Posted on 12/27/2004, 9:21:09 AM by Stoat
Rumsfeld says 9-11 plane 'shot down' in Pennsylvania During surprise Christmas Eve trip, defense secretary contradicts official story Posted: December 27, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
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.'" |
what the ???
I'm with you Mike, this is a crock.
It's always seemed rather obvious to me from witness accounts and the debris pattern, whether it's ever admitted or not. Just FWIW..
If this is on tape somewhere, it will be played out in the media or transcribed. I'm guessing this is a misquote, or that he misspoke a word or two.
OK, this entire article doesn't make a lick of sense. If you want to believe Rumsfeld's words verbatim, you are not accepting the notion of U.S. planes having "shot down the plane over Pennsylvania," but terrorists who did so.
This piece is not worthy of WorldNetDaily.
You talk enough, one is bound to slip up.
He has a history of cocking up his words ( like the Prez), he said "..and shot down a plane over Pennsylvania", referring to the terrorists doing it when obviously they didn't.
Its a strange off the cuff statement. As I read that long sentence, I believe it is really a fragment. His thought isn't complete, it seems. Further, if you compare the list, it is as if he is saying that the terrorist shot down the plane since all of those evils were committed by terrorists. I am thinking he misspoke and the reporter is trying to hit the jackpot.
This is a complete non-event. These mispoken words from Rumsfeld will be gone from the news and replaced with the latest gory local crimes within a week.
ummm ok NOT
I don't remember Michael Moore getting hot and bothered over George Stephanopoulos' "misstatement" years ago about "the bombing" of TWA Flight 800 over Long Island in 1996.
There. That gives a better idea what Rumsfeld actually said.
When did World Net Daily begin attacking President Bush and Rumsfeld? Is this typical?
Rummy critics come out of the woodwork. He said "shot" when he meant to say "brought"
Put too much into it. If you had seen the pics of the HOLE IN THE GROUND. The plane embedded itself in the field.
Shoot it down and it falls apart in mid-air.
He did not in any way say the plane "WE" shot down.
What?! Huh? Are you being facetious? Sarcastic? Is this a joke? Please explain.
It's always seemed rather obvious to me from witness accounts and the debris pattern, whether it's ever admitted or not. Just FWIW..
Sorry pal. I wouldn't get your hopes up for any trials or any gallows to be built anytime soon. After the Clinton Administration, the standard for a true scandal is now so high that nothing the Bushies do will even remotely qualify for an investigation. You're chances are better that the Ravens win the Super Bowl next season.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.