[Dianna]

If we did NOT shoot it down, the people on board truly WERE heroes in causing the crash. If we DID shoot it down, it was the right thing to do to avoid catastrophe in numbers we have no way of calculating.

I haven't gotten through this whole thread, but I think the dems MAY be trying to say that the heros did in fact take control of the plane only to be then shot done on orders from Bush.

This is the only scenario that would be truly horrific.

[Dianna]

This is the only scenario that would be truly horrific.

That was a poor choice of words. All of it is horrific. But it would bring an extra jolt to think that the plane was under control and safe and then shot down.

We know that the rumors of 93 being shot down have been out there for months. And the story went nowhere because everyone knew that if it were shot down, it was necessary. So, now the dems are trying this.

[supercat]

I haven't gotten through this whole thread, but I think the dems MAY be trying to say that the heros did in fact take control of the plane only to be then shot done on orders from Bush.

It is doubtful that the heroes could have gotten and kept control of the plane. Even if some of the passengers had managed to get control of the cockpit briefly, the hijackers in the back of the plane would have likely been able to take it back. The real question in my mind is whether the hijackers crashed the plane to prevent the passengers from regaining control, or whether a passenger forced an unrecoverable dive to prevent the terrorists from regaining control.

[Wondervixen]

Yes, and like most of the Dums charges, the ridiculous anti-logic speaks for itself.