VECTORS

---

Shooting Down Conspiracies --
Don't Blame Internet for Latest TWA Tale

By William M. Arkin

Date: 11-12-96

Explanations for the crash of TWA flight 800 range from "terrorism" to public allegations of a government coverup of a "friendly fire" accident. While some analysts blame the Internet, the real culprit may be Americans' propensity to point a finger at someone when things go wrong -- a need encouraged by the military and intelligence communities' attempts to justify their existence. William M. Arkin is a military expert and author of numerous books. His next book, "The U.S. Military Online," will be published by Brassy's next March.

Which is more disturbing -- Pierre Salinger's claim that he had proof a Navy plane shot down TWA flight 800 or the public's willingness to believe him?

Or is the real problem our propensity for finding a scapegoat, encouraged by the efforts of the military and intelligence communities to justify their continued existence?

Salinger, former press secretary to President John F. Kennedy, made headlines saying he had a "document" showing that a U.S. missile was responsible for bringing down the Boeing 747 off Long Island on July 17. The FBI issued a "categorical denial" and the Navy announced its nearest vessel, the USS Normandy, was almost 200 miles away.

Within hours, a humiliated Salinger admitted he had no government document: his "proof" was nothing more than rumor from the Internet.

In fact, the missile story has been circulating for months. Reporters who bothered to probe found the airliner was more than 145 miles outside the range of the Normandy's missiles.

Despite this, and despite many hints from the National Transportation Safety Board that it will conclude flight 800 exploded due to mechanical failure stemming from poor maintenance, Salinger's tale moved rocketlike around the globe.

The "friendly fire" allegation began to circulate on the Internet within 48 hours of the crash. Over the months, it was embellished with seemingly authentic aviation and military terminology until it was ultimately convincing enough for the veteran Salinger.

With almost daily news stories alleging coverups of Iraqi use of chemical weapons and CIA involvement in cocaine smuggling, it comes as no surprise that the public might be receptive to the tale of an accidental Navy missile.

Some blame all this on Internet. James Coates of the Chicago Tribune writes "America is awash in a growing and often disruptive avalanche of false information" and in effect suggests mainstream media are more trustworthy because they "regulate" what is news.

The public begs to differ. Let there be no doubt about it: the Internet is a chaotic organism, and has given voice to every crackpot conspiracy theory under the sun. But the problem is not that a computer network offers an alternative to the information aristocracy. The true crisis is that neither the news media nor the government has enough credibility to be accepted as either truthful or impartial on their own.

Recently, a little-noticed story reported that someone had erased over 300 Pentagon documents dealing with Gulf War Syndrome, documents posted on the Internet by disgrunted former CIA analysts. The rumor quickly spread that the "government" was the culprit, reinforcing the belief, widespread among veterans, in a grand conspiracy behind the still-mysterious human tragedy.

I have read the documents, and can say they don't "prove" anything. Yet I am reluctant to dismiss the possibility that the intelligence community did the deed. Within the last few years, they and their military counterparts have become obsessed with "information warfare," a sort of electronic version of the weapons gaps of yesteryear. While they are most concerned with protecting government communications and computer systems an offensive element also exists, one suited for just such an intrigue as this.

With the Cold War Soviet bogeyman gone, the need to protect vulnerable American computers sometimes serves as creative justification for a still huge defense budget. But this is merely one facet of a far-larger campaign to nurture the omnipresent aura of continued external threats to America's well being that is the lifeblood of the military and espionage community.

This explains why, within hours of the tragic TWA crash, news media and the public were completely primed to assume that Islamic terrorists were behind the accident -- without the aid of a single computer or E-mail message, without one Web page. This also allowed the airline, the FAA, and the Department of Transportation to evade responsibility.

No wonder people can't decide whether it is Washington or some hidden enemy that is more diabolical.