WOW - How did I miss this before??????

Canada has announced formally that it will NOT sign onto the missile defense system with the US. Kudo's to Prime Minister Paul Martin for making an obvious decision that reflects the mood of Canadians. But here is an interesting snippet that Ambassader Celluci stated.....

quote - Cellucci compared the situation to one that occurred during the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. He noted that it was a Canadian general at Norad who scrambled military jets under orders from Bush to shoot down a hijacked commercial aircraft headed for Washington.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2005/02/23/940281-cp.html


OK Duer's, perhaps my memory is lacking, but I thought the airliner that crashed in Pennsylvania was because of the passengers fighting back with the hijackers.....and the one that crashed into the pentagon, just ran right into it....and the two that crashed into the Twin towers certainly were not attacked by military jets...As far as I can recall, this is the first admission that the Pennsylvania airliner was shot down, and that was authorized by Bush....Which still doesn't work for me cause I thought it was Rumsfeld who was in charge.......Am I just getting old and missed this before??????

I wasn't aware of that one either.

Rumsfeld says Flight 93 was 'shot down'

http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=517

Not us

that are currently researching this horror.

request document could not be found. Where did it go?

JUST telling me that her son, who was in the army stationed in PA told her that the plane WAS shot down. She argued a little with him before he said, "Mom, trust me, on everything I hold sacred, the plane was shot down."

no passengers on that plane walked out on the wings and knocked that engine off..wake up america!!

from and american airlines 33 yr just retired flt attendant ny based!

but that by the time we managed to get anything airborne, all the planes had either hit their targets, crashed on their own (PA), or landed at the closest available airport.

But I've slept since then, and who knows what was real and what was only a cover up.

check and see where the commissoners get their money!
why was marvin bush never supoena'ed check what marvin has to do with the airports involved!!
read up on egypt air aircrash..see how it happened..see how the airplane computers operated..it was a 767 ..and the aircraft in pa was a 757..but same computers!!

thats just a start!!

fly

Thank You, I didn't know there was a 9/11 forum.

lying bastards. The people on board are no doubt still heroes, but shit !!

a Canadian General gave the order so that they could say it wasn't an American who gave the order. Who knows what really happened? We live in Bushworld now.

Cellucci compared the situation to one that occurred during the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. He noted that it was a Canadian general at Norad who scrambled military jets under orders from Bush to shoot down a hijacked commercial aircraft headed for Washington.

When did Goat-boy do this?

At 9:16, NORAD was notified that Flight 93 had been hijacked, and at 9:24 it was notified that Flight 77 had also been hijacked and was heading toward Washington (though, as discussed above, the hijacking was known long before this). No media report has suggested that the possible shooting down of hijacked airplanes was discussed at this time, however. It appears the discussion was not broached until after 9:55. At about 9:26, it was either FAA head Jane Garvey or FAA administrator Ben Sliney (and not Bush) who decided to halt all airplane takeoffs in the US. Additionally, no evidence has appeared suggesting Bush had a role in ordering any fighters into the skies.

FINALLY TO THE AIRPORT

By 9:35, Bush's motorcade was ready to take him to the Sarasota airport where Air Force One was waiting. At 9:37, Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Bush was informed as his motorcade got near the airport. (Apparently Bush could be reached by phone in his limousine at this time.) The motorcade arrived around 9:43 and pulled up close to Air Force One. Security conducted an extra-thorough search of all the baggage for the other passengers, delaying takeoff until 9:55.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html

i dont have links just recall, and press made no deal out of it

that the Pennsylvania plane was shot down. Later, the story changed. I believe it was shot down.

but would those reports still be out there in internet land?

to place of impact!! your answer is there..no terrorist could make the engine fall off..nor could any passengers!!

also look how long it took for norad to respond to payne stewarts plane in an obsure place..not the ny corridor..but while looking at it realize it changed from eastern time to central!!

look into marvin bush and catering companies for airlines at the airports used on 9/11!!

look into jeb bush executive order on sept 7th 2001 and then execitive order put into place 9/11!!

fly

flight 73 before it went down, don't recall if anyone saw the military jet shoot down the plane.

Also, Marvin is involved with company that handled security for WTC.

Cheney said on tv something about making the decision to shoot down a plane but the reporter didn't follow up on it. I saw that myself, I think Russert was the interviewer but it was long ago.

We probably just dreamed it all, anyway.

Everything the Commission did seems to be aimed at protecting Cheney, who likely gave the order.

will perhaps see it. WOW.

he thought the plane had been shot down. It was decided by the Bush Junta that the story of the passengers bringing the plane down would be more pleasing to the public so the Whore Media was ordered to go with that story.

The 911 Commssion was a White Wash. The truth of that day may come out in about 50 years.

I did. They used that woman to take the sheeple's eyes away from the REAL story. Also, out of GUILT! They knew that plane was shot down and had to steer the story in a different direction. I remember when they used her at the SOTU speech. Disgusting. "Let It Roll." :eyes:

I wonder if SHE knows that plane was shot down? Didn't she write a book? Has anyone here read it? Whatever happened to Lisa Beamer anyway?

How could I have been so clueless?! Now I believe it was one or the other.

BTW, that book was loaded with a major Christian faith based message. I'm not a Christian, so it was a bit preachy for me. I don't doubt that Lisa Beamer still believes everything she was told-how sad is that?

like they did? She was another tool for them. A grieving widow tool. :grr:

They used her and her kids too! :mad:

... of evidence, plus Rummy's slip of the tongue, there is almost no question that the plane was shot down.

The question is, "why keep that fact a secret"?

Because, IMHO, most Americans would understand that there was really no choice - all the passengers were going to die no matter what. At least if the plane is shot down, loss of life on the ground could be minimized.

But - why not just tell us? This administration has exhibited a pattern of "telling us what we want to hear" from the get-go.

Bush**'s initial campaign in 2000 painted him as much more moderate than he really is. The Bush** bunch lie, lie and lie again and as long as the lie is a nice lie that people want to hear, Americans just put up with it. There is a price for that kind of happy delusion on the part of the American people, and we're all gonna pay it :)

that's why they wouldn't tell us. I agree with you that the American public would largely accept the action as necessary in light of the day's events.

But the idea of brave passengers (lead by a brave Christian, incidentally) overpowering the terrorists (just as our "brave" *cough* "christian" *cough* "leader *cough* would then overpower the evildoers in defense of the nation) and sacrificing their lives in defense of liberty and for the common good--that kind of myth is way too valuable to let get away.

The whole bit about the passengers hijacking the hijackers set the emotional tone for the national response to the tragedy. It *taught* the average American how to react to the situation. It was a John Wayne movie come to life.

If they admitted the plane was shot down, they'd actually have to JUSTIFY shit like the Iraq war, because without that myth I think the tone of the country might have been very different indeed.

If the passengers didn't roll, what was up with that plane. Was it really headed for the white house with a terrorist on board? Were they lost? Did the passengers really take over and something went awry with the mission and the potential witnesses needed to die?

I wonder what actually happened. What about the black boxes or potential contacts with control towers?

recordings, but I'm not sure. I have heard (I know it mentions it as true on Snopes, for example) that the cockpit recordings picked up passenger voices, so apparently they at least tried to do what they are credited with. But then again I've only heard about these recordings, I've never actually heard them :shrug:

Anyway, it is an interesting question about what was really going on. I suspect the passengers did try to do something, may have been partly successful, but that the plane was ultimately shot down. Of course, if it was MIHOP/LIHOP, then it would have been advantageous to shoot down the plane even if the passengers successfully overtook the plane and were peacably returning it to the ground, right?

Perhaps the travelers did overtake the plane and B*shco of course had to be done with this errant plane. If people were to ever hear of it being shot down while in friedly hands, it would blow the whole charade. Shooting down terrorists could be constued as good, but friendly fire in not accepted.

They might actually provide real information as to how the atack had been set up. If the passengers had actually subdued the hijackers...loose ends would have abounded. Just a thought.

Olaf the Viking

That is the obviuos thought.

Perhaps the passengers GAVE a good fight, then seemed to get an upper hand. I've always wondered how a bunch of good pissed off folks never could beat some people armed with paper knives??
How difficult is it to overwhelm someone with a toothpick-sized blade - if you're desperate enough.

I know I would have been.

...what if "Let's Roll" was true--and this is the reason the plane was shot down?

If I'm remembering correctly, the "Let's Roll" comment was recorded on a 911 call or something...is that right?

Could it possibly be that the passengers were successful in taking over the plane and that's why it was shot down?

Several people on the ground, who received calls from loved ones aboard the plane, said that a group of passengers was gearing up to charge the cockpit.

It's a possibility that both events--"Let's Roll" AND the plane being shot down--did happen.

Cynical, I know

... of evidence, plus Rummy's slip of the tongue, there is almost no question that the plane was shot down.

The question is, "why keep that fact a secret"?

Because, IMHO, most Americans would understand that there was really no choice - all the passengers were going to die no matter what. At least if the plane is shot down, loss of life on the ground could be minimized.

But - why not just tell us? This administration has exhibited a pattern of "telling us what we want to hear" from the get-go.

Bush**'s initial campaign in 2000 painted him as much more moderate than he really is. The Bush** bunch lie, lie and lie again and as long as the lie is a nice lie that people want to hear, Americans just put up with it. There is a price for that kind of happy delusion on the part of the American people, and we're all gonna pay it :)

who actually did something to prevent the attacks that day.

How telling.

http://start.shaw.ca/start/enCA/News/NationalNewsArticle.htm?src=n022365A.xml

Take a screen shot! It won't be on the web for long...

Tried to put in the cache location but it didn't work.

they keep stalling the release of the 9/11 report -- because it shows that the plane was indeed shot down and shows that Bushco lied about it. Imagine the public furor that would ensue if that revelation were made. Now THAT would be quite a shitstorm.

I'm sure the reaction would be either media silence or ambivalence.

Even so, if you accept the official story otherwise (a HUGE if), shooting the plane down wasn't the issue so much as having lied about it.

And lying about something that was essentially the right thing to do but looks bad after the fact is generally supported by public opinion.

Basically, can't blame them for lying about it, since they did the right thing.

"This plane was shot down. Everyone who has a basic understanding of physics and even mildy interested in the case, using the facts that are verifiable can not come to any other conclusion without being well, ridiculous. Rumsfeld’s slip of the tongue is understandable; being a pathological liar one does have to at all times keep a lifeline to the shores of truth if one is to avoid drowning in one’s own bullshit completely."

to us.




<sarcasm off>

"Cellucci compared the situation to one that occurred during the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. He noted that it was a Canadian general at Norad who scrambled military jets under orders from Bush to shoot down a hijacked commercial aircraft headed for Washington."

********

The general could have given the shootdown order without that order actually being followed (or able to be followed) -- like if the plane crashed/hit the Pentagon before it could be shot down.

For example, if a police chief told an officer "Go to Building 3 and arrest Joe X" but when the cop got to Building 3, Joe X was long gone and later the cops said Joe X wasn't arrested, we wouldn't automatically say "There was an order, so he must have been arrested."

(Now, whether this news makes sense in the Official Story (TM) is another matter.)

but my good friends saw Johnstown TV on 9/11--the noon new--where farmers and others all said they saw the "other plane(s) with it". That news clip was never shown again.