Daily Kos

The Cheney Coup

Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:02:49 PM PDT

Woa, how did I almost miss this?

After the 9-11 attacks, Cheney sent Bush away and took control of the US response to the attacks. He essentially staged a coup, taking over as "commander in chief". This information was contained in a draft report from the 9-11 Commission.

America was under attack, and somebody had to make a decision. Dick Cheney, huddled in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center under the White House, had just urged the traveling George W. Bush not to return to Washington. The president had left Florida aboard Air Force One at 9:55 a.m. on 9/11 "with no destination at take-off," as last week's 9-11 Commission report noted. Nor had Bush given any known instructions on how to respond to the attacks. Now Cheney faced another huge decision on a morning in which every minute seemed monumental. The two airliners had already crashed into the Twin Towers, another into the Pentagon. Combat air patrols were aloft, and a military aide was asking for shoot-down authority, telling Cheney that a fourth plane was "80 miles out" from Washington. Cheney didn't flinch, the report said. "In about the time it takes a batter to decide to swing," he gave the order to shoot it down, telling others the president had "signed off on the concept" during a brief phone chat. When the plane was 60 miles out, Cheney was again informed and again he ordered: take it out.

Then Joshua Bolten, after what he described in testimony as "a quiet moment," spoke up. Bolten, the White House deputy chief of staff, asked the veep to get back in touch with the president to "confirm the engage order." Bolten was clearly subordinate to Cheney, but "he had not heard any prior conversation on the subject with the president," the 9/11 report notes. Nor did the real-time notes taken by two others in the room, Cheney's chief of staff, "Scooter" Libby--who is known for his meticulous record-keeping--or Cheney's wife, Lynne, reflect that such a phone call between Bush and Cheney occurred or that such a major decision as shooting down a U.S. airliner was discussed. Bush and Cheney later testified the president gave the order. And national-security adviser Condoleezza Rice and a military aide said they remembered a call, but gave few specifics. The report concluded "there is no documentary evidence for this call."

This is startling information. The vice president ordered the president sent away and took control of the government.

There is no other word for this than "coup".

There was a reason Cheney didn't want Bush testifying to the commission by himself.

The initial report flat out accused Cheney of lying, but that has since been taken out after a fierce lobbying effort by the White House -- a rare victory by a White House that may see its entire 9-11 fiction exposed to voters right before the election.

The skirmishing continues--and it's starting to get personal. Now, with a final report due next month, the Bush team is increasingly aware that the commission's body of work might someday stand as the nation's official record of 9/11. And Bush's credibility on key national-security issues--upon which he's staked his re-election bid--could well turn on whether the public believes the administration's version or the commission's.
Given Bush's plummeting numbers on things such as "honesty" and "truthfulness", I think the 9-11 Commission wins the battle of the truth hands down.
  • ::

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 151 comments

  •  how can he stage a coup (3.50 / 2)

    when he's already running the country?

    that's the only thing i can think of for why there hasn't been much said about this--a lot of people think Cheney was/is running the government anyways...here's the proof!

    "He's so yesterday...if I think of an old calendar, I think of George Bush's face on it."--James Carville, "The War Room"

    by southc on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:11:10 PM PDT

    •  It's the European model (none / 0)

      The President is the head of state, a ceremonial office occupied by a senior but not historically powerful figure who sets a moral tone.

      The Prime Minister is the head of government, an operational position occupied by a powerful politician who really runs the show.

      The Europeans openly call Cheney the Prime Minister.  And I don't think anybody with any sense has ever fooled themselves that it would be otherwise, not even during the 2000 campaign.

      And let's face it, would you really prefer Bush to be in charge at a moment of crisis?

      The sooner this bunch of clowns is forcibly retired, the better for everyone.

      •  I don't think Cheney is in charge (4.00 / 2)

        I think it's feudalism and Cheney is just the most powerful baron.
        •  perle , wolfowitz & cheney (none / 0)

          i think perle & wolfowitz are the "brains" while cheney is the "brawn".
          www.nornsisland.com

          by n69n on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:51:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I completely agree (4.00 / 3)

          I liken the situation to a business deal. Cheney assembled a group of investors for a leveraged buyout of the Presidency. Cheney is just the largest shareholder, but not the only one.

          Any doubt that Bush is simply a figurehead should have been eliminated when Cheney, the man charged with finding a vice-president for Bush, decided that he himself was the best choice for the job.

          Bush is like a Limited Liability Partnership. If anything goes wrong, the shareholders can lose their investment but aren't personally liable. So if some gross misconduct is uncovered like, say, misappropriating $700,000,000, the worst that can happen is that Bush goes to jail-- and Cheney becomes even more powerful.

      •  but interestingly enough (none / 0)

        we're not in Europe...and in some places, Bush would be called a puppet...

        i'd prefer none of them be in charge, really...
        i look forward to the day when we have a President who can lead the government on his very own... ; )

        "He's so yesterday...if I think of an old calendar, I think of George Bush's face on it."--James Carville, "The War Room"

        by southc on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:32:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Moral Tone? (none / 0)


        The President is the head of state, a ceremonial office occupied by a senior but not historically powerful figure who sets a moral tone.

        So...we're supposed to be getting our moral guidance from George W Bush?

        Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. - Frank Herbert

        by Severian on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:51:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not necessarily (none / 0)

          although there are certainly people who do, and who think everybody should.

          (Then again, Austria had a former Nazi as President not long ago.)

          My point is that W's real job is as figurehead.  It's the only thing he was ever any good at.  It's what he did for the Texas Rangers, for example.

          The real power in this administration is elsewhere.

      •  Or the Texas model.... (none / 0)

        Seriously, the Lieutenant Governor has more power than the Governor.

        It seems I can hear God say to America, "You are too arrogant, and if you don't change your ways, I'll break the backbone of your power."

        --MLK

        by Melissa O on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:37:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  a coup? (none / 0)

      even if bush willingly gave control over to darth cheney? yes, i'd say it was. vp's are not commanders-in-chief. period.

      there was only one man with that kind of authority that morning, and he was either incapacitated by fear or keeping quiet and flying around, preparing to play his role as face plate for the machine.

      someone bust an foia request on those cell phone records.

  •  That negates my conspiracy theory... (none / 0)

    ...that Karl Rove had Cheney curse at Leahy today in order to give him an exit stage right from this year's GOP ticket.

    Cheney is President.

    -fink

    Al Gore didn't lose in 2000. America did.

    by fink on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:11:41 PM PDT

  •  Amazing (none / 0)

    History is being made too fast as of late.  This is another clear sign that the SCLM is starting to get its balls back.  
  •  Coup? (none / 0)

    I'm not sure we can describe this as a coup, since the Preznit didn't know what to do and probably told the Dick to take care of it.

    Of course, there is no question that the Preznit did relinquish his powers during this time, sort of the way presidents do when they, say, undergo anesthesia during a medical procedure.

    So my interpretation of the history is less of matter of describing a coup and more a matter of showing that the Preznit is incompetent and cowardly.

  •  Hmmm... (none / 1)

    Can we get Bush to testify again?  Preferably alone and under oath this time?

    I mean if Clinton was man enough to face a Grand Jury alone and under oath about his private sex life, shouldn't we expect Bush to be similarly brave when it's a matter of national security?

    Read James Loewen's "Sundown Towns"!

    by ChicagoDem on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:14:23 PM PDT

    •  Cheney is smart (none / 0)

      He knew better than to testify under oath and alone.  He's a liar!  I guess no contempt of Congress for him since he was under oath?

      All the careful parsing of their previous comments, "contacts," "pretty well proven," etc. just proves to me that they knew they were lying all along and were careful not to cross the line.

      Turn ons: progressives, Democrats with spines Turn offs: conservatives, people named Bush, John McCain

      by Unstable Isotope on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:19:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What really happened (4.00 / 7)

    The captain of a navy sailing ship sees a pirate ship on the horizon. "Bring me my red shirt" he commands his lieutenant, who dutifully carries out the task. The two ships fight and the pirate ship is repelled. Days later the ship's captain sees two pirate ships on the horizon and again commands his lieutenant to "Bring me my red shirt!" After a successful battle against the two pirate ships the lieutenant asks the captain, "What's the secret of the red shirt?" The captain replies, "So that if I'm wounded in battle the crew won't be disheartened by the sight of my own blood on my person."

    Several more days go by when the captain sights five pirate ships on the horizon. "Lieutenant, Bring me my brown pants!"

    The polls don't tell us how a candidate is doing; they tell us how the media is doing.

    by Thumb on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:14:34 PM PDT

  •  Really though (none / 0)

    what is to stop them from editing everything that's damning out of the report? Who is going to object? Congress? The media? Maybe Bush will say "fuck" the day the report comes out to distract our soccer ball chasing press...

    Now, people had lost their fear. From that moment I knew we would win. - Oscar Olivera

    by Josh Prophet on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:15:55 PM PDT

  •  omg omg omg omg omg omg.... (none / 0)

    did you guys hear that Cheney dropped the F-bomb on the Senate floor?? holy crap man!!

    _____
    people on the street often stop me and ask, "what does rmg stand for?"
    -- to which i reply, "love, peace, and above all justice!"

    by rmg on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:16:16 PM PDT

  •  Cheney in charge (3.50 / 2)

    Maybe, just maybe, the reason Cheney sent Bush off on AF1 and took control of the government is because he knew that Chimpy wouldn't be able to make any fast, rational decisions.

    I can't stand Cheney but in a moment of crisis I sure trust him to make an important decision--ANY decision--than I trust Bush.  So Cheney gave the shoot-down order instead of Bush.  SOMEONE had to give the order and if it was left to Bush he would be sucking on his thumb looking for Dick, Condi, or Momma Bush help him decidde.

    •  Read Richard Clarke (none / 1)

      Cheney wasn't making decisions about how to protect the country. Cheney was making decisions about how to spin the country.

      Really. Just go read it.

      This is the way democracy ends Not with a bomb But with a gavel -Max Baucus

      by emptywheel on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:01:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  that's not the issue, however (4.00 / 2)

      the issue is the constitution - just another instance of how this admin thinks sept 11 invalidated our constitution and they can do whatever they want. as i recall from Clarke's book [hark, hark, the clarke] Cheney and the Mrs were watching CNN- and didn't they have the telephone off the hook or something?
  •  Noticed this last week (4.00 / 2)

    I noticed Cheney's apparent coup in this article and in this article in the WaPo from June 17, and was shocked that it hasn't received more comment from the media or the blogosphere.

    Of course, I have never doubted that Cheney is the real decision-maker in the administration. Bush is little more than a figurehead. If you read closely you'll see that Cheney also made the decision that Bush shouldn't return immediately to DC but should bounce around the country in AF1.

  •  PSA :: veterans' attorney representation amendment (none / 1)

    please write your congressman and ask them to support this new amendment, which would set better precedent for many of the "tribunal" / representation issues that u.s. soldiers are facing.

    bottom line: it's a civil liberties issue, regardless of what you feel personally about the war in iraq or on "other terror fronts".

    H.R. 3492 Title:

    To amend title 38, United States Code, to allow claimants for benefits under laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to pay fees for attorney services during any stage of the Department of Veterans Affairs claims process.

    Bill Sponsor: Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2]

    (introduced 11/17/2003)

    thanks.

  •  The Newsweek article (4.00 / 2)

    also made clear that 9/11 staffers think Bush and Cheney are lying.

    Turn ons: progressives, Democrats with spines Turn offs: conservatives, people named Bush, John McCain

    by Unstable Isotope on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:22:13 PM PDT

    •  Indeed (none / 1)

      According to one knowledgeable source, some staffers "flat out didn't believe the call ever took place." When the early draft conveying that skepticism was circulated to the administration, it provoked an angry reaction. In a letter from White House lawyers last Tuesday and a series of phone calls, the White House vigorously lobbied the commission to change the language in its report. "We didn't think it was written in a way that clearly reflected the accounting the president and vice president had given to the commission," White House spokesman Dan Bartlett told NEWSWEEK.

      now how can we get a hold of an earlier draft?
      •  You didn't print our spin (none / 0)

        So the White House was angry that the 9-11 report went with the evidence instead of the story Cheney and Bush concocted and insisted on in their not-under-oath moment.

        Do they really have the power to force their spin over the evidence? Somebody please tell me that in my country the law still has some power over these idiots.

      •  That NORAD was clearly in disarray, (none / 0)

        with no idea what to do, indicates that no one was exercising leadership -- including Cheney.

        And Rumsfled was "out of the loop," which is understandable because he's loopy in an unloopy way.

        And Cheney was probably using the opportunity while everyone was watching TeeVee and not watching him to shove some more contracts Halliburton's way.

        A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

        by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 03:52:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Shootdowns and F9/11 (none / 1)

    It's important to keep this shootdown issue in mind when confronting spin directed against the 7 minutes of uncomfortable pet goat footage in Fahrenheit 9/11.  That's the reason every minute counted: only Bush could give the order (in theory).  

    The pilots who were sent to intercept have pointed out that it wouldn't have mattered if they got there in time because they had no authorization to fire.

    •  Yeah. What's that about: (none / 0)

      Cheney gave the shoot-down order after Bushit, frozen with indecision, didn't get on the phone and gave him permission to do so, and then the pilots never got the order.

      Though Cheney gave the order.

      Who did Cheney give the order to?  Halliburton?

      A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

      by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 03:56:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm not sure which is worse (4.00 / 3)

    The fact that the President and Vice President have apparently lied, circumvented known protocol and chain of command structure in something as serious as shooting down a civilian plane; OR the fact that I have such high regard for the man sitting in the chair of the President of the United States, that I would rather see a man as despicable as Dick Cheney take charge when there is a crisis situation, even if he did not have proper orders.
  •  And you thought... (4.00 / 3)

    it was scary when Alexander Haig took charge.
  •  Thanks kos (4.00 / 3)

    for great reporting

    The Center For Cooperative Research explores the fate flight 93 and considers the possibility that the plane WAS shot down and the shootdown subsiquently covered up.   Adding to this that Cheney may have been covering up his illegal power grab could explain motive a lot more clearly than before.

    http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline_flight_ua_93

    9:58 a.m.      Complete 911 Timeline

    Edward Felt.

    A man calls 911 from a bathroom on the plane, crying, "We're being hijacked, we're being hijacked!" [Toronto Sun, 9/16/01], then reports that "he heard some sort of explosion and saw white smoke coming from the plane and we lost contact with him." [ABC News, 9/11/01 (B), ABC News, 9/11/01 (C), AP, 9/12/01 (B)] One minute after the call began, the line goes dead. [Pittsburgh Channel, 12/6/01] Investigators believe this was Edward Felt, the only passenger not accounted for on phone calls. He was sitting in first class, so he probably was in the bathroom near the front of the plane. At one point he appears to have peeked out the bathroom door. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 193-194, 196] The mentions of smoke and explosions on the recording of his call are now denied. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 264] The person who took Felt's call is not allowed to speak to the media. [Mirror, 9/13/02] If that's true, why is this important fact only denied now, when the FBI got a copy of the recording on 9/11, and let the media report the smoke and explosion story for month

    Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. George Orwell

    by moon in the house of moe on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:30:34 PM PDT

    •  that's an interesting theory (none / 0)

      wonder if the 9/11 commission has looked at that issue?  

      "He's so yesterday...if I think of an old calendar, I think of George Bush's face on it."--James Carville, "The War Room"

      by southc on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:38:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The flight 93 timeline (4.00 / 2)

        linked above is worth a close look, especially in light of this latest stuff.

        A distinct possibility is that the passengers had gotten control of the plane, knew how to fly it, and were shot down anyway, perhaps in an abundance of caution or carelessness. There were two people on the plane who were potential pilots. One was a professional pilot. The other was a flight controller.

        Center For Cooperative Research timeline

        (9:57 a.m. and After)      Complete 911 Timeline

        "In the cockpit! In the cockpit!" is heard. Hijackers are reportedly heard telling each other to hold the door. In English, someone outside shouts, "Let's get them." The hijackers are also praying "Allah o akbar" (God is great). One of the hijackers suggests shutting off the oxygen supply to the cabin (which apparently wouldn't have had an effect since the plane was already below 10,000 feet). A hijacker says, "Should we finish?" Another one says, "Not yet." The sounds of the passengers get clearer, and in unaccented English "Give it to me!" is heard. "I'm injured," someone says in English. Then something like "roll it up" and "lift it up" is heard. Passengers' relatives believe this sequence proves that the passengers did take control of the plane. [MSNBC 7/30/02; Telegraph 8/6/02; Newsweek 11/25/01; Observer 12/2/01]

        Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. George Orwell

        by moon in the house of moe on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:46:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  just read the timeline.... (none / 0)

          so complicated...what i've always wondered about is why did it get pulverized? was it the speed it went down? the angle?  just thought that was always strange because in almost any other plane crash there are pieces and often big pieces left...would that have anything to do with it being shot down or not?

          i wouldn't be surprised if it did get shot down...frankly i think the kentucky governor was lucky he didn't get shot down the other week during Reagan's funeral....

          you're right that it becomes even more complicated if it's cheney running the show and if he wasn't authorized to do so...and that could have induced such a coverup

          "He's so yesterday...if I think of an old calendar, I think of George Bush's face on it."--James Carville, "The War Room"

          by southc on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:17:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not so strange (none / 0)

            When a plane buries itself into the ground there typically isn't anything big left.  Think to the Valuejet flight that hit the Everglades a few years ago.  It also buried itself and there weren't many large pieces visible.
            •  What about the reports that an engine (none / 0)

              was found 8 miles away?

              And the guy who saw papers coming down from the sky?

              Might those be spurious?

              A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

              by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:01:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Also.. (none / 0)

      I'm sure I read somewhere, though can't come up with it now, that some witnesses on the ground nearby saw a strange looking, single fighter jet fly over just after the plane went down.

      Anyone else remember something like this?

      •  Witnesses on the ground (none / 0)

        This conspiracy theory has been around since shortly after the crash. There are at least six eye-witnesses who claim to have seen an unmarked white military aircaft near Flight 93. More info at GlobalResearch.ca among many other sites.

        Without a clear motive for a cover-up--why deny shooting down the plane if it was to save countless lives?--it was just another conspiracy theory with some anecdotal evidence. However, now that Cheney's decision to shoot down the plane has been confirmed and his apparent coup has come to light, it makes much more sense why he would prefer to give credit to the passengers of the flight for crashing the plane. This would be doubly sad if it's true that the passengers had gained control of the plan and could have been landed it safely.

        -6.38/-6.26 Bush is studiously anti-science, a man of applied ignorance who has undernourished his mind with the empty calories of comfy dogma. - Richard Cohen

        by mofus on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 11:32:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Reason to Conceal? (none / 0)

          If Flight 93 was shot down because the hijackers had lost control of it (thus raising the possibility of interrogation of some of the hijackers,) one can see why the government would want to hide that.

          The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

          by lysias on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:38:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not necessarily. (none / 0)

            If Cheney, unauthorized, ordered the plane shot down, and it was shot down, there could have been legal repercussions.  Thus greater scrutiny, therefore questions about why Bushit was so incapacitated -- frozen with indecision -- that he couldn't give the order.

            That would have screwed up his image as being the dashing and daring and decisive leader we all know he has always been.

            A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

            by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:06:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Center for Cooperative Research... (none / 1)

      Best thing I ever did, was read the entirety of their massive 9/11 entry, time lines of every part of the day, each flight, it is exhaustive... read it in summer of 02.

      I can really recommend it.  One thing that people used to use against the site (to say it had an unpalatble viewpoint) was the entry of mainstream media reports of the departure of the bin Laden relatives... but I had read those at the time and felt it was entirely feasible.  And now it is in the regular conversation with regard to that day, that week.  (Despite the inability to make clear sense lately out of the two disparate Clarke versions of "authorisation".)

      Great site.

      •  another relevant passage (none / 0)

        Terry Butler, at Stoystown: He sees the plane come out of the clouds, low to the ground. "It was moving like you wouldn't believe. Next thing I knew it makes a heck of a sharp, right-hand turn." It banks to the right and appears to be trying to climb to clear one of the ridges, but it continues to turn to the right and then veers behind a ridge. About a second later it crashes. [St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]

        Ernie Stuhl, the mayor of Shanksville: "I know of two people--I will not mention names--that heard a missile. They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards... This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." He adds that based on what he has learned, F-16s were "very, very close." [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01]
        Accounts of the plane making strange noises:
        Laura Temyer of Hooversville: "I didn't see the plane but I heard the plane's engine. Then I heard a loud thump that echoed off the hills and then I heard the plane's engine. I heard two more loud thumps and didn't hear the plane's engine anymore after that." (She insists that people she knows in state law enforcement have privately told her the plane was shot down, and that decompression sucked objects from the aircraft, explaining why there was a wide debris field.) [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01]

        Charles Sturtz, a half mile from the crash site: The plane is heading southeast and has its engines running. No smoke can be seen. "It was really roaring, you know. Like it was trying to go someplace, I guess." [WPXI Channel 11, 9/13/01]

        Michael Merringer, two miles from the crash site: "I heard the engine gun two different times and then I heard a loud bang..." [AP, 9/12/01 (B)]

        Tim Lensbouer, 300 yards away: "I heard it for 10 or 15 seconds and it sounded like it was going full bore." [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 (B)]
        Accounts of the plane flying upside down:
        Rob Kimmel, several miles from the crash site: He sees it fly overhead, banking hard to the right. It is 200 feet or less off the ground as it crests a hill to the southeast. "I saw the top of the plane, not the bottom." [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 210-211]

        Eric Peterson of Lambertsville: He sees a plane flying overhead unusually low. The plane seemed to be turning end-over-end as it dropped out of sight behind a tree line. [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01]

        Bob Blair of Stoystown: He sees the plane spiraling and flying upside down before crashing. Its not much higher than the treetops. [Daily American, 9/12/01]
        Accounts of a sudden plunge and more strange sounds:
        An unnamed witness says he hears two loud bangs before watching the plane take a downward turn of nearly 90 degrees. [Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01]

        Another unnamed witness sees the plane overhead. It makes a high-pitched, screeching sound. The plane then makes a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashes. [Cleveland Newschannel 5, 9/11/01]

        Tom Fritz, about a quarter-mile from the crash site: He hears a sound that "wasn't quite right" and looks up in the sky. "It dropped all of a sudden, like a stone," going "so fast that you couldn't even make out what color it was." [St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]

        Terry Butler, a few miles north of Lambertsville: "It dropped out of the clouds." The plane rose slightly, trying to gain altitude, then "it just went flip to the right and then straight down." [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 9/12/01 (B)]

        Lee Purbaugh, 300 yards away: "There was an incredibly loud rumbling sound and there it was, right there, right above my head--maybe 50 feet up.... I saw it rock from side to side then, suddenly, it dipped and dived, nose first, with a huge explosion, into the ground. I knew immediately that no one could possibly have survived." [Independent, 8/13/02]
        Upside down and a sudden plunge:
        Linda Shepley: She hears a loud bang and sees the plane bank to the side. [ABC News, 9/11/01 (C)] She sees the plane wobbling right and left, at a low altitude of roughly 2,500 feet, when suddenly the right wing dips straight down, and the plane plunges into the earth. She says she has an unobstructed view of Flight 93's final two minutes. [Philadelphia Daily News, 11/15/01]

        Kelly Leverknight in Stony Creek Township of Shanksville: "There was no smoke, it just went straight down. I saw the belly of the plane." It sounds like it is flying low, and it's heading east. [Daily American, 9/12/01, St. Petersburg Times, 9/12/01]

        Tim Thornsberg, working in a nearby strip mine: "It came in low over the trees and started wobbling. Then it just rolled over and was flying upside down for a few seconds ... and then it kind of stalled and did a nose dive over the trees." [WPXI Channel 11, 9/13/01]
        What sense can be made of all these different accounts? Some say it was flying a couple thousand feet up and suddenly plunged down, some say it was flying extremely low. Turns, climbs, strange noises, flipping, etc.... While many of these accounts conflict, virtually all support a missile strike, because of the common theme of noises and a plane struggling to rise and stay in the air. The plunge doesn't seem to be a deliberate thrust of the plane toward the ground, but instead the result of engine failure.

        Flight 93 crash site. North is to the top. Note the impact point north of the road, and the burned trees to the south of it.
        Other passenger planes hit by missiles continued to fly for several minutes before crashing. For instance, a Korean Airline 747 was hit by two Russian missiles in 1983, yet continued to fly for two more minutes. [KAL Cockpit Voice Recorder transcript] Is that what happened here?

                  

        Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. George Orwell

        by moon in the house of moe on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:15:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  how fortuitous (none / 0)

          this answers some of my questions above...

          certainly being shot down doesn't seem to be at all reaching out of the realm of possibility...

          "He's so yesterday...if I think of an old calendar, I think of George Bush's face on it."--James Carville, "The War Room"

          by southc on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:24:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Now The Real Question... (none / 0)

            ...Why was it shot down? An overabundance of caution? Or because Cheney didn't want to risk any of the hijackers coming back alive?

            •  Downing makes sense, Cheney doesn't (none / 0)

              Although the decision would be difficult to make, it does have logical merits.

              Option 1: Shoot down plane in rural area.
              Total Dead: Those on board.

              Option 2: Let the terrorists crash the plane (as was clear their intention).
              Total Dead: Those on board + 100? 1,000? 10,000?

              Let's say the plane hadn't crashed in PA, but made it to its target (US Capitol building?) and taken additional lives as well as another symbol of our democracy. What would people say if they found out later the plane could have been shot down over a field, but that the administration had hesitated or simply decided to do nothing?

              I think the issue here isn't that the decision was made to down the plane, but rather it was made by someone who was clearly exceeding his authority.

              -6.38/-6.26 Bush is studiously anti-science, a man of applied ignorance who has undernourished his mind with the empty calories of comfy dogma. - Richard Cohen

              by mofus on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 11:51:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  devil's advocate (none / 0)

                true, much better the plane is taken down in a relatively safe rural area rather than taking another unkown number of lives.

                but wouldn't you agree that, if 93 was shot down, there's something incredibly insidious in pushing the original 93 story? and again, if it was shot down, how can they justify hiding that fact from the public for coming on 3 years?

                the actions of bastards with something to hide, regardless.

                •  Something to hide? (none / 0)

                  If so, it could be something "forgivable," such as Cheney acting illegally, but saving lives, because Bushit was tied up pissing his pants.

                  So cover it up for two reasons: the illegality, and the revelation that Bushit didn't act like the dashing and daring decisive leader and hero we have always known he is.

                  A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

                  by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:18:23 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Please: until you can come up with a (none / 0)

              sane tying of Cheney to the highjackers, leave that conspirabunk out.

              If the plane was shot down, it was so it wouldn't reach it's theorized destination.  One could say that would be the only possibly-responsible anyone in power took regarding the attck.  The other three planes got through because planes were (1) scramled too late, and (2) from distant instead of near airfields.

              A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

              by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:14:42 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  asdf (none / 0)

    I posted a diary on a related topic last week.
  •  There is no other word for this than... (none / 0)

    ...overreaction.
  •  We've only known this since 9/11/2001 (4.00 / 3)

    On that day we knew Cheney was 'in a bunker' under the White House and Dubya was flying around the sky until finally he joined the pre- scheduled meeting hosted by Warren Buffet.

    So, who else was coordinating 'events'? Cheney. I don't understand all the surprise. Here you have a man who has failed at everything he has ever attempted, 'interviewed' to be president, (as opposed to tapping his brother Jeb) then a group of retreads from the Reagan administration becomes his cabinet, along with a man who goes back to the Nixon administration... Dick Cheney. Does anyone think that was an accident? The only 'accident' if there was one, was tapping Dubya instead of his brother (whom his father tells anyone who will listen, is smarter than Dubya). And we really believe this man is the one calling the shots?

    An unexamined life is not worth living - Socrates

    by crone on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 05:56:09 PM PDT

  •  I would use (none / 1)

    the old stand by of rats leaving the sinking ship but rats are a creature with intelligence, integrity, and purpose whether you like them or not, on the other hand Bush, Cheney, and the rest of this band of outlaws don't have the same redeeming values, if any at all.
    PEACE!
    ABB&B!!!
  •  That's funny (4.00 / 2)

    Combat air patrols were aloft, and a military aide was asking for shoot-down authority, telling Cheney that a fourth plane was "80 miles out" from Washington. Cheney didn't flinch, the report said.

    ...

    When the plane was 60 miles out, Cheney was again informed and again he ordered: take it out.

    The closest the fourth plane ever got to Washington was 125 miles.

    For the first link, click the "flight 93" button; for the second, see the last line of the article.

    I don't want the world; I just want your half.

    by Finrod on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:14:36 PM PDT

    •  Flight 77 (none / 0)

      Flight 77 (the plane that allegedly hit the Pentagon) obviously got within 60 miles of D.C.  If it was shot down, that may explain why it had to be a missile that hit the Pentagon.

      By the way, did anybody else notice about how Jamie Gorelick questioned Rumsfeld in the 9/11 hearings about a missile being headed towards the Pentagon the morning of 9/11?

      The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

      by lysias on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:46:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't go there (none / 0)

        People saw the plane hit the Pentagon. Despite counterclaims by that French conspiracy theorist, aircraft-related debris was recovered from the grounds and the building.
        •  Yeah, I really get irritated (none / 0)

          by the conspirabunk red herrings.  They only muddy and obscure.

          Which sometimes I think is a deliberate conspiratorial intent . . .

          A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

          by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:23:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Witnesses to Plane Hitting Pentagon? (none / 0)

          I used to work at the Pentagon, a few years ago.  I know people who still work at the Pentagon, and I live in the D.C. area.  I don't know anybody who saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

          If the book The New Pearl Harbor is to be believed, very few people say they actually saw a commercial-size airliner hit the Pentagon.  

          The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

          by lysias on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:40:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Question: (none / 0)

    Will this actually get any play in the SCLM?
    •  SCLM? (none / 0)

      Sorry for the newbie question, but what does SCLM stand for? I'm usually pretty good deciphering these, but this one has had me stumped since I first came across it. Thanks.

      -6.38/-6.26 Bush is studiously anti-science, a man of applied ignorance who has undernourished his mind with the empty calories of comfy dogma. - Richard Cohen

      by mofus on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 12:00:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Coup? I think not. (3.00 / 2)

    He may have violated chain of command and other protocols but this just isn't a coup.  This kind of overblown hyperbole really hurts our cause because it gives those we need to convince a bad taste and reduces our legitimacy.

    It's fairly obvious that Bush's cabinet and advisors (namely, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfovitz, etc) have great sway over the president's beliefs and decisions but its pretty dumb to think that GWB isn't intelligent and capable in his own right.  He isn't a retard and he isn't stupid (I'm not suggesting that he is brilliant by any means either).  If anything he is hobbled by his chosen beliefs in seeing the world in simple terms, hence he appears simple.

    But I do believe that he is in power and control and I hold him responsible for everything that happens.  He does trust his advisors and if they tell him that it is too dangerous to fly back to Washington, he did.  (Funny how it was safe enough to hang around that school for 20 minutes chit chatting with teachers though).  

    Stop with the feel-good attacks on Bush.  They don't help our cause and don't help us to deal with the situation. Just as Bush is barking up the wrong tree with his rhetoric on terrorism, so are those who just blather about puppets and retards.

    I'm in this fight to fix the country.  Stop being so shallow and get over your disgust.  Time to buck up and do what needs to be done, not just what looks good.  We spend too much time blowing each other's clits and dicks and not enough time digging out of the hole we are in.

    Maybe Logic gets you farther.

    by Nutrimentia on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:23:19 PM PDT

  •  93 (none / 0)

    It's clear that they shot down flight 93.  This is proof that Cheney gave the order to do it.  They say he gave the order but nothing happened?  Horseshit.  Regardless of the way you want to characterize it, it is clear that Cheney was in charge.  And I am sure that by September it was clear to everyone that Cheney was calling the shots.  So we are to believe that his direct order to shoot down an airliner was disobeyed or ignored? There was a lot of speculation at the time that the plane had been shot down.  Now that Cheney has admitted issuing an order to do just that, don't you think the whole thing should be revisited with an open mind?  I mean really.  They had reason to do it.  They gave the order to do it.  The plane went down but we're not supposed to entertain the notion that it was shot down?
    •  If they shot it down, good for the military (4.00 / 2)

      If Flight 93 was shot down, sorry for the people on board, but chances are that the hijackers were going to do their best to crash the plane into the U.S. Capitol, the White House or some other building and kill many more people than the crash of Flight 93 killed.

      Under the circumstances, shooting down Flight 93 was/would have been a tragically heroic act.

      As far as I'm concerned, proof that our military shot down Flight 93, on Cheney's illegal orders or anyone else's orders, would be the only proof I've seen in a long time that we have a military capable of doing anything other than piling naked prisoners in pyramids.

      •  Well... (none / 0)

        the question of whether or not it was the right call is entirely independent of the incredibly slimy nature of the cover-up.  It is beginning to look like this is just another aspect of the big lie that their response to 9/11 was.
      •  Shooting (none / 0)

        Actually, shooting was a very cowardly act. Especially since confirmation had been recieved from several sources that the plane was no longer in terrorist hands and had changed course away from DC. So the question must be asked - why did Cheney want it shot down at any cost? Enough to warrant (by some accounts) three missiles fired at the plane, enough to cause it to break apart?

        •  Read the fucking timeline -- (none / 0)

          the phone call from the guy who allegedly saw smoke after the hijackers were apparently overcome was within a period of seconds.  If it was shot down, the missile/s were on their way from just before the passengers took control, and they couldn't be called back.

          Unless there's evidence that there was a "necessity" to ensure the hijackers were killed, drop the conspirabunk.

          A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

          by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:32:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  legally (none / 0)

    I can't find it with google, but I was pretty sure that only the President is allowed to order planes to be shot down, and if someone else does that, aren't they breaking some sort of law - subject so some sort of punishment?
    •  9/11 Timeline (none / 0)

      http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

      If you haven't seen it, this site is amazing-  tons of detail regarding the events before and after 9/11.  Compiled by Paul Thompson, relying entirely on mainstream news sources.

    •  IF there's a law limiting such actions to (none / 0)

      only the president, but Bushit was incapacitated -- which is obviously the fact, as the video shows, then Cheney violated the law.

      But if the facts are that he ordered the plane shot down out of genuine concern that if not shot down it would be flown into a building in DC, and those facts were to come out, Cheney would be "forgiven".

      Why the cover-up, if there is one?  To hide the fact that Bushit was incapable of functioning so couldn't himself give the order.  Remeber: the only thing that matters to these people is keeping Bushit looking good for the purposes of election.

      A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

      by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:36:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think I like this (none / 1)

    I don't like Cheney, but, in this case, he was making a split-second decision under terrible circumstances, and he gave a reasonable, practical order that Bush obviously would have supported.

    I think it makes sense to criticize Cheney for (apparently) lying about the circumstances and refusing to take responsibility for his actions now that we're past the crisis, and I think it makes sense to ask, "How can we improve the vice president's response in the future?", but I don't think it makes sense to criticize Cheney or punish him for doing what he could to take control of a chaotic situation. If he thought he had to lie and stage a temporary coup to keep an airliner from crashing into the Capitol, well, who knows, maybe he was right.

    The reason to vote against Bush and Cheney is because they've done everything they could before and after 9/11 to alienate other countries, flout international law, and weaken the dollar, not because they happened to act like flawed human beings on 9/11.

    •  No but... (none / 0)

      they've been lying through their teeth about it ever since.  Its the fundamental dishonesty, the "institutionalized lying" that is at the heart of my disgust with these people.
      •  They've been lying about everything (none / 0)

        since before they stole their ways into office.

        If their lying about shooting down the plane, it can be understood why, and therefore be "forgiven".

        There're enough other, impeachable offenses, to fill a libary.

        A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

        by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:39:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Cheney (none / 1)

      The point on Cheney issuing the order is that he was not in the chain of command....and so it is not surprising that the order was never relayed to the pilots.

      If a pilot shot down a plane on an order from the Vice-President it would be illegal.

      The second point isn't a criticism of Cheney but a criticism of the President who decided that he would spend 10 minutes reading a goat story and posing for photographs while Flight 77 was cruising toward the Pentagon and Flight 93 was heading toward the Capitol Building that was filled with our representatives.

      He then wrote a little speech for ten minutes, gave the speech and then left for the airport...but he never issued an order to down any additional airplanes...which is about the only thing he could really do to help matters.

      Meanwhile Rumsfeld abandoned his post and went outside the Pentagon after Flight 77 hit, rather than be in a position to order the downing of planes...since he WAS in the chain of command.

  •  It Can't Be a Coup (none / 1)

    Since everybody knew Cheney would be in charge when he anointed himself veep back in 2000. Many of us consoled ourselves, however briefly, after they stole the election, thinking Cheney wasn't the mindless dolt W was, and that he at least had the executive experience required to do the job. Little did we know he would start of war to profit Halliburton and his many other cronies. Um, wait...yeah, we knew he'd do that given the chance, we just didn't think the voters would give the evil fucks both houses of congress in 2002.

    This isn't on Cheney. It's on America. They empowered these shitheads.

    The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

    by easong on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:41:23 PM PDT

    •  i agree except (none / 0)

      i also hold the 9/11 hijackers responsible as well....

      BC would never have been able to get away with half of what they have done without that event occurring....the unification of the country for a year or two after 9/11 and the overwhelming demands for absolute patriotism even at the expense of some basic American civil liberties (like dissent) has let BC get away with murder both figuratively and, really many would say literally....

      "He's so yesterday...if I think of an old calendar, I think of George Bush's face on it."--James Carville, "The War Room"

      by southc on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 06:58:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  If I'd known (none / 1)

    If, at the time, I'd known that Cheny was in charge, I might have actually felt better.
  •  The 9/11 commission discussion of comms. (none / 1)

    I was listening to the replay of part of the hearings last week on CSPAN radio and I was struck by the fact that when the panel asked a question obout communication issues between the FAA, NORAD, the NMCC, the Whitehouse (where Cheney was) and AF1, the witness basically described some difficulties with establishing secure comms with the FAA, but that eventually they established the links with the WH.  One of the panelists followed up by pointig out that he hadn't mentioned connecting to AF1.  The interesting thing about his original answer and his follow-up answer was that it was clear that his focus was on extablishing comms to Cheney at the WH, and connecting to Bush was clearly an afterthought.  At least, that was the impression I had from listening.  
    •  He probably thought first to (none / 0)

      contact the White House on the assumption Bushit was there.

      Not to contact Cheney instead of Bushit.

      And wasn't the FAA "out of the loop"?  Was it only possible to get it into the loop from the White House side of the equation?

      We get a pretty clear picture of what was happening with NORAD, and it was in disaray.  I want as detailed a timeline of what was happening on the Bushit-Cheney side of the equation.  I suspect that, if not a lie, would show that the NORAD disarray was because there was no leadership from that other side.

      The NORAD side is described as not having any sense of urgency.  Cheney was probably scrambling, totally unprepared, trying to figure out what to do.  Who contacted whom first: NORAD the White house?  Or White House, NORAD?

      A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on. -- Mark Twain

      by jnagarya on Fri Jun 25, 2004 at 04:47:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  coup is a little over the top (none / 0)

    "Coup" is not the right word.

    This isn't a criticism, just a reminder that people are going to dismiss writers as "not serious" if they float words like "coup" too cavalierly.

    There are many reasons, even if lame, for Bush not to come immediately back to the White House.

    Regardless, he was always within phone contact, and, in a moment of crisis, someone has to take charge.

    If George W. Bush wasn't prepared to take charge, if as president he was willing to have the VP tell him to fly around for awhile, then it's better he does so.

    Leaders respond.  Since Bush didn't step up, Cheney did.  Whether Cheney encouraged it or not doesn't matter.

    I'd prefer the guy who wants the mantle to be calling the shots, and that's apparently what happened.

    free the information

    by freelixir on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 07:48:33 PM PDT

    •  and I say this as a big Cheney critic (none / 0)

      I look forward to Cheney being removed from power, along with Bush.  I don't think they're competent, or rational.

      Cheney is just the type of politician tied into big corporations that I have no tolerance for.  

      Yet, in this matter of 9/11, just pointing out that leaders take charge, and don't let their underlings or assistants tell them what to do.

      If they do, then it's clear who the real leader is, and who's in charge.

      Leadership is rarely acquired, in my opinion.  It's a natural trait.  You either exercise it (some say "command" it), or you don't.

      free the information

      by freelixir on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 07:51:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  all true, freelixir (none / 0)

      what that doesn't account for, however, is that Cheney apparently concocted a story about relaying Bush's order, when it appears to have originated with him. I agree that there might be a good argument made for what happened with the shoot-down order. But then, he should have made that argument. He didn't. He concocted a story. That tells me there may be more to the real story.

      Turn the Mountain West blue! Support Gary Trauner for Wyoming's only House seat!

      by kainah on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 07:54:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  maybe (none / 0)

        But it's pure speculation.  I do find that interesting, but in my mind the order to shoot down planes should have happened before that time, and Bush backs up Cheney (maybe he just said "do what you have to do" and then decided not to make a big deal out of it).

        I just don't see this as a controversy that will last with anyone but conspiracy thinkers.  Bush says he gave Cheney the order...we can speculate all we want, but that's exactly what the Right has been doing to Clinton the past decade...finding a couple strands that can prop up a conspiracy theory and then expounding it as "obvious".

        free the information

        by freelixir on Thu Jun 24, 2004 at 08:31:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Ever since I heard this testimony (