Investigators from the first probe of doomed TWA Flight 800 called Wednesday for a new examination of the tragedy, resurrecting old claims that a missile downed the plane.

A half-dozen people involved in the original inquiry into the July 17, 1996, blast that killed 230 people on a Paris-bound flight out of JFK Airport claimed new evidence supports the oft-suggested missile theory…

The investigators – in a conference call promoting an upcoming documentary, “Flight 800″ – charged the original probe ignored testimony from nearly 700 eyewitnesses and included evidence tampering…

New evidence suggests there were more than 100 traces of explosives found in the plane’s wreckage, and internal CIA documents suggest a cover-up, they charge…

And they referenced FAA radar evidence that reportedly pointed to a missile hit – although they declined to speculate if it was a terrorist attack or friendly fire…

Tom Stalcup, joined Wednesday by former NTSB investigator Hank Hughes and former TWA investigator Bob Young, said they had no doubt that a missile was responsible for the plane’s demise…

Skeptics and conspiracy theorists have long argued that TWA 800 was shot down by the U.S. Navy or hit with a terrorist rocket.

It’s easy to understand why these folks didn’t want to speak up while still on the payroll of the NTSB. How often do whistleblowers actually get the protection they’re promised?

  1. keaneo says:

    I’m surprised Uncle Sugar didn’t try to shoot down the Aeroflot plane carrying Edward Snowden to Moscow, this morning. Maybe they’ll try on the connection to Cuba – or Venezuela.

  2. MikeN says:

    And why did the government feel the need to lie about a drug training exercise on the same plane earlier in the day?

    Why did they make up a second interview with Mike Wire, only discovered because he had a name that didn’t get blacked out in documents?

  3. MikeN says:

    “Let me say something else about this eyewitness [Wire] because I think this is interesting. He was an important eyewitness to us. And we asked the FBI to talk to him again, and they did. In his original description, he thought he had seen a firework and that perhaps that firework had originated on the beach behind the house. We went to that location and realized that if he was only seeing the airplane, that he would not see a light appear from behind the rooftop of that house. The light would actually appear in the sky. It’s high enough in the sky that that would have to happen.

    When he was reinterviewed, he said that is indeed what happened. The light did appear in the sky. Now, when the FBI told us that, we got even more comfortable with our theory.

    The italics are mine. There was no second FBI interview. The government also recorded a second FBI interview with Witness #73, the witness about whom I spoke briefly on CNN. In her second interview #73 confessed to drinking several “Long Ice Teas,” and these impaired her judgment. In real life, she doesn’t drink, did not even know what a Long Island Ice Tea was. As in Wire’s case, there was no second interview. To make its theory that a mechanical failure brought down TWA 800 work, the CIA manufactured interviews for two essential eyewitnesses and ignored McClaine. ”

    McClaine was piloting another aircraft, and according to the CIA scenario, part of the plane went right up into his path. McClaine insists this did not happen. He also would have been unable to see a missile, so using him to argue against it is weird.

    Plus, why was the CIA involved?

  4. JimD says:

    Pierre Salinger was telling us this at the time, and they called him a crackpot !!!