chris817 Posted December 27 Report Share Posted December 27 DAY OF INFAMY 2001Rumsfeld says 9-11 plane 'shot down' in PennsylvaniaDuring surprise Christmas Eve trip, defense secretary contradicts official storyPosted: December 27, 20041:00 a.m. Eastern© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com WASHINGTON – Ever since Sept. 11, 2001, there have been questions about Flight 93, the ill-fated plane that crashed in the rural fields of Pennsylvania. The official story has been that passengers on the United Airlines flight rushed the hijackers in an effort to prevent them from crashing the plane into a strategic target – possibly the U.S. Capitol. During his surprise Christmas Eve trip to Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld referred to the flight being shot down – long a suspicion because of the danger the flight posed to Washington landmarks and population centers. Was it a slip of the tongue? Was it an error? Or was it the truth, finally being dropped on the public more than three years after the tragedy of the terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000? Here's what Rumsfeld said Friday: "I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon, the people who cut off peoples' heads on television to intimidate, to frighten – indeed the word 'terrorized' is just that. Its purpose is to terrorize, to alter behavior, to make people be something other than that which they want to be." Several eyewitnesses to the crash claim they saw a "military-type" plane flying around United Airlines Flight 93 when the hijacked passenger jet crashed – prompting the once-unthinkable question of whether the U.S. military shot down the plane. Although the onboard struggle between hijackers and passengers – immortalized by the courageous "Let's roll" call to action by Todd Beamer – became one of the enduring memories of that disastrous day, the actual cause of Flight 93's crash, of the four hijacked jumbo jets, remains the most unclear. Several residents in and around Shanksville, Pa., describing the crash as they saw it, claim to have seen a second plane – an unmarked military-style jet. Well-founded uncertainly as to just what happened to Flight 93 is nothing new. Just three days after the worst terrorist attack in American history, on Sept. 14, 2001, The (Bergen County, N.J.) Record newspaper reported that five eyewitnesses reported seeing a second plane at the Flight 93 crash site. That same day, reported the Record, FBI Special Agent William Crowley said investigators could not rule out that a second plane was nearby during the crash. He later said he had misspoken, dismissing rumors that a U.S. military jet had intercepted the plane before it could strike a target in Washington, D.C. Although government officials insist there was never any pursuit of Flight 93, they were informed the flight was suspected of having been hijacked at 9:16 am, fully 50 minutes before the plane came down. On the Sept. 16, 2001, edition of NBC's "Meet the Press," Vice President Dick Cheney, while not addressing Flight 93 specifically, spoke clearly to the administration's clear policy regarding shooting down hijacked jets. Vice President Cheney: "Well, the – I suppose the toughest decision was this question of whether or not we would intercept incoming commercial aircraft." NBC's Tim Russert: "And you decided?" Cheney: "We decided to do it. We'd, in effect, put a flying combat air patrol up over the city; F-16s with an AWACS, which is an airborne radar system, and tanker support so they could stay up a long time ... "It doesn't do any good to put up a combat air patrol if you don't give them instructions to act, if, in fact, they feel it's appropriate." Russert: "So if the United States government became aware that a hijacked commercial airline[r] was destined for the White House or the Capitol, we would take the plane down?" Cheney: "Yes. The president made the decision ... that if the plane would not divert ... as a last resort, our pilots were authorized to take them out. Now, people say, you know, that's a horrendous decision to make. Well, it is. You've got an airplane full of American citizens, civilians, captured by ... terrorists, headed and are you going to, in fact, shoot it down, obviously, and kill all those Americans on board? "... It's a presidential-level decision, and the president made, I think, exactly the right call in this case, to say, I wished we'd had combat air patrol up over New York.'" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk4 Posted December 28 Report Share Posted December 28 I figured it was, what are the chances of it going down over grassland unless it was shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris817 Posted December 28 Author Report Share Posted December 28 I figured it was, what are the chances of it going down over grassland unless it was shot.Well they could of overpowered the terrorists and sent it into a tailspin.Don't know if i believe it but if its true the bush administration has a lot of explaining to do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk4 Posted December 28 Report Share Posted December 28 I understand they could of overpowered them and crashed it, but to do it over an unpopulated area seemed to be good luck on a day when we had no good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris817 Posted December 28 Author Report Share Posted December 28 I understand they could of overpowered them and crashed it, but to do it over an unpopulated area seemed to be good luck on a day when we had no good luck.Good point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 28 Report Share Posted December 28 Well they could of overpowered the terrorists and sent it into a tailspin.Don't know if i believe it but if its true the bush administration has a lot of explaining to doApparently, the order was officially given to shoot down that plane, and fighters were dispatched and were very close at the time the plane crashed, Also, Cheney and Rice, who were in a White House bunker, believed the plane was shot down for a short period of time when word reached them that the plane was down, until apparently the fighter planes reported back thru command that thet did not fire their ordinance.One thing that did bother me was the report that the flight recorder has the hijackers about to be overwhelmed by the passengers, and decided to bring down the plane on their own. To me, that seems a little illogical when the hijackers were on a mission to slam this plane into something. It would seem that they would try and hold out as long as possible to hit something .Anyway, apparently Rumsfeld minced words a little bit during this speech, and was not trying to say the plane was actually shot down.Pentagon: Rumsfeld misspoke on Flight 93 crashDefense secretary's remark to troops fuels conspiracy theoriesFrom Jamie McIntyreCNN WashingtonWASHINGTON (CNN) -- A comment Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld made during a Christmas Eve address to U.S. troops in Baghdad has sparked new conspiracy theories about the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.In the speech, Rumsfeld made a passing reference to United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania after passengers attempted to stop al Qaeda hijackers.But in his remarks, Rumsfeld referred to the "the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania."A Pentagon spokesman insisted that Rumsfeld simply misspoke, but Internet conspiracy theorists seized on the reference to the plane having been shot down."Was it a slip of the tongue? Was it an error? Or was it the truth, finally being dropped on the public more than three years after the tragedy" asked a posting on the Web site WorldNetDaily.com.Some people remain skeptical of U.S. government statements that, despite a presidential authorization, no planes were shot down September 11, and rumors still circulate that a U.S. military plane shot the airliner down over Shanksville, Pennsylvania.A Pentagon spokesman insists Rumsfeld has not changed his opinion that the plane crashed as the result of an onboard struggle between passengers and terrorists.The independent panel charged with investigating the terrorist attacks concluded that the hijackers intentionally crashed Flight 93, apparently because they feared the passengers would overwhelm them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msoprano Posted December 30 Report Share Posted December 30 my parents were landing in italy at the time of the september 11th attackts...the taxi driver had told them what happened...when they got to my gmas house they turned the tv on and saw drawings of how a fighter plane took out flight 93....no one knows the real truth but i belive that story more then the pasangers taking over the plane.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghhhhhost Posted December 30 Report Share Posted December 30 i think the story of the passengers taking over the plane was mostly fictitious. they might have planned to do something, but i doubt anything ever happened. i dont want to take away from their possible valiant effort...but im pretty sure the plane was shot down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tres-b Posted December 30 Report Share Posted December 30 Doesnt matter either way. I have heard both versions. I have no doubt that planes were dispatched to take the plane down. Whether the passengers caused the crash or the plane was taken out by our military the result is the same.Based on the "Greater Good" principle, I have zero issue with the plane being shot down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris817 Posted December 30 Author Report Share Posted December 30 Doesnt matter either way. I have heard both versions. I have no doubt that planes were dispatched to take the plane down. Whether the passengers caused the crash or the plane was taken out by our military the result is the same.Based on the "Greater Good" principle, I have zero issue with the plane being shot down.I don't think anyone has an issue with the plane being shot down, what i do have an issue with is our gov't lying to us about what happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fresinha12 Posted December 30 Report Share Posted December 30 "yeah, lets roll" I meant literally...the plane... to be honest I dont buy that....i am quite certain the plane was shot down....for one there is was no intact piece of debris left on the ground, the only way a plane would just disintegrate is that it was blownup....Well they could of overpowered the terrorists and sent it into a tailspin.Don't know if i believe it but if its true the bush administration has a lot of explaining to do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.