Jump to content

The Death of John Kennedy Jr.


Randy Downs
 Share

Recommended Posts

Randy-

I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you'll never get to the truth unless you do the research. Read up on "Pilot's Spatial Disorientation" - its a real phenomena, and can affect any pilot, regardless of experience. If you are going to dismiss it as a significant factor in the crash, at least study it and understand what you are discussing.

I am not going to engage in a dueling report debate. The NTSB can say whatever the frell it wants to after the fact. As opposed to the eyewitness and/or news reports at the time. I'm quite sure the NTSB never "finds anything wrong" when light aircraft carrying important political or social figures (who coincidently actively or on record oppose the the power structure) flies into a mountain or an ocean. 'Cause they're completely trustworthy (KAL 007, and the other passenger jets shot out of the sky).

Steve, i remember that day very well and "fell out of the sky" is exactly the phrase that was being used.

Accepting as the true and authoritative fact the things reporters say on the day of an incident, when they have no real facts themselves, and then rejecting out of hand a long term - extensive expert review of available facts, shows me that you have no interest in finding out the truth about what really happened.

In my opinion, you started this thread already convinced that JFK Jr. was murdered, and wanted confirmation. Sorry that you are now upset that some of us don’t agree with you and won’t simply reinforce your views.

Also - What point were you trying to make about KAL-007?

lol...need i point out (which apparantly i do), you don't me; don't tell me what i think or feel. I don't care if people agree with me or not. That's not the point, that's not ever the point, believe whatever you want it's a semi-free country.

My point is: a report from source A, contradicts a report from source B. You come up with one guy who says visibility was poor, yet here's a statement from a guy who was there and he says visiblity was good.

Ultimately, this is turning into a pile of contradictions. Who's lying? Who's telling the truth? Who has a vested interest in serving the power structure? Does someone have a vested interest in saying it's murder?

You accept as gospel a NTSB report that says: other pilots reported haze. But you totaly blow off the FAA, CNN, and a witness standing on the freaking shore watching aircraft approaching the island: "The FAA issued VFR weather conditions that night, and the weather report (mentioned in the UPI story <upi.html>) called for 8 mile visibility. One witness on shore reported that there was very little haze <hazy.html> and that standing on the shore, he could see airplanes out over the ocean on approach to the island, proof that airplanes on the approach could see the shore. This claim is backed up not only by the weather report of 8 mile visibility, but by a weather radar image <JFK-0340Z.gif> taken at about the time of the crash. This radar image is showing haze and fog along New York and Long Island (if this radar image were of clouds, the FAA would not have declared VFR flying conditions that night) but none at all at Martha's Vineyard. ON the morning after the crash, CNN reported that weather could be ruled out as a factor in the crash!"

Then you want to tell me Some of the "Facts" listed in your previuos post aregarding the JFK Jr. crash aren't really facts. and you go straight into some government report. Are you kidding me?

Just because the NTSB says something, doesn't make it a fact. Government reports don't lie, obfuscate, or sow confusion? Yes, and we were told the truth about TWA 800 right from the start. From Boggs to Jr., it's always "pilot error", and every assassination in the U.S. is done by a "lone nut"; 'cause conspiracies happen all over the globe except for some reason, here in the U.S. (the conspiracy-free zone).

Oh, and btw, i'm not discussing "pilot spatial disorientation", in the end i don't think it really matters 'cause it's guesswork unless you were on that plane at that time and could see JFK Jr's behavior for yourself. Which none of us did. What i did was post a copy of a report i dug up that seems rather cogent to me.

Randy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Randy-

Good luck in your search for truth, maybe you'll find it some day. Not today oviously, but someday when you stop believing everything you hear on CNN and ABC and learn to think.

Well golly, maybe you can teach me how to think, and then we talk about how Oswald killed Kennedy all by himself, Sirhan shot Bobby; then in addition to your dazzling wisdom which outshines the sun, you can teach me the gracious manners which you so constantly display.

Randy :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

From the JFK assassination forum:

I've looked into the JFK, Jr. death a bit myself. There a few main reasons why "conspiracy theorists" find his death suspcious. First, UPI, ABC-TV and local television stations reported that there was a final radio communication from JFK, Jr. at 9:39 p.m., in which he declared all was fine and he was preparing to land. Another researcher sent me a videotape of unedited t.v. coverage of the search for JFK, Jr.'s plane, from local station WCVB. The 9:39 p.m. communication is mentioned several times, and a Coast Guard representative, Todd Burgun, is even interviewed on air, specifically about this communication. So, clearly, it happened. Burgun did not answer questions in an interview about an imaginary communicaton. But, after the plane was found, this communication officially went down the memory hole, and no further mention was made of it. When researchers later obtained videotape of local news coverage of the search, they found that all mention of the 9:39 communication had been edited out. There is no innocent explanation for that, imho. The importance of this communication can not be overstated; the official story is that JFK, Jr.'s plane went into a death spiral at exactly 9:39 p.m. Obviously, that could not be the case if he was talking on the radio, reporting all was well, at that exact moment. There is also the question of the reporter from the local Hyannisport Gazette paper, who reported seeing an explosion in the air, in that exact area, at that exact time. The reporter was never identified, and researchers who attempted to track him down later were rebuffed by the paper. They were first told that the reporter had been mistaken, and then that the reporter no longer worked for the paper, having "gone back to college."

Don I though it made sense to leave discussion of this topic spread out over only two threads rather than 3.

Please cite a reference for your claims that "the official story is that JFK, Jr.'s plane went into a death spiral at exactly 9:39 p.m"

and

A "reporter from the local Hyannisport Gazette paper...reported seeing an explosion in the air, in that exact area, at that exact time"

Also if you could upload some of the video you have to Google Video or YouTube that would be helpful.

Len

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len,

The 9:39 p.m. time of the crash was repeated ad naseum by the media, and emanated from the most official sources like the FAA, the NTSB and the Coast Guard. The reporter from the Hyannisport Gazette definitely existed; WCVB-TV reporter Steve Sbraccia told me in an email that he talked to the guy, but didn't get his name (Sbraccia was not on duty, his wife was sick, and he only arrived on the scene inadvertently, without all his normal reporter trappings). That reporter has still never been identified. Also, lawyer Victor Pribanic heard a "loud bang" in the area where the crash took place, around the relevant time. He contacted local and state police, who passed his information on to the FAA and the NTSB. He was never contacted again.

Even if we assume that the communication from JFK, Jr. happened a few minutes before the alleged death spiral into the water, that would be extremely odd and difficult to explain. Regardless, the 9:39 p.m. call is crucial for me; if it's insignificant, why cover it up? But then again, I don't see how it could be insignificant, since it is pretty hard to accept that a pilot would state that everything was fine one minute, and suddenly plummet out of the sky the next. Someone needs to do real research on this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...since it is pretty hard to accept that a pilot would state that everything was fine one minute, and suddenly plummet out of the sky the next...

Well, depending on what was said, it is actually pretty understandable. I'm not familiar with the details, so any links would be helpful.

Saying "everything is fine" is actually unusual, perhaps a sign of poor radio discipline. You normally only report if anything is wrong, not report all is well. Perhaps what was actually said was a 'OPS NORMAL' call. These are given at regular intervals (usually 30 mins) to report that your operations are normal in cases where you don't have a pre-planned position to be in at that time, such as operating within an area (e.g. airwork below 10,000 [feet] within 20 miles of XYZ [airfield designator]).

Since the aircraft was on a point-to-point flight plan, it is more likely it was a joining call. Again, you don't report that all is well, simply that you are there and your intentions. For example:

"All stations Horn Island, Cessna N123A is 15 miles to the southwest, leaving 10,000 for a right base runway 15, Cessna N123A"

I'm presuming that the aircraft was landing at an 'uncontrolled' airport (i.e. no Air Traffic Control or only a UNICOM).

Anyway, things can go wrong very quickly. There are numerous examples of air accidents happening without the aircraft issuing a Mayday call. To give some related examples which I was personally involved in:

Blown tyre on takeoff - recovered safely.

Double generator failure - total loss of aircraft electrical power and comms - daytime in circuit at military airfield, returned safely.

Double generator failure - total loss of aircraft electrical power and comms - nighttime, over water, below lowest safe altitude whilst doing contact investigation, regained single generator and returned safely.

Loss of braking traction on grass runway - aircraft impacted trees - nill injuries to crew, aircraft eventually flown off island some 4 weeks later.

Things can happen suddenly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len,

The 9:39 p.m. time of the crash was repeated ad naseum by the media,

Then you should have no trouble citing an article, I did a quick Google search and only found references to a radio call or radar contact at that time

and emanated from the most official sources like the FAA, the NTSB and the Coast Guard.

According to the NTSB report the crash happened at “about 2141 eastern daylight time” and indicated the radio call was at “2138” http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief2.asp?ev_id=...A178&akey=1

The “docket” didn’t indicate a crash time http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=2...19354&key=1

The Coast Guard didn’t indicate when the crash took place either, though they placed the call at 9:39.

http://www.john-f-kennedy-jr.com/newshawk.htm

AFAIK the FAA didn’t investigate the crash since the NTSB had jurisdiction.

The Boston Globe had the plane descending too quickly but not yet in a spiral at 9:40 though it said "NTSB officials said there was no word from Kennedy's flight during the last 40 minutes it was known to be in the air." the reporter or "NTSB officials" were of course wrong about that.

http://www.boston.com/news/packages/jfkjr/..._plane_fell.htm

Also, lawyer Victor Pribanic heard a "loud bang" in the area where the crash took place, around the relevant time. He contacted local and state police, who passed his information on to the FAA and the NTSB. He was never contacted again.

Perhaps Evan can expound further on this (as a naval aviator) but I imagine a plane crashing into the water would make a "loud bang".

Regardless, the 9:39 p.m. call is crucial for me; if it's insignificant, why cover it up?

"Cover it up" as in mention it in the NTSB and Coast Guard reports, John-f-kennedy-jr.com, the Boston Globe, AP and UPI etc?

http://www.boston.com/news/packages/jfkjr/search_globe.htm

http://archive.southcoasttoday.com/daily/0...99/a01wn006.htm

<a href="http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/JFK_JR/upi.html" target="_blank">http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/JFK_JR/upi.html</a>

Edits - links added, typos fixed

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...