ATS: Pentagon: Rumsfeld Misspoke, page 1

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 10:39 AM

link

Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld speaking to the troops made a gaffe that will fuel speculation of what really occured over the skies of Southwestern Pennsylvania on the morning of 9/11. Rumsfeld said: "the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania." The very utterance of a plane being shot down, to some, give creedence to the theory that Flight 93 was downed by US missiles.

cnn.usnews.printthis.cl ickability.com
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.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Regardless of what I happen to believe on the subject, I do think he simply misspoke. It seems like it would be very easy to say "shot down" instead of something like "took down". Although it easily could have been a Fruedian slip too.

Related News Links:
www.worldnetdaily.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
rumsfeld says 911 plane shot down in penn
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Xatnys

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 10:47 AM

link

"the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania."

Wow, first true statement to come out of this guy's mouth since 9/11.

I guess since Rummy couldn't practice the old rule of "CYA", the press has to do it for him.

Good job Rummy!

X

MysticalUnicorn

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 10:48 AM

link

Was it a slip-up?

No question was it a slip-up, the question is, what kind of slip-up is it?

Slip-up A- He used a bad choice of words. (No big deal)

Slip-up B- He accidently told the truth in which case it would be a very big deal.

We will never know, and most likely, our government will deny it. Once the government denies it, it will slip OUR minds and we will soon follow another media story. You never know what their next story is though.

Countermeasures

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 10:58 AM

link

I think Mr. Cool on the outside must be boiling on the inside with his person coming more under scrutiny within the united states, cracks in the mirror, getting sloppy my man!

[edit on 28-12-2004 by Countermeasures]

GradyPhilpott

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:14 AM

link

It was a simple error by someone who deals with all manner of military scenarios, including aircraft shot down. One has to wonder how many of us would want to have to be followed about all day having every word recorded and analyzed. Heck, most people here can't produce a single post without errors or slip-ups. Rumsfeld doesn't have the luxury of an edit function for every word that leaves his mouth.

I would like to know one person on this site who has as much responsibility as the Secretary of Defense. I would like to know one person on this site who never misspeaks.

[edit on 04/12/28 by GradyPhilpott]

JoeDoaks

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:53 AM

link

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I would like to know one person on this site who has as much responsibility as the Secretary of Defense. I would like to know one person on this site who never misspeaks.

If you found such a person what would you do with them?

Is this wishful thinking?

Rummy took the job- therefore HE is responsible. Dan Quale 2

spngsambigpants

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 12:06 PM

link

Originally posted by Xatnys

"the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania."

Wow, first true statement to come out of this guy's mouth since 9/11

You have to take the entire statement into consieration, not just part of it. The statement says that the terrorists from 9/11 were the ones who shot down the airplane, which is, of course, not true.

metalfan87

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 12:09 PM

link

Originally posted by JoeDoaks

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I would like to know one person on this site who has as much responsibility as the Secretary of Defense. I would like to know one person on this site who never misspeaks.

If you found such a person what would you do with them?

Is this wishful thinking?

Rummy took the job- therefore HE is responsible. Dan Quale 2

Your right "Rummy" did take the job and he should be responsible for whatever he does... but thats not the issue. Gradyphilpott asked who on this board can say they've never misspoke, and that mistakes happen. It's ok for the average citizen to misspeak because were not giving speeches to the public and w/e we say or do is reported. One little mess up for people that are constintly in the publics eye like a government official or a celebrity and it's on the front pages of ur local news paper. Made a good point Grady. This isn't an attack on you Dan just responding to your comment...

GradyPhilpott

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 12:22 PM

link

Originally posted by spngsambigpants
You have to take the entire statement into consieration, not just part of it. The statement says that the terrorists from 9/11 were the ones who shot down the airplane, which is, of course, not true.

This is absolutely correct. The misuse of one term doesn't alter the intent of the statement, unless, of course, you are simply grasping at straws to discredit the man.

thirddensity

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 12:36 PM

link

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by spngsambigpants
You have to take the entire statement into consieration, not just part of it. The statement says that the terrorists from 9/11 were the ones who shot down the airplane, which is, of course, not true.

This is absolutely correct. The misuse of one term doesn't alter the intent of the statement, unless, of course, you are simply grasping at straws to discredit the man.

Unless you are of the opinion that the "terrorists" that committed the above were actually not Muslims, but something else all together.

For instance, if the terrorists were part of the NWO, then the entire context makes perfect sense, and is truthful.

SkipShipman

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 12:41 PM

link

It is so difficult to maintain an "internal truth," and a "public truth," when both are for practical purposes entirely different. Yes okay, the plane was "shot down," but not by Osama. It is the only instance in which NORAD, acted responsibly, but it was a local national guard that gave the order. Next time, a more intensive federalization and topheavy leadership will insure that the airplane attains its remote control mission, designed to steal your basic human rights, and pass horrible so called laws.

Xatnys

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 03:58 PM

link

As the context you reference is the context that the government supports....
Like this person pointed out:

Unless you are of the opinion that the "terrorists" that committed the above were actually not Muslims, but something else all together.

Exactly.

Not to mention the fact that his statement could also be saying "They made us shoot down the plane." It's called guilt displacement.

And deep, deep down in the back of that cold, dark mind, Rummy has some form of guilt.

As they all should.

The truth will be known by all one day. 9/11 was the biggest lie a government has told its people since the Reichstag fires.

Wait till you see what the government has planned to instigate the coming Iran invasion, oh, I mean, "liberation".

This is how the world ends.
This is how the world ends.
Not with a bang.
But with a whimper.

X

Kidfinger

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 04:06 PM

link

I honestly believe that plane was shot down. Did any one actually see the pics of the debris field? It wasnt very large, or scattered. Not only that, but there wasnt anything left bigger than a shoebox. When aircraft crash, this doesnt happen. There is a debris fiel that usually is scattared over a large area, and with large fragment of the plan intact. I have seen pics of planes that have crashed into the side of mountians that left entire wing sections, engines, tail sections, even landing gear. There was nothing left of flight 93. It was completly destroied.

I think Rummie actually told the truth about something, even though he didnt mean to.

[edit on 12/28/04 by Kidfinger]

MaskedAvatar

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 04:06 PM

link

Altogether there is too much "mis-speaking" by figures in the Bush administration. The number of instances of programs gone wrong and criminal acts overseen by the administration that must be removed from public view is staggering. Of course there will be slip after slip.

Fear and terrorism are the only means of keeping "Joe Public's" eye off the shell in the shell game. Never before have there been so many mushrooms in the mushroom farm.

*Departs to mix bad metaphors elsewhere, and contemplate just what did happen with all the "immediately deployable" "Weapons Of Mass Destruction" that Colin Powell pinpointed the location of on maps and aerial photographs, with the Bush administration-led invasion of Iraq imminent.*

Odd

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 05:31 PM

link

how come any Bush administration is assumed to be lying CONSTANTLY, except when they say something in line with the hardcore liberal conspiracy theorist rhetoric?

just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's a lie. Get some perspective, kids

Kidfinger

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 05:39 PM

link

Originally posted by Odd
how come any Bush administration is assumed to be lying CONSTANTLY,.....

Because they are constantly lying to us

Tell them to quit lying to us, and I will tell the Liberals on the board to quit bitching about the lying.

MaskedAvatar

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 06:15 PM

link

Originally posted by Odd
just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's a lie. Get some perspective, kids

Well that bears a high degree of relevance to this topic.

How about providing some "perspective" to the "kids" before bailing out?

Did you "like" what Rumsfeld said?

Was it the "truth" or was it a "lie"?

Well, which was it?

Please provide some supporting evidence in your defence of the indefensible, and practise what it is that you wish to preach.

Odd

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 06:26 PM

link

I have yet to see conclusive evidence that the Bush administration had any hand in the destruction of the World Trade Center.

As for the bit you quoted, I wasn't talking specifically about Rumsfeld's statements-- what I mean is this: just because you don't want to think that the WTC was destroyed by Islamofacist terrorists does make the idea 'indefensible'.

And don't bother trying to make this into a flame war. I've seen the way you flout your holier-than-thou attitude around the rest of the board, and I'm not going to be bothered in the least if you try and direct it at me.

PistolPete

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 06:28 PM

link

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Please provide some supporting evidence in your defence of the indefensible, and practise what it is that you wish to preach.

How do you provide evidence someone misspoke?

MaskedAvatar

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 06:36 PM

link

Misspeaking is defensible. It is an act of stupidity.

Criminality and covering up of criminal acts are indefensible.

On topic, it would appear that if we agree with Rumsfeld that the plane over Pennsylvania on 9/11 was shot down and that is not a lie, then clearly it warrants much investigation as was in the "official" account that heroics aboard the plane wrested it from the terrorists on board and brought the plane down.

Or, if Rumsfeld "misspoke" so severely, then he really ought to retract or explain it, to put it mildly.

Bad to worse, day after day, for the Bush administration.

Odd, I could not make sense of your second sentence about the WTC. But I am holy today and tomorrow I may well be unholy, while you will still be Odd, LOL.