<font color="#ffccff">I was kind of shocked at this. I remember the incident fairly well and assumed that this guy was just a nut case...now we are finding out he was right. What do you all think?

<font color=orange> Story from www.WND.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jailed author of Flight 800 book vindicated
Justice Department concedes wrongdoing in case against Sanders

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 13, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

<font color=yellow>© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com</font>

A police officer-turned-investigative reporter who was arrested and jailed because his investigation into the mysterious crash of TWA Flight 800 exposed flaws in the government's official probe – and who co-authored an explosive new book on the subject – has found vindication after his five-year legal nightmare.

Journalist James Sanders is the author, along with Jack Cashill, of "TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America," published by WND Books.

In December 1997, Sanders and his wife, Elizabeth, a TWA flight attendant and trainer who knew Flight 800's pilots and had trained many of its flight attendants, were arrested for conspiracy to steal government property after receiving material from a whistleblower within the Flight 800 investigation.

Although Sanders and Cashill have always maintained the charges were trumped up by the government so as to chill and discredit Sanders' investigation into what really happened to Flight 800, it has taken years for official vindication to come.

In an exclusive analysis of the case in today's WorldNetDaily, co-author Cashill traces Sanders' legal battle back to March 10, 1997, eight months after the July 1996 destruction of the TWA jumbo jet that took 230 lives. California's Riverside Press-Enterprise newspaper published a story titled "New Data Show Missile May Have Nailed TWA 800," which cited Sanders as an "investigative reporter" and described his private investigation into the FBI and NTSB Flight 800 investigation over the preceding five months.

The problem, explains Cashill, an Emmy-Award-winning writer and producer, is that Sanders' investigation "created a significant problem for the Justice Department. The article’s text confirmed that Sanders was on the trail of potential criminal activity within the Flight 800 investigation."

Explaining how the Clinton Justice Department went into gear and "used its considerable powers to thwart Sanders" by denying his standing as a journalist, Cashill notes that under President Bush, the Justice Department now admits its predecessors "conspired to print factually false information in a Justice Department letter to deprive [James Sanders] of his civil rights …" The current Justice Department also now concedes it "fabricated a defense where none existed" in earlier opposing the Sanderses’ civil action, writes Cashill. "It also concedes there is no defense for the 32-counts of federal lawlessness committed in pursuit of destroying a journalist and his wife."

Cashill, who has created documentaries for regional PBS and national cable channels, and who hosted daily talk radio shows for five years, sums up the importance of the Sanders case:

"In so conceding" its previous railroading of Sanders, "the Justice Department tacitly acknowledges that yes, the TWA Flight 800 investigation has been corrupted, and no, we are not prepared to contest this fact." Cashill calls the case "among the most egregious violations of a reporter’s constitutional rights in the history of American journalism."

In their groundbreaking expose "First Strike," Sanders and Cashill uncover substantial new information – including a terrorist connection – about the fate of TWA Flight 800.

Sept. 11, 2001, they claim, did not represent the first aerial assault against the American mainland. The first came July 17, 1996, with the downing of TWA Flight 800. Their book looks in detail at what people saw and heard on that fateful night.

The book also shows the relationship between events in July 1996 and Sept. 2001, and proclaims how and why the American government attempted to cover up the truth
</font>

***SNIP cut out inflamatory irrelevent comment SNIP*** :( </font>

[ 03-13-2003, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Wow, scary stuff. I'll have to look into this. Janet Reno, IMHO, was a much greater threat than John Ashcroft ever thought about being. Darn it, I wish she had run against Jeb Bush in FL.

<font color="#ffccff">I am even more worried because it didn't get any real main stream media coverage...sort of indicating there was a massive collusion. :( </font>

Pretty damning article and I make no attempt to dispute it, but I will point out a mathematical concept by way of clarification for our readers.

An argument of injustice of a previous administration is not proof nor is it disproof of the assertion that I have quoted from my good friend MagiK.

The article states that injustices were done by a previous administration - fullstop. It is not implicit that the world of civil rights is wonderful under Bush - it may be - it may not be - personally I have no idea. Neither the inference nor the conclusion can be drawn from that article.

Thank you - have a nice day [img]smile.gif[/img] .

<font color="#ffccff">You would be dead on if you didn't foget the minor detail...the mainstream press is not making any attempt to cover for this administration as it apparently was for the last....I am wondering how many other similar stories were covered up? I don't think this administration can fart without it making the headlines.</font>

[ 03-13-2003, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Perhaps this is the new centuries version of checks and balances. Since the media is so dangerously liberal, the citizens have put the Republicans in majority position in government, thereby insuring that we will be immediately appraised of any wrongdoing. [img]smile.gif[/img] With the Dems in control in Washington and the Media we've got a "Fox guarding the Henhouse" scenario.

That's the problem with cover-ups - they are cover-ups. What conclusive evidence can anyone possibly produce to support the text that I have highlighted. It is history that determines if cover-ups happen (as per your original article).

I would guess what you were probably trying to say is that "I Ray, firmly believe that the press is not making any attempt to cover for this administration". If I am guilty of putting words in your mouth then I am sure you will correct me in extremely short time :D .

MagiK, I think you're clever enough to know that there are stories like that under any administration. You will always discover them, damn coincidence, when the power is in the other Side's hands. Sometimes you will even never hear about them.

Maybe they are and you don't know about it...well...let me think...yeah, that's the main goal of it anyway [img]smile.gif[/img]

(Dav was faster on this one :D )

[ 03-13-2003, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: Masklinn ]

<font color="#ffccff">You have it right Thoran, despite what my friend Davros is trying to imply (if anything) I was not stating mere opinion, but a demonstrable fact. There may be other views of the evidence but I haven't seen any credible evidence to back those views.</font>

ugh... if it isnt something with Bush's pollicies it's Clinton's...

That's it... I'm Votin' for Nader... who'se with me? Worst he can do is legalize hemp...

How can you demonstrate a non-fact (press not covering current administration's mistakes) ?

<font color="#ffccff">Actually I don't know if it was so much Clinton as Janet Reno. (in this case)

Edit: could we get back on topic now? I was hopin for more comment on the article and less on wich way the press leans. In this case the Press did in fact cover this up and the man went to jail.....very bad stuff.</font>

[ 03-13-2003, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

How can you demonstrate a non-fact (press not covering current administration's mistakes) ?</font>[/QUOTE]Hi Masklinn - I was about to say much the same thing, but even with direct mathematical relationships and cold logic there is no convincing "the convinced". Time to look for another thread methinks. Catch you around.

You *must* be joking. ROFL. Bush is the Republican President who reaps the benefits of a very smart and cagey 10-yr plan by the party to gain the favor of the media. It's a PR blitz that just got rolling about the time Clinton was impeached and has gone full-steam since. Everyone knows this.

So, in short, the mainstream press isn't *looking* for anything other than what Bush tells them so there's nothing to cover up. It's hard for the media to attack him when it spends so much time investigating his buttocks with its lips. ;)

Note: I am not attacking the President with this statement - only the media.

<font color="#ffccff"> [img]graemlins/offtopic.gif[/img] I of course am not joking TL, it is way too easy to do a lexus-nexus serach and count the number of anti-admiistration articles and stories, now vs clintons years.....Bush comes out waaaaaay down. Unless you count Fox and talk radio then the numbers shift considerably. But it is no secret that the mainstream media has a left leanign bias. There have been a few books about the issues...but I am only really concerned with the "news media" and I maybe should have stated that too.

I think your statement that the media doesnt look for anything bush doesnt tell them to is nonsense.....but you are allowed your opinion. [img]smile.gif[/img] I was waiting for you to show up....now back on topic...the article? your thoughts? Please?</font>

[ 03-13-2003, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Just a brief point. I think it was Pratchett who said something along the lines of:

"Considering governments track records with everything else its suprising how well they can cover up the most outrageous of facts..."

I think it was in one of the Johnny Maxwell books, does anyone know the exact quote? This is off topic, but I'm curious...

Haven't had time to investigate it or even read it except skim it. Seems scary. :( However, I once had a list of all the friends Clinton knew who accidently died in plane crashes or by suicide. If he can convince McDougal to sit in prison rather than come clean on White Water, nothing surprises me. He's still my favorite president since I've been alive. Of course, I like Tony Soprano too. ;)

<font color=plum>It's very scary to think something like this could happen here in America. The point being that the reporter and his wife had personal and professional lives <font color=yellow>RUINED</font> at the express direction of our own government.

This should be followed through and those responsible for this atrocity should found themselves on the other side of the court's gavel for their efforts.</font>

<font color="red">Magik, you mis-spoke. You of course meant a search on WestLaw, didn't you? :D
I hate my job, but while I'm here, gotta make sure they get $ so I can get my paycheck, hehe</font>

Post moved to own thread.

[ 03-13-2003, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: Rokenn ]

<font color="#ffccff">Roken could you plese delete the article and leave the link? This thread is about the article I posted, not a thread for new articles.
I am looking for comments on the topic I set, if this gets any more off topic I am just gonna delete the whole thing.
</font>

<font color="#ffccff">Rokken, you have a PM.</font>

<font color="#ffccff">I have edited the original post to remove an irritating inflamatory editorial comment by myself. I did this in an effort to try to steer this back on topic...but I think it may be dead anyway. </font>

<font color = lightgreen> [img]graemlins/erm.gif[/img] So what did happen to TWA Flight 800? Shoulder-fired missile? Bomb in the cargo compartment?

Or I suppose that, of all the flights that have ever carried oxygen tanks throughout the decades, that this plane just happened to be the first to have an oxygen tank explode? [img]tongue.gif[/img] :rolleyes: </font>