Dems Claim Bush and Cheney Killed Flight 93 Heroes

A web site with ties to the Democratic Party and ex-President Bill Clinton is charging that President Bush is most likely "personally and directly responsible for the deaths of 37 passengers and 7 crew members on Flight 93," claiming that evidence shows Bush and Vice President Cheney ordered the plane shot down on 9-11.

The left-wing web site Democrats.com goes so far as to contend that the famous photo depicting President Bush talking on the phone that morning aboard Air Force One was likely taken as Bush was authorizing Cheney to give the order to have Flight 93 blown from the sky.

"Here is a very likely scenario," says the web site. "Bush was approving the shooting down of hijacked airliners, which led Dick Cheney to order the shooting down of Flight 93 - with all of the Heroes on board."

The photo, offered earlier this year for $150 as part of a GOP fundraising package, has the Democratic web site complaining that sale of the picture was "a huge insult to the victims of 9-11 — who died never knowing they were helping raise big bucks for the Republican party."

The report, by Democrats.com co-founder Bob Fertik, blames Bush - and not the terrorist hijackers - for killing the Flight 93 heroes:

"A careful analysis of all available evidence points to a shootdown as the most likely cause of the crash of Flight 93 - thus making George W. Bush personally and directly responsible for the deaths of 37 passengers and 7 crew members on Flight 93."

Democrats.com accuses the Bush administration of perpetrating a massive cover-up by going along with the convenient cover story that it was the battle between Flight 93's passengers and the plane's hijackers that caused it to crash into a rural field in Shanksville, Penn.

"Certainly, the White House has every reason to lie," says the Democratic Party's web promoters. "After all, it would look pretty horrible if Bush and Cheney were responsible for the deaths of the crew and passengers about Flight 93, even if the planes were shot down to protect Washington DC."

"Unfortunately for the White House" says web site continues, "there is overwhelming evidence that Flight 93 was shot down - and no evidence at all that the Heroes succeeded in taking control of the cockpit."

In fact, no one has ever claimed that Flight 93's heroes "succeeded in taking control of the cockpit." Otherwise the crash might have been prevented. The question is, did their failed efforts to regain control distract the hijackers long enough to foil their ultimate plans to attack Washington, D.C.

Given their public comments to date, the families of Flight 93's heroes seem to have no doubt about the cause of the crash.

Last April, after hearing the in-flight recording of the plane's final 30 minutes in a special session arranged by the FBI, family members seemed convinced that their relatives' heroic effort to storm the cockpit - and not a missile from an F-16 - was what brought the plane down.

"I felt incredible pride," said Deena Burnett, whose husband, Tom, died on the United Airlines plane, told reporters after hearing the tape. "It was obvious they all acted heroically."

"I never doubted that there were specific individuals who worked together, and the tape confirmed that," said Alice Hoglan, mother of Flight 93 hero Mark Bingham. "I never doubted that the cockpit had been taken over by terrorists who were thwarted, and the tape definitely confirmed that."

Hoglan, who along with the other Flight 93 relatives was asked by the FBI not to discuss specifics, described the tape as "wonderful in a strange and odd way" - hardly the words of someone reacting to evidence that her son was killed on orders of the president.

Further proof of a shootdown, Democrats.com argues, comes from reports that debris from Flight 93 was discovered eight miles away from the actual crash site, a detail the continues to perplex those on both sides of the political aisle.

But if Flight 93 did explode in midair, there are other plausible explanations, such as the bomb the hijackers said they had and threatened to detonate, according to several passengers who relayed the news in cell phone calls to relatives.

But Democrats.com doesn't let details like that get in the way of accusing President Bush of responsibility for the crash and the ensuing "cover-up."

"The FBI has stated that there was no evidence of a bomb at the crash site," the web site argues. "If the hijackers detonated a bomb, it is hard to imagine a reason why the FBI would cover it up."

And last August, Democrats.com boasted it had "arranged with the office of former President Clinton for birthday greetings sent by e-mail to be delivered to him personally," adding, "Please join us in thanking the last legally elected President of the United States for his dedication to public service."

"Democrats.com is the largest online community of Democrats. We have created a unique space where Democrats can meet, discuss, and work towards building a stronger Democratic Party.... Take our Voter Pledge to sweep all Republicans out of office."

That's it? Sorry, UJ, I hardly believe that's the best response you can claim, after stating emphatically that Bush never said anything like this in prior to 9-11. He most certainly did, and this snippet is part of a much larger press conference given in front of reports with President Vicente Fox prior to their departure to Toledo. They were talking in the context of the budget and reporter specifically mentioned social security. Go to the White House web page and look at the transcripts yourself. I'm tired of doing your homework for you.

Some silly fool over at MSBNC.com even wrote a huge smear piece on Bush over the same thing, proclaiming he never said anything like it. Perhaps you read that? Your proclamations on this thread parallel the article closely. Funny how someone without access to a nexis search engine could locate the phrase, but MSNBC couldn't.

P.S. Tell David he should do better homework. It's easier to wrip someone on what they DID say, instead of coming up short by speculating on what they didn't say.

His favorite joke claims he said it during the campaign, in Chicago, not a few days before 9/11. And we were clearly headed for deficits BEFORE 9/6. It didn't happen. That's lying, regardless of Party. Or do Republican liars get a pass?? Was all the angst about Clinton lying a put-on??

I already proved that Bush said something similar BEFORE 9-11. I knew he said it during the campaign, in defense of his tax cut: as the Enlistment Coordinator for the KEYES2000 campaign, I followed the news very closely. As a result, his statement rang true when I heard the "joke".

Here is PROOF that Bush made the statement before the attack; he even reiterates in his own statement that he made this comment several times. If you even bothered to read the press conference (which was recorded verbatim), he did not appear to be "thrown" by the question at all; this was a PAT answer. Moreover, if this was such an issue (considering the budget battle prior to 9-11), why didn't the press jump on it then? I'll tell you why...these are REASONABLE exceptions and the press HAD heard it before.

If this bothers you so much, start doing your own homework and find out the truth on yourself instead of accepting someone else's report on another person's article as gospel. If you're so concerned about the truth, DIG FOR IT.

I have to "prove" nothing. I submit that, like all politicians, GWB is a liar. To disprove my assertion all you have to do is produce ONE credible source, or one record, showing that he in fact said what he claims, repeatedly, that he said, in Chicago during the campaign. Either he said it there or he's a liar.

Did I ask you to prove anything to me? No, I didn't. I asked YOU to keep digging and prove it to YOURSELF. That is the only way YOU are going to be satisfied. I'm not the one upset about it, you are. I remember Bush stating something very smiliar during the campaign; obviously, you don't.

I spent almost two years watching the media distort Dr. Keyes' words; it was so bad, the campaign starting sending out copies of transcripts to volunteers so that anyone who didn't see his speech would know exactly what he said, in the context it was spoken, instead of the spin.

Don't dig for me, UJ. Dig for YOU.

If I have time tomorrow night, I'll dig around some more myself and hopefully give you what you need to resolve this issue. I've got two sick kiddos, so it's going to have to be after they are settled down for the night.

Happy 4th of July.

Not a single thing in any of those that reflects what he claims.

Either he said it while campaigning in Chicago or he's lying.

Speaking of which, was he lying years ago when he said the SEC "lost" his insider-trading paperwork, or is he lying now when he says Harken's lawyers didn't file it?? Both cannot be true, so one is a lie.

Hmmm...let me make sure I've got this right:

Several of these reporters and commentators saw fit to write scathing commentary based upon campaign promises THEY remember him making, just like he claimed he did. I guess they were hallucinating or - gasp! - lying when they implied that he made those campaign promises. How utterly shocking! The press certainly would never lie about a Republican, would they?

One of the articles even quotes Bush on January 7, 2000, stating that war would be a necessary exception to running a budget deficit, but hey, since it's not specifically to a reporter in Chicago, it doesn't mean diddly, right?

Sorry, I'm going to save my angst for something a little more important. I was trying to be helpful, but since you're convinced that Bush is a liar, I'll leave you to your convictions. The folks who bother the follow the links can discern for themselves what they believe.

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.