I wanted to take a moment to thank all you the people involved in the film. Thank you for having the courage to stand up and speak out. It does count, people do notice, and you are appreciated.

I wanted to believe that the scientist (physicist) who produced this documentary was right. I knew the official cause of the explosion, but always wondered if there had been something more menacing involved. This documentary is compelling.The problem is that the producer cherry-picks data and omits other data to support his hypothesis that a missile or similar rocket brought down the aircraft. In forming scientific hypotheses, the scientist is required to include all possible alternatives to results supporting his/her hypothesis.In TWA Flight 800 we hear all sorts of speculation from the producer and his witnesses. Together, the story presented is credible----- that a missile (described specifically by dozens of eye-witnesses on the ground) brought down Flight 800, and, that the government----- the FBI, NTSB, and DOD conspired to conclude that the cause was an explosion in the center wing fuel tank of the plane. The producer presents "chemical splatter" evidence on pieces of the recovered plane, explosive residue found on the parts, and variable injuries to passengers in different parts of the plane as evidence of an external explosive.Unfortunately, the producer fails to include in his documentary a very telling recorded comment (on the cockpit recorder) by the pilot about an inaccurate "crazy" reading of the fuel gauge of the #4 engine. This is critical because the NTSB speculated that the explosion was caused by an ignition source---probably fuel gauge sensor or (similarly located) wiring degradation/malfunction..In addition, the producer omits that there were previous center wing fuel tank explosions caused by the ignition of gas vapors in Boeing products, Avianca and Philippine Airlines for starters. These prior events are not referenced. This is critical because on the day of the crash of Flight 800, the plane was delayed over an hour with the air conditioning units running due to the hot weather. The units are located under the center wing fuel tank and would have contributed to the vapor buildup. This is what happened in the Philippine Airlines explosion, which occurred on the ground with the engines off.The producers do include that the plane was supposedly used for police canine training where explosive residues were used to train the police dogs on the plane at the airport, but he tries to refute that this training exercise took place as documented, casting doubt on the source of explosive residues from a benign source. Instead, he omits that the jet was used in 1991 to transport military equipment and troops exposed to explosive residue from the Gulf.Once I learned of these omissions, I could not believe anything the movie asked me to believe.While the official report can't say "with certainty" that the wiring in the center wing fuel tank caused the explosion, it does show significant evidence that this is the likely source of the ignition.As for the hundreds of well-meaning witnesses who believed that they saw a missile streaking up and striking the plane, well, all I can say is that eyewitness accounts are the LEAST reliable evidence.Once you look at other sources of information about the crash of flight 800, it is apparent that the likely scenario is the same as what was presented by the NTSB after four years of exhaustive investigation.

Thank you to the courageous Americans who are putting their reputation on the line to bring up the lies we were told about TWA flight 800. Watch out for "reviewers" who attack the documentary with the intent to discourage people from watching it and coming to their own conclusions. I recall watching a retired Air Force Pilot who went on CSPAN debunk this "center fuel tank explosion" theory years ago, and he was a credible as any person I've listened to. That was when I first realized (sadly I admit) that our government lies to us and that they cannot be trusted. I am a psychologist and I'm frightened at how psychology was referenced by the government to imply that eye witness testimony is so unreliable as a means to discredit hundreds of eye witnesses to what was a very basic event (little details to get mixed up). Listen to the eye witnesses in this documentary and see for yourself if they seem credible. I've watched lots of documentaries and I don't often agree with them because I think they don't provide all of the details or distort the facts. I also look for who has an agenda to push. I see no ulterior motives with those who are interviewed for this movie. I just recommend that you watch it for yourself, and if it's your first exposure to how easily our government lies to its citizens, be prepared to be discouraged (and hopefully motivated to make some changes).

I had heard a few weeks ago that a number of investigators of the Flight 800 disaster had come out publicly about their "reservations" about the official conclusions of the NTSB investigation. I did not, however, realize that there was a documentary that had been made, detailing the substance of those "reservations". Serendipity, and perhaps Fate, led me to be searching my DVR for something to watch at 3 am, whereupon I chanced to see this title. Hmmmm...*** Spoiler Alert? *** This documentary is unique, as far as I know, in its inclusion of high-level technical officials involved in an actual investigation, giving very specific details (technical and otherwise) of a cover-up as it happened. For this alone is this film compelling in the extreme.In addition to this, the broad cross-section of eyewitness accounts, technical data, and media footage demonstrates convincingly that not only did Flight 800 *not* explode due to a center wing tank anomaly, but that 3 (yes, *three*) different plumes/flares/etc. were witnessed by multiple (i.e. **many**) witnesses interacting with the doomed airliner, eyewitness accounts which were excluded from the NTSB investigation, an apparently unique circumstance, according to the seasoned investigators. Also, the investigators' assertions of very specific pieces of evidence and analyses which simply "disappeared" from or were plainly modified at the closed investigation hangar are greatly disturbing. Finally, the skew of the media coverage of the event and investigation relative to the asserted facts is impossible to discount as merely "reportage of the story".The final and most explosive (pun intended) evidence in the sickening array of exposed lies is the radar return immediately after the explosion of the plane showing fragments at a distance which are consistent *only* with a velocity of about Mach 4 (~3000 mi/h), a velocity which could not be reached by anything other than a rocket or a high-explosive detonation.In a larger context, this unique exposition of official skullduggery, malfeasance, and frankly, Evil, should hopefully shake the cobwebs loose from a new contingent of the un-awake sheeple enough to begin to make them question *other* as-yet-unsatisfactorily-explained "disasters". Such as World Trade Center Building 7.