I’m sorry but I’m a little confused here. I could swear I saw a Hollywood movie that claimed this flight was brought down by the passengers of Flight 93. Neil Young even wrote a song about it called “Let’s Roll”. Now Dick wants to take the credit? I know he has a book to sell, but does Dick have no sense of decency? I may have to rethink this whole thing.
Your comments?
Thanks to AC and No Agenda
Just imagine if a US fighter had shot down a US airliner full of Americans on Cheney’s order….
I think the Dick got lucky here.
#41–Olo==I think Cheney would be lauded for making a tough call that had to be made.
The alternative that no one can deny is a fourth airplane hitting another large government building.
Shooting down the airplane would have been the right thing to do–I’d have tried to down it by taking out the engines one at a time. Might have worked and saved everyone but the plane could not be allowed to pick a target and fly into it.
Explain yourself please. What are you thinking of?
“…passed on the President’s approval.” So he made the decision? Based on his long military service…yeah…I believe him.
This post is evidence that Bush Derangement Syndrome hasn’t finished. So what should Cheney have said?
Bobbo, taking out engines works if you think you have lots of time. You have to go for the wing or cockpit.
If they knock down that plane, they better find irrefutable, unequivocal, and absolute evidence of its intent. I think that’s a challenge, especially given the conspiracy nuts who crawled out from under their rocks.
IMO it would have resulted in massive controversy, possibly leading to Cheney’s resignation or even the collapse of the BushToo administration.
As for shooting engines, I suspect the new pilot didn’t practice flying a 757 with one engine. Just a guess.
MikeN…Cheney should just shut his trap completely. He’s working hard to make himself look like the brains in that administration, but his accounts often contradict Bush’s. He regrets no decisions? What a narcissistic buffoon.
From a historian’s perspective, he should just be like old Grant and sit around typing up his memoirs until that blood pump finally fails. History will be his ultimate judge, not today’s Fox News audience.
Our government covered up something with a feel good story? Nah, that would never happen. Trust your government blindly!
In other news, a conspiracy nut I know is saying there’ll be a major earthquake in my region (Portugal)… Anybody aware of any relation between these events???
I actually started planning an emergency kit for such an event a week ago, the thought just came to me out of the blue…
Am I finally going insane? Or is there a greater cosmic relevance to all this? Please advise.
This is a bullshit conspiracy that @McCullough is trying to pin on this statement. I don’t care for Dick and think he is wrong in his stances, but giving the order to shoot down a plane DOES NOT mean the plane was shot down. Why do you have to lie about conspiracy and controversy when there is ACTUAL controversy out there. You should be ashamed of yourself for being so stupid.
#45–Olo==didn’t I provide the irrefutable evidence in my question? 3 other airplanes already hit other buildings? It was irrefutable enough for Todd Deaver (sp?) and the passengers of Flt 93 to take action themselves. The plane had turned 90 degrees from its flight path and was out of radio contact.
I do “assume” the pilots in the fighters would get a visual on who was flying the airplane and signal them.
There was plenty of time to take out an engine. It might well have provided enough confusion for the passengers to have seized control.
I don’t think any reasonable person would want more proof than was already had and/or easily confirmed. Fighter can fly to within a few feet of the cockpit windows and actually see the colors of their eyes.
The passengers were going to die anyway if it was a hijacked aircraft.
What are the odds of the fourth aircraft being innocent when three other aircraft that morning that turned 90 degree/180 degrees off course without radio contact and flew into buildings?
Seems like common sense to me. Olo. come back?
#33 never said that. You’re delusional.
I’d to be on your death panel to help you.
#51 But you are delusional. Seriously, ask Dick you wanna suck him and be finally happy.
I think he must mean TWA Flight 800.
On 9/11 his job was to make sure that the USAF didn’t stop any planes.
#50 Bobbo said
“Fighter can fly to within a few feet of the cockpit windows and actually see the colors of their eyes.”
Don’t believe the movie “Top Gun”. F-15 has a wingspan of 42 ft, F-16 is 32 ft. The fuselage of Boeing 777 is 20 ft. So if the F-16 was so close that the wingtip was scraping paint off the 777, the fighter pilot would have 25 ft between his eyes and the eyes of the 777 pilot, looking thru his canopy and the cockpit windows of the 777. All the while maintaining position at 500+ mph.
Can you tell the eye-color of the driver of the car beside you on the interstate? I know I can’t even if we are sitting still in a backup.
It took 17 posts before somebody made a post that suggested they had an IQ.
They had a plane out of radio contact and he said what had to be said under the circumstances.
Of course it might have been a good idea to have a military jet loiter in front first and turn on the after burners. Looking into the business end of a giant blow torch tends to get the attention of even the most lack witted pilot.
Kapn==I welcome your challenge. I didn’t think much about it==just thought back to my own flying days and maybe I was just remembering the color of my friends eyes? Our jets were smaller though, so you are right. Too far away. You absolutely can get close enough to see the face, uniform, and hand signals that are used in such circumstances.
what I imaged was the fighter pulling up ahead of the aircraft far enough ahead so that the airline could not suddenly ram him and looking back say at an 8 o’clock low angle. Only if need be, it wouldn’t be that much of a trick to go upside down cockpit to cockpit just like in Top Gun. Not that close, but close enough to see the color of the eyes would be possible but not safe due to the hijackers potential hostile actions.
Just heard the Shanksville crash site is only 18 minutes flight time from Wash DC. There indeed may not have been time for all this confirming stuff.
I’d still want to try and disable the a/c first and see what they do. I doubt a low time pilot could keep the a/c in the air but you should give them a chance to land 15 minutes short of Wash DC? If not, hit that fuel tank with an incendiary burst or a missile. Course, I would do whatever Cheney told me to do. Ha, ha. Hell–I’d let the fry cook at McDonalds order me to straff a train on a bridge. ………. would I???? Well, if 3 other trains had set off nukes at their terminal cities—–yes, I would.
Jet Jockies are like that. We want to shoot our guns……in a responsible professional way.
bobbo, the political implications aren’t always logical, the right doesn’t have an exclusive on insanity.
Anyways, they have to shoot it down fast because they can’t do it over the DC ‘burbs. Positive determination of intent is tough unless the fighter makes radio contact with the new pilot, and as the new audio tells us, these guys lied about their intent. The cell phone stuff from the passengers didn’t come out until weeks(?) later, and there was no communication channel between passengers/crew and military. Maybe a passenger flashing morse out the window with a flashlight? Do fighter pilots know it?
Cheney was guessing. He would have been right, but all he had was circumstantial evidence.
His interviews are a “gasp” to watch, not just this one. If you have the balls, take a gander at them. Shocking is an understatement.
#57–Olo==you are losing me. Let’s parse:
bobbo, the political implications aren’t always logical, /// Political? Well, everything does have a political component. Will there be a great outcry such as yours if a plane of innocent civilians is shot down before it flies into the Whitehouse? I know there would be. Wouldn’t the situation be totally controlled by the post facto analysis of whether or not the plane was under terrorist control? Yes–erroneously, but politically it would be. So–Cheney’s decision politically was to face that wrath compared to the odds the plane that was off course was a threat or not. The plane was under terrorist control. I don’t see long term political consequences from anything other that letting the plane fly into the Capital or the Whitehouse, or whatever target of convenience was found. You do recognize there would be consequences for letting the plane fly into a building when “we knew” it was being used as a weapon right? And there have been “political consequences” for the government not being reactive enough to get the fighters in the air fast enough to provide the air cap that is now in hindsight seen to have been helpful. Helpful to do what?=====Shoot down the airplane.
the right doesn’t have an exclusive on insanity. //// Agreed. Its completely partisan to blame one party while ignoring the same activity by the other. It is almost always only a matter of degree that separates them. Sad.
Anyways, they have to shoot it down fast because they can’t do it over the DC ‘burbs. /// I disagree. A few houses/apartments/cars is nothing like a Public Building like the Whitehouse or the Congress being taken out. Planes crashing in the suburbs have never killed as many people as were on that airplane. In my view, even facing the political fall out that would result, I would risk the suburb crash to positively ID the airplane and situation.
Positive determination of intent is tough /// No–all a matter of definition. No pilot will take an aircraft off course, without radio contact, and not land immediately unless the pilot is under duress.
unless the fighter makes radio contact with the new pilot, /// I would find confirmation in seeing the aircraft was not being flown by guys in United Pilot Uniforms. The iron proof if you will is the other 3 planes crashing into buildings.
and as the new audio tells us, these guys lied about their intent. /// There would be no discussion of intent. At the most: turn your aircraft to the north or I will shoot you down. The a/c either turns North or not.
The cell phone stuff from the passengers didn’t come out until weeks(?) later, and there was no communication channel between passengers/crew and military. /// It would have been “nice” but not necessary at all.
Maybe a passenger flashing morse out the window with a flashlight? Do fighter pilots know it? /// No. The only hand signal I remember is short on fuel–its the Aggie Horns.
Cheney was guessing. /// Of course. Thats what leadership is. Making “decisions” based on having all the facts is called management.
He would have been right, but all he had was circumstantial evidence. /// Yes–circumstantial==actually the best evidence in the world and in fact all we ever have to go on once we leave the world of dogma.
Olo==we agree. You just haven’t found the right attitude yet to realize it.
Life is good.
I’m just glad those guys on Flight 93 acted.
I had a chance to see the Flight 93 memorial on Sunday and regret not doing it.