QUESTIONS ABOUT FLIGHT 93
Don Rumsfeld’s remarks regarding Flight 93 having been “shot down” over Pennsylvania caused a bit of buzz over the weekend. Here’s what he said:
And I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon, the people who cut off peoples’ heads on television to intimidate, to frighten — indeed the word “terrorized” is just that. Its purpose is to terrorize, to alter behavior, to make people be something other than that which they want to be.
The lingering questions about Flight 93 have always centered on whether the hijackers crashed the plane into the ground or whether we were forced to shoot it down. Rumsfeld’s comment suggests something I had never heard before–that the terrorists themselves shot down the plane.
That doesn’t make sense and Rumsfeld was clearly tired.
So, was the plane shot down or not? The 9/11 Commission investigated the matter. It concluded that Flight 93 was not shot down, but raised questions about whether NORAD would have been capable of shooting down the plane if the passengers had not brought it down themselves:
NORAD officials have maintained that they would have intercepted and shot down United 93. We are not so sure. We are sure that the nation owes a debt to the passengers of United 93. Their actions saved the lives of countless others, and may have saved either the Capitol or the White House from destruction.
Whatever you believe, the renewed attention to Flight 93 can serve as a valuable teachable moment for both the press and the public. Are combat air patrols equipped to handle another 9/11 today? Is NORAD better prepared than it was three years ago? Are we mentally ready to accept the possibility of a shootdown to avert a terrorist attack? Or will The Unhinged Ones paralyze the government from making such decisions in the future?
Update: The Angry Clam at Patterico’s Pontifications explains Rumsfeld’s syntax.
Update II: The Pentagon says Rumsfeld misspoke.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
A few more words about Koward Krugman Update: Take two!
September 12, 2011 12:53 AM by Michelle Malkin
74 CommentsVideo flashback: A ride to the Top of the World
September 11, 2011 06:51 PM by Michelle Malkin
17 Comments9/11 flashback: James Woods and the hijacker dry run; Update: What happened on AA Flight 34 today? Just “some unruly passengers?”; three men
September 11, 2011 03:24 PM by Michelle Malkin
39 CommentsTen years on at the 9-11 7-11
September 11, 2011 06:36 AM by see-dubya
44 CommentsAll the wrong 9/11 lessons
September 9, 2011 09:02 AM by Michelle Malkin
160 CommentsRosie O’Donnell: Hard to Believe All These Tornadoes Aren’t Caused By Global Warming
May 27, 2011 04:25 PM by Doug Powers
97 CommentsU.N. Human Rights Chief Asks U.S. to Explain Bin Laden Killing — Okay, Fine
May 4, 2011 09:46 AM by Doug Powers
108 Comments
Categories: 9/11
Babalu Blog
» Greece is Burning
Patterico
» NYT hails the safety net: Poor hardest hit
Daily Caller
» Inside Media Matters: Sources, memos reveal erratic behavior, close coordination with White House and news organizations

AmSpecBlog
» Weekend Political Wrap-Up
JustOneMinute
» I Guess I'm Still Stuck On Stupid
The Hill
» Rep. Ron Paul not conceding Maine vote











See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.