It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cheney admits he gave the order to shoot down Flight 93

page: 7
26
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I think some people are forgetting that the pictures you normally see are just one small area of a vast miles long containment field.

Personally it seems obvious that the plane exploded in mid air and rained down debris along it's flight path for miles and that the reason they arent going to say they shot it down is the lawsuits that will come as a result for wrongful death. Which would force them to disclose details about attempts to contact the plane and to force it down or lack there of. A Pandora's box of potential bad things.

We have gotten a small part of the story at best and as far as evidence of complicity I can't imagine they would give written orders to attack the US to anyone.




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Cheney's order to shoot down Flight 93 wasn't anything honorable, as some here seem to imply.

He had no interest in saving lives from a plane that was being used as a weapon. The simple fact is that the plane was off course and it was clear that it wasn't going to be able to hit it's intended target (most likely WTC 7). There's no way that those in office were going to allow any survivors of the puppet terrorist cell to link any sort of information back to Pakistan, and then in turn to the Pentagon, and then in turn to the administration.

The order was given only to cover his ass.

Could you imagine if someone at the Pentagon had "slipped up" and actually shot down the missile that struck the Pentagon? LMAO. Over a million Iraqis would be alive today, had that happened. In fact, it might have been Bush, Cheney and Rumsefield on the gallows, instead of Saddam. What a beautiful world that could have been.

Coulda ... woulda ... shoulda



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
So, is it now the protocol for when a plane is hijacked to just shoot it down and kill everyone on the plane? Will they try to negotiate? I would think that they would try to communicate with the people in control of the plane before shooting it down.

Wasn't there a struggle going on at the time when the plane was going down? So, was it shot down while the innocent people were fighting for their lives rendering their resistance futile and assuring their death by the hands of their own government?

-Alien



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
Yes, I mean Flight 93. There were so many 'funny' flights that day it's hard to keep them straight!



What I meant was, at first (when responders FIRST got there) they were reporting no signs of any Human remains. There was hardly any signs of any discernible debris......anywhere!!


Well then it's not quite correct to say that they didn't find a single cell of a human there. They didn't see any discernible body parts and those that were found, you doubt the provenance of them. That would be more accurate.

I can't personally see any point in killing all the passengers somewhere else, painstakingly faking a crash site, then driving over some random remains and pretending they were part of that crash site. Why not just crash the plane? Or shoot it down, as has been suggested?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by tyranny22
Cheney's order to shoot down Flight 93 wasn't anything honorable, as some here seem to imply.

He had no interest in saving lives from a plane that was being used as a weapon. The simple fact is that the plane was off course and it was clear that it wasn't going to be able to hit it's intended target (most likely WTC 7).


Interesting theory. It might even hold water if the plane had been headed for New York.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

geeeez HA, are you really gonna bark at others for actually READING some of the info out there?
apparently, you forgot to read your own resource or just skimmed over the contradictions within it ... here, let me help ... from your source: PG/MSM BS

Pittsburgh FBI spokesman Bill Crowley said the flight data recorder was found about 4:50 p.m. in the main crater at the crash site, located near Shanksville.
- from the opening paragraphs ~ emphasis mine
then we have this from same story ...

"The other priority is the black box," Crowley said. "We're confident that we are going to keep looking for it and we will account for it."
- really ??? thought he stated they FOUND it ?
now, for more standards of confusion ... let's look further -- dare we ??

While some officials were reportedly pessimistic about the chances of finding the flight recorders intact, Crowley said there was no way to determine their conditions until they were located.
- emphasis mine

In response to a question on recurring rumors that the plane might have been shot down, Crowley said that at this stage of the investigation, no possibility was being ruled out. He stressed, however, that no evidence had surfaced to support that theory.

Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, noted and discounted the same speculation here Tuesday, saying that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield had assured him that the government had not shot down the hijacked plane to prevent it from hitting a potential target.

so let's review ...
We found it
ok, WHEN we find it
no evidence of being shot down but witnesses report second plane in immediate air space
but wait, even Rumsfeld ASSURED Rep Murtha the plane was NOT shot down.
however, regardless of witness accounts, govt declared the 'other' aircraft didn't exist, remember ??

yet let's not forget, armed assailants were plentiful (1 for each 10) ... so when the passengers over took them, i don't suppose any shots were fired or cabin pressures breached or debris falling from the sky prior to the plane's descent, right?

so in other words, if any witness claimed they saw a person falling from the plane, to you that means it must have been 'shot down', right ?? couldn't be that cabin depressurizing sucked passengers from the craft rather it be shot down ?? or perhaps, maybe someone saw what was coming, grabbed a parachute and jumped, that couldn't be a possibility either right? wow dude, pretty presumptuous for someone who wasn't there.

oh and btw, i doubt any vehicle you drive can eclipse 150mph ... and that's a wee bit slow to 'spread' debris as you infer. Now, you wanna blow out a tire at 120mph and then smash into a brick wall ... i would bet you'd find plenty of miniscule debris some distance away from the point of impact ... what makes this soooo different ???
ohhhhh, that's right ... the plane was traveling at what ?? 400+ mph ... nope, that debris field shouldn't be bigger than a ball field !!
... psssst, the name is Honor93 for a reason and it isn't a propaganda statement either

Soooooo, who's lying? (besides the passengers in pieces wherever they amassed)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

(And bin Laden still remained "not wanted")


I'm not sure you're correct there. Bin Laden was wanted for years even before 9/11.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
So, is it now the protocol for when a plane is hijacked to just shoot it down and kill everyone on the plane?


Why would you assume that this had become "protocol"?




Will they try to negotiate? I would think that they would try to communicate with the people in control of the plane before shooting it down.


I wonder what they would do. It's an interesting question, actually. Although it's harder to hijack a plane now, what would they do faced with a single hijacked aircraft that they could communicate with? Given no other planes hitting buildings I imagine they would struggle to pull the trigger. I know I would.


Wasn't there a struggle going on at the time when the plane was going down? So, was it shot down while the innocent people were fighting for their lives rendering their resistance futile and assuring their death by the hands of their own government?

-Alien


Note that this thread and the OP doesn't at all prove that the plane was shot down. Just that the order was given.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by caladonea
So....Cheney admits to giving the order.....big deal.....I am not impressed by anything this man does. I do wonder however...what is his hidden agenda this time....he always has one.





Operation Northwoods 1963


PNAC 1991 via Terrorism 2001 via 2.3 trillion missing dollars


Patriot Act via Al qaeda

Homeland Security via Weapons of Mass Destruction

Halliburton via 3 unprovoked wars

Anthrax scare via a guaranteed (Diebold) second term in office which afforded him a nice cushy retirement sipping umbrella drinks down in Paraguay!


I didn't find his agenda too terribly hidden, did you?


Exactly.

You can say whatever you want about Cheney, but to accuse him of not being transparent is not one of them. The man frightens the bejesus out of me, but if you have ever watched an interview of the man in full, im 99% sure he believe everything he says.

He still firmly believes waterboarding was for the best (not sure i disagree), and still stands behind the decision to invade Iraq. No regrets from this man, and when he says it, i believe him.

edit on 8-9-2011 by nightbringr because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Why are we making an such a big issue of this now when Cheney admitted on Sept 16, 2001 that he gave the order?

In an interview with Meet the Press he admitted it. Ten years ago. Lets stop pretending this is new news.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nightbringr
 


That's what I was thinking exactly. If this is different than any testimony given in the 9-11 commission reports then its a non issue. If it is contrary, you may have something... if not;

Move alone



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
I really dont like that guy.

Any proof flight 93 existed yet?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
When I was watching this I wasn't too shocked. To me it sounded like he wasn't actually admitting that he shot down the plane. It sounded like he was talking about standard protocal on what to do in that situation. I don't know if I'm wording my thoughts correctly on this one though.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
If you listen to the tapes that are on NYtimes site today you can hear all the people talking about the events as they happen... two things here.... Cheney gave the ok to shoot down the planes after all 4 were already down from what I can tell.... so X the shot down theory.... also, a pilot near the end of the tapes reports seeing the plane flying toward and hitting the pentagon.... missle theory sunk


These tapes have been available at the national archives since they had been collected, but now they are freely available online....

Nice try truther's, but the REAL TRUTH is in the tape..... highly doubt they have actors talking on FAA channels live....



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
The decision was made way in advance to shoot down any aircraft in terrorist control that threatened the lives of more americans. So, the question is then, what would be every ones responce if the aircraft had not been taken down by the passengers and/or by fighter jets? Would we be content with the loss of many more lives in a residential area because nothing was done? If the plane was in fact shot down, then I applaude the decision. Were I on that plane, then I would applaude the decision to shoot it down than to let it destroy the lives of many more. As it stands, the order was "given" to shoot it down. That does not mean that it was in fact shot down. There are many veterans here on ATS, does a given "order" mean that somethng took place? I really cant see the purpose of this thread other than to continue a theory with a lack of any evidence.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by dreb13
 


I have thought for a while that they shot down flight 93. I actually went to the cinema to watch the crappy film of it with an ex-girlfriend. In hindsight that was an obvious propaganda film, I was oblivious at the time though.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by rayuki
wait so this pretty much proves every conspiracy theorist right about flight 93 all this time everyone saying it wasn't a plane CRASH etc and now they ADMIT it was BLOWN out of the sky?

so the Sheeple will just go "Meh" and continue on there merry way no doubt?


Odd...I thought the conspiracists always claimed that Cheney *withheld* the order to shoot on purpose. Now you say this was never a claim - or is it just one they had to (now) give up?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by rayuki
wait so this pretty much proves every conspiracy theorist right about flight 93 all this time everyone saying it wasn't a plane CRASH etc and now they ADMIT it was BLOWN out of the sky?

so the Sheeple will just go "Meh" and continue on there merry way no doubt?


Um, no. It makes it more likely that the "OS" is broadly true. Because why would the perpetrators blow up their own hijacked plane?

And you're wrong anyway. He says he gave the order, not that it was carried out.


OMG...

Bizzaro world here.

He gave the order to shoot the plane down.
And it was carried out. How could it not have been?
The president already gave out the general command to intercept and shoot planes.
So this was a specific command from Cheney about a specific plane.
It fits with the ground evidence and eyewitness testimony.

So yes, it supports 9/11 skeptics at least when it came to flight 93.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by rayuki
wait so this pretty much proves every conspiracy theorist right about flight 93 all this time everyone saying it wasn't a plane CRASH etc and now they ADMIT it was BLOWN out of the sky?

so the Sheeple will just go "Meh" and continue on there merry way no doubt?


Um, no. It makes it more likely that the "OS" is broadly true. Because why would the perpetrators blow up their own hijacked plane?

And you're wrong anyway. He says he gave the order, not that it was carried out.

He gave the order to shoot the plane down.
And it was carried out. How could it not have been?


Omg is right.

He gave an order. I have no idea why you make the jump to the conclusion the order was carried through. If he gave the order at 9:25am and the jets imediately flew to intercept, yet the plane was crashed to the ground by the time they got there, the order could not be carried out.

I have no idea what it is you cannot understand about this.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Ive always thought this video of Rumsfeld stating the plane was shot down said all you need to know..... I am sure an OS person will say it was a verbal mishap, but i disagree.

www.youtube.com...



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join