Here is just a taste of the many clues that show that the official story for 911 was a fraud. At a speech, Donald Rumsfeld is rambling off about bombings and attacks, and all of a sudden, he says " Flight 93 shot down." I want everyone to click on the link below and listen very carefully for
yourself: http://prisonplanet.com/articles/October2006/301006Rumsfeld.htm

The official story for 911 at Wikipedia states this about flight 93:

"(through testimony, tapes of passengers' phone calls, and the flight data recorders recovered from the crash) determined that crew and passengers, alerted through phone calls to loved ones, had attempted to subdue the hijackers. The Commission concluded that the hijackers crashed the plane to keep the crew and passengers from gaining control. The Commission's official report states that co-pilot LeRoy Homer, flight attendants CeeCee Lyles and Sandra Bradshaw and passengers Todd Beamer, Mark Bingham, Tom Burnett, Andrew Garcia, Jeremy Glick, and Richard Guadagno, among others, fought back against the hijackers. "

This is clear evidence that the government is lying. Donald Rumsfeld screwed up during his speech and said that Flight 93 was shot down, when the official story clearly states it was hijacked and crashed into the ground by terrorists when the passengers attempted to fight back. How could he have got that wrong?

Some of you will try to say this was a mere "mistake." Yeah right. The same mistake that Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTCs, used the term "pull it" to refer to the fall of WTC Building 7, which was not hit by airplanes. The word "pull it" means controlled demolition. He tried to say it meant the fire fighters, but they had already left the building earlier in the day.

If you want to declare that it's not a mistake, then you also have to accept that it's not a mistake that he included it in a list of things done by the terrorists. So you think the terrorists shot down United 93?

Man, thats not evidence. He said that terrorists 'shot down' the plane, instead of 'running it into the ground'.

So... the terrorists had some AA guns that we didn't know about in Pennsylvania, and decided to shoot down the plane that they had already successfully hijacked. I'm failing to see a motive here.

Look I know that flight had "real" people on it...but what if they did shoot it down... under the circumstances that day, would that be sooooooooooooo horrendous? Just asking. For some reason, to me that pales in comparison with Iraq if you want to get technical. And even if you don't...they didn't know where the plane was headed and it's killing potential, The people aboard were already were going to die regardless.

It may sound cold but??????????????

This is over a year old.

Bush and Cheney have both admitted they gave orders for the flight to be shot down.

It would only make sense to shoot it down given the circumstances.

But its better propaganda to say the passengers ran it into the ground.

Why are people even in denial of this?

Look I know that flight had "real" people on it...but what if they did shoot it down... under the circumstances that day, would that be sooooooooooooo horrendous? Just asking. For some reason, to me that pales in comparison with Iraq if you want to get technical. And even if you don't...they didn't know where the plane was headed and it's killing potential, The people aboard were already were going to die regardless.

It may sound cold but??????????????

I agree Sal. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 the government would have said "we shot it down to prevent another Twin Towers", and the American people would have said "good job".

This is over a year old.

Bush and Cheney have both admitted they gave orders for the flight to be shot down.

It would only make sense to shoot it down given the circumstances.

But its better propaganda to say the passengers ran it into the ground.

All true.

Why are people even in denial of this?

Because it's not true.

To me that (old) video is nothing more than a mistake by Rummy - I'd hardly call it an admission.

On 9/12 the government would have had no problem saying they shot it down if in fact they had done so the previous day.

This is just yet another load of rubbish for the conspiracy heads to jump on - there are far better "items" to mention than this one.

Dude, (you're getting a Dell, hah, hah, hah)

Rumsfield said that the terrorists "shot down" the airliner, not the government, fighter planes, anti aircraft sites or any of that. This really and truly isn't evidence.

I've not dug around for list of passengers on those airliners that dove into the WTC towers, BUT one could give these silly ass conspiracy theories a little more credit if planes did crash into buildings and nobody could find any passenger lists and who the pilots were on that day. A passenger plane fully loaded with kerosene (think at least ten thousand gallons) is going to start a very, very hot fire and it will destroy the steel supports that held the WTC towers together. Bin Laden himself said he had studied engineering and EXPECTED that to happen.

Rumsfeld made a mistake. It's not like it's a stretch to believe that, after all look at his record as Secretary of Defense. If he could be that wrong about Iraq, he could easily make a small mistake like this.

I dont think anyone would say something of this magnitude if it wasnt somehow true.

Why? The guy's ancient - he was born the same year Lincoln was shot. Most guys his age don't get to even touch the TV remote control, nevermind get to actually say important stuff on the TV.

Its much more likely that if there was a shootdown conspiracy that he would never make such a slip because he'd be absolutely focused on not saying that. I'm 99.999% certain that this was nothing more than a wrong choice of words - ie a mistake.

When you add to that the plain & simple fact that the government would have absolutely zero reason to lie about that - then you can just dismiss this rummy comment as not even worth discussing.

I dont think anyone would say something of this magnitude if it wasnt somehow true.
So the terrorists did shoot down Flight 93? Where exactly did they get the weaponry to do that?

Search me.........

It all seems strange!!

Because it's not true. how do you know?

There evidence that suggest that it was. The engines were found over a mile away. Theres minutes of rushing air noise on the voice recorder before the crash, indicating a hull breach.

how do you know?

The engines were found over a mile away.

Nope. (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=7)

CLAIM: One of Flight 93's engines was found "at a considerable distance from the crash site," according to Lyle Szupinka, a state police officer on the scene who was quoted in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Offering no evidence, a posting on Rense.com claimed: "The main body of the engine ... was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner."

FACT: Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.

Theres minutes of rushing air noise on the voice recorder before the crash, indicating a hull breach.

I've never heard that before, either in the media or on the tapes when played.

I know that prior to 9/11 Internal security in America was shit, but even I just cant believe that alQaeda were on the ground with a SAM unit,then got away,c'mon.

Dude, (you're getting a Dell, hah, hah, hah)
Priceless, Darth. Lmao.

I just saw on CNN that Rumsfield has just resigned

I just saw on CNN that Rumsfield has just resigned
He was gonna get canned anyway; like Bush, his career is over.

Im quite certain it has something to do with this fuck up of letting the truth slip out.

Okaaaaay.

Im quite certain it has something to do with this fuck up of letting the truth slip out.

No, then they'd just kill him, because he can still talk and frankly now would be free to do so. Apply a little thought to this, please.

Lionel, please don't counter bad logic with more bad logic. A man in Donald Rumsfeld's position would be easily persuaded to keep silent. Killing him would be counterproductive.

No, then they'd just kill him, because he can still talk and frankly now would be free to do so. Apply a little thought to this, please.It just seems strange thats all...