Posted on 12/27/2004 7:55:49 PM PST by wagglebee
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I dunno guys.... i'm not much for conspiracy theories.... but i still think that flight was shot down by our jets due to the debris field being so large and i also think TWA-800 was shot down (by terrorists with shoulder fired rockets.... too many people saw con-trails)
Finally, a theory that fully explains the reports that a one-ton section of the engine was found over a mile away and other light debris was found scattered over eight miles away! I have no doubt that Sec. Rumsfeld (whom I respect greatly) misspoke, the question is whether his misstatement was in fact a rare revelation of the truth.
If you still havn't been SOLD on the plane being downed because it was compromised by terrorists, yes, you are a nutter. Pip. Off you go.
"I think he meant brought down (not shot down) in the sense of not letting it land again."
I thought so too.
He was speaking of the terrorists in each instance. So he must have meant "brought down," not "shot down."
This is much ado about nothing.
"i still think that flight was shot down by our jets due to the debris field being so large"want to back that up with a link???
"Art Bell and George Nouri will salivate on this for years"
Didn't this looney retire a few times. Or, you mean his entertainment show is still on?
He's just pushing their buttons over at scAIR AMERICA.
LOL!
Thanks.
Actually, Rummy should say something off the cuff about Roswell and later something about JFK and give all the conspiracy wingnuts something to drool over.
Then I can write a few select blog entries and start a new conspiracy movement to prove Rummy has been taken over by a supreme being to reveal all the secrets of the world before the end times.
Before too long, Rummy will have his own set of counter culture worshippers based on nothing other than the mental lapses of an old man.
Name one and I guarantee you it has been answered and documented.
Kind of a dumb statement from a dumber commission.
Certainly conspiracies exist but I am afraid this one ain't one. I think Rummy meant to say brought down, not shot down.
Please tell me where I said that terrorists weren't involved. I do believe they took control of the plane.
"Eight miles away in New Baltimore, Melanie Hankinson said she found singed papers and other light debris from the crash, including pages from Hemispheres Magazine, United's in-flight magazine. Stoe said authorities initially insisted crash debris could not have traveled over a mountain ridge more than eight miles from the crash.
that mirror is a load of crap!!! the engine is the easiest to explain... violent movements during the takeover took the plane OUTSIDE of the DESIGN ENVELOPE and one of the engines snapped off. a four engine plane can fly a long time on three engines, any fighter pilot worth his salt would put a load of 20mm through the cockpit windows and put it down right then and there!!! anything else found on the ground is nothing more than the plane shedding lost skin etc. and could be smoking/on fire from the engine being ripped off the plane.
I also believe mideasteners were involved in the Oklahoma City bombing. I guess that makes me a double-nut.
The plane WAS NOT shot down. You said it. Not me. Don't suggest that I'm telling you that you're a nutter for suggesting it was SHOT DOWN when that's extactly what you are suggesting. The plane was downed. It was by folks on it. Terrorists, or passengers, brought it down. Make a stand one way or another. -Mal
Its no secret that a huge engine section was found over a mile away and light fragments were scattered some 8 miles away from the main crash area.
I've read this from many reputible sources.
And FYI, i'm not much for conspiracy theories. My ex-fiancee's good freind and (co-flight attendant) was the girl on the United Airlines jet that hit the WTC... you can hear her gurggling blood in the background of the recording... her throat slit.
My ex-fiancee was supposed to be on that plane. So this tragedy really hits home for me and is something i dont screw around with.
One of our air to air missiles would have taken the entire engine and part of the wing.the plane would have fallen at no more than about 300mph.
The plane hit at a very high rate of speed. Something a damaged plane with a missing engine could not possible have done. And there was no indication from passengers that anything like that occurred. Also, if we had shot it down, don't you think that we would have acknowledged it since orders had been given to do exactly that.
In point of fact, we actually failed to shoot it down before it crashed and the defense dept. got criticized for that as well.
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.