The flaws in your analysis often orbit around your ideas about what somebody would do. I suggest you focus instead on what has happened, and try to work from that rather than the would've, should've, could've line of reasoning which leads you astray.

Think about it. The former Chairman, JCS says all the data point to a missile. A seasoned air crash investigator spends the last five years of his life refuting every argument of the FBI and NTSB and is convinced a missile brought down the 747. Veteran pilots with combat experience who witnessed the event from the air say it was a missile. There were over 700 witnesses to the shootdown, and there are several other incidents of pilots reporting missiles in that very air corridor.

Did you know that in 1995, this very same 747 was struck by lightning while on its landing approach to Rome? The lightning bolt went in one wingtip and out the other, and there was a fair amount of damage to the aircraft, but THE FUEL TANK DID NOT EXPLODE.

Why did the FBI throw the book at the Sanders for removing a tiny bit of seat cushion for analysis, when James Kalstrom presented bits of the seats to passangers' families as souvenirs, and other agents reportedly did the same, without being charged?

I highly recommend you acquant yourself with the facts of the case before you comment much more.

sp