented key eyewitness accounts based on a review of the facts. Instead, the NTSB says that Dr. Mayer’s eyewitness presentation was “appropriate and consistent with the actual eyewitness statements”. This is demonstrably false. Leaving out military witness descriptions of an object with a “rocket type motor” seen colliding with TWA 800 or the “flak” explosion seen causing the crash is not appropriate during an investigation looking into the possibility that a missile was involved.
The NTSB cited erroneous “magnetic bearing” readings taken at a critical eyewitness’s location when the eyewitness was not present in an effort to continue the distortion of his account. Dr. David Mayer highlighted these erroneous readings at the final hearing, even though they were clearly false based on this eyewitness’s observations and many detailed sketches. The TWA 800 Project Investigative Team demonstrated this to NTSB officials by presenting a Google Earth analysis with the witness present at the time. The team’s presentation showed the true magnetic bearings which were easily obtained from factual documentation such as landmarks the witness referenced. The analysis and the witness confirmed that the object described rising from the surface and traversing the sky collided with another airborne object on a bearing where TWA Flight 800 lost electrical power. Therefore, the NTSB’s statement that “the petitioners provide[d] no factual documentation for the different magnetic heading information” is false.
The NTSB also erroneously dismissed two radar analyses with the incorrect claim that absolute (as opposed to relative) data points were required for those analyses. This objection is equivalent to saying that only a clock synchronized to GMT time (and not a stop watch) can be used to time a sprinting athlete. In our analysis, as in professional competitions, the time was zeroed out before we made our calculations, as were the other data points. We never claimed to have determined the absolute positions of any objects, because we were only interested in their relative positions and speeds. We note that the NTSB used this exact technique and radar data sets in their Addendum to the Main Wreckage Flight Path Study. The speeds gleaned from that analysis are consistent with the last known speed of the aircraft. So the NTSB used this method for tracking TWA 800 after the first explosion, but now says it is unreliable, and uses that false claim to deny this portion of the Team’s petition. Further, our analysis found that the object(s) were hurled between 1/4 and 1/2 mile perpendicular to the jetliner’s flight path, exactly consistent with the findings in an independent FBI contracted radar analysis ordered during the original investigation. In the NTSB’s official scenario, no single piece of the aircraft does this.
The NTSB dismissed the section of our petition on spike tooth fractures because it says it contains no new information. The NTSB’s ignored the fact that erroneous information was provided for the record on spike tooth fractures and that they comprise key evidence pointing to a high-energy explosion far more powerful than a fuel-tank explosion. The NTSB also mentioned consulting metallurgist Dr. Barry Shabel when dismissing the spike tooth fracture evidence. However, Dr. Shabel told the TWA 800 Project investigative team that he did not have the expertise to assess spike tooth fractures or their importance as evidence.
The NTSB claim that it worked independently of the CIA is false. In his March 15, 1999 letter to Chairman James Hall, CIA Director George Tenet writes: “During the past 16 months, this [CIA lead] analyst has been working closely with Dr. Mayer of your organization to help with the NTSB’s analysis of the eyewitness reports.”
In its denial, The NTSB fails to address Dr. Mayer’s malfeasance misrepresenting key eyewitness accounts as Eyewitness Group Chairman and his altering debris field evidence while in charge of managing the debris location database. The NTSB claims the petition provides no proof of Dr. Mayer’s malfeasance in the latter area. We refer the NTSB to Hank Hughes’s Affidavit and the Exhibits attached thereto, which were submitted to the NTSB prior to its denying our petition.
The TWA 800 Project Team will provide a more comprehensive rebuttal of the NTSB’s denial in the coming weeks. Additional information about the NTSB’s misconduct during the original official investigation and our serious concerns about the NTSB’s review process (borne out by the details in their denial of our petition) can be found in our letter of protest and Hank Hughes’s affidavit, both of which are available for review here: https://flight800doc.com/pr/
###
————————
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Ira Arlook, Fenton, 202 258 5437
MONDAY, JUNE 30, 2014 ira@fenton.com
CITING ONGOING MALFEASANCE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST ISSUES, TWA 800 PROJECT INVESTIGATIVE TEAM SUBMITS LETTER OF PROTEST AND AFFIDAVIT TO NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
After corresponding with the NTSB for more than one year and meeting with NTSB staff to present additional evidence, the TWA 800 Project Investigative Team has submitted a letter of protest (see below) and an affidavit (see below) by retired NTSB senior NTSB accident investigator Hank Hughes.
The letter of protest contains a chronology of the Team’s communication with the NTSB following the submission of their petition in June 2013. The letter details the Board’s failure to publicly correct inaccurate statements their representatives made to the press and public about facts of evidence and eyewitness accounts as well as the Board’s failure to address evidence the Team has provided regarding current Managing Director David Mayer’s role in altering forensic evidence and misrepresenting eyewitness accounts during the original crash investigation.
The Team also expresses their concern about the NTSB staff reviewing their petition being in a conflict of interest position because they are subordinates of Dr. Mayer.
The letter of protest is buttressed by an Affidavit by retired senior NTSB accident investigator Hank Hughes that provides a detailed insider account of who did what during the original crash investigation to alter, taint and suppress evidence. Hughes points to members of the three main agencies involved in the investigation, including the NTSB leadership, FBI agents and a CIA team that produced an animation showing that the eyewitnesses “did not see a missile” as the primary culprits responsible for derailing the original crash investigation.
The letter of protest was submitted in response to the NTSB’s denying TWA 800 victims’ family members request that the Investigative Team be allowed to make an oral presentation to NTSB Board Members pertaining to their petition and additional findings.
__________________
1) Letter of Protest: https://twa800project.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/stalcup-hughes-to-tochen-final.pdf
This letter lists the TWA 8o0 Project Investigative Team’s year-long and ongoing efforts to correct the official record that continues to be tainted by corrupt and misinformed current and former NTSB officials. Nearly all of the Team’s efforts have been blocked by top NTSB officials. For example, we have never been allowed to directly communicate or exchange information with any NTSB staff member reviewing our petition. Also, our repeated requests that the NTSB correct inaccurate information its current and former staff members have supplied to the US media since the submission of our petition have been denied.
2) Affidavit of Henry F. Hughes, senior NTSB investigator (Ret): https://twa800project.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/affidavit-of-hank-hughes.pdf
The letter of protest is buttressed by an Affidavit by retired senior NTSB accident investigator Hank Hughes that provides a detailed insider account of who did what during the original crash investigation to alter, taint and suppress evidence. Hughes points to members of the three main agencies involved in the investigation, including the NTSB leadership, FBI agents and a CIA team that produced an animation showing that the eyewitnesses “did not see a missile” as the primary culprits responsible for derailing the original crash investigation.
###
TWA Flight 800 