[dead]

This theory, based on the government's analysis of cockpit recordings, discounts the popular perception of insurgent passengers grappling with terrorists to seize the plane's controls.

Am I overly sensitive, or is there a triumphant tone to this article? Like the writer is happy that the "heroism" story is tainted in his eyes?

I don't know why, exactly, I get that impression, but I do.

[mdittmar]

It hasn't been,the plane did not reach it's intended target as a direct result of the passengers actions,period.

[nyconse]

What a fool this author is. The bottom line is these passengers fought back-losing their lives in the process- and prevented a bombing of the Whitehouse or possibly the Capitol. They were heroes-all of them. This article just goes to show you how out of touch the liberal media really is with real Americans. The passengers revolted-"passenger uprising". Obviously, the terrorist scum "pilot" crashed the plane because he knew they were coming to get him-the jig was up.

[dagnabbit]

Either way the passengers were heroes, and struck the first blows back against the islamic filth responsible for the attacks.

Yes, I also detect some glee in the tone of the article, perhaps because the author and news bureau see a deliberate crash as somehow less a U.S. victory than one resulting from Americans reaching the controls.

But what should we expect from Reuters? These are the folks who don't consider 9-11 a "terrorist" act, and who in fact never use the word "terrorism" except in quotes when citing someone's comments. (though they will substitute "militant" when paraphrasing Israeli officials who actually said "terrorist")

[cyncooper]

Am I overly sensitive, or is there a triumphant tone to this article? Like the writer is happy that the "heroism" story is tainted in his eyes?

I don't know why, exactly, I get that impression, but I do.

Not overly sensitive. Just perceptive. That is exactly what I took the writer to convey.

[arasina]

I agree; there's a triumphant tone to this. Following the liberal recipe as usual:

A WINNING RECIPE FOR "ANTI-BUSH ADMINISTRATION SURPRISE"

• Take one box of Reuters archived wire stories about Flight 93.
• Stir in the official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
• Mix in a little "President Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft have regularly praised the courage of those aboard Flight 93..."
• Sprinkle in speculation.
• Whip family members until frothy.
• Add lies for garnish. Your guests will love this surprise. They'll eat it up!

  (This is better than what I heard from a liberal relative last year. Said our own military shot down Flight 93.)

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Not unlike the stuff they did with Jessica Lynch's rescue, and the "the Iraqis tried to return her in an ambulance" bit. I know what you mean.

[Howlin]

Who is this guy? He ususally writes about computers.

[PFKEY]

discounts the popular perception of insurgent passengers grappling with terrorists to seize the plane's controls.

I don't know that this was really the perception.

I never thought the heros of Flight 93 were capable of flying a commercial aircraft.

It was always my perception that their intention was to crash the plane sooner rather than later.

They knew what the outcome was going to be they just wanted to influence the outcome in the favor of less loss of life.

[bobsatwork]

...is there a triumphant tone to this article? There sure as s**t is. Think about it: would the terrorists in the cockpit decide to crash the plane if the struggle with the passengers was going well? Of course not. The passengers were winning. They thwarted a terrorist attack.