Pentagon sources say Bush communicated the order to Cheney almost immediately after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon

Bush did not communicate this order to Cheney. It did not happen. Bush and Cheney are liars. Cheney simply took command because he couldn't get in touch with Bush.

Every phone call, every type of communication with the President and Vice President is logged. There are no exceptions. There was no communication between them. It's one of the reasons why they would not testify under oath. We know they didn't communicate, and they know we know, but they still lie about it.

And an FAA employee told the Nashua Telegraph that "an F-16 fighter stayed in hot pursuit of another hijacked commercial airliner until it crashed in Pennsylvania ... and made 360 degree turns to remain close to the commercial jet ... [The pilot] must've seen the whole thing [the crash]".

Flight 93 was the last plane hijacked, and F-16s were sent to intercept when it turned toward the Capitol. These were the same F-16s sent to intercept American Airlines Flight 77, who arrived far too late and began flying CAP over the Capitol.

The planes most likely would have shot down Flight 93 if it had not crashed and continued toward the Capitol. There is no evidence they actually shot Flight 93 down.

Why don't you try maybe reading about 9/11 a bit before you spout off, instead of parroting what CNN told you???

I forget more information about 9/11 daily, than you'll ever know. I don't think I've listened to CNN at all, but I also don't read conspiracy sites and believe them. (I read them to anticipate the arguments) 99% of what they argue is physically impossible.

First, it was obvious from the time the second plane hit it was Al Queda.

and

Look neither Saudi Arabia nor Pakistan are stupid enough to have their hands in the attack.

...tells me I'm an idiot, I guess it must be so!

Admission is the first step in recovery.

Obviously you speak with such great authority that you don't need to even consider evidence and contradictory public accounts when wild conjecture will do!

It's not wild conjecture. Unlike you, the first I heard of Bin Laden wasn't in 2001, or the attack on the Cole, or the first attack on the Towers. I knew of him decades ago.

It's standard on these types of attacks to quickly narrow down who is responsible, we do that based on patterns. There are only so many organizations with the support needed to carry out the attack, you can limit the attackers to those, once a second similar attack happens, it's Al Qaeda.

It's one of the reasons why the attack on the Murrah building was unlikely to be Al Qaeda related from the start of the investigation. No similar attack made elsewhere. That fact alone moved Al Qaeda down the list of possible suspects.

Like I said, if you want to spend the time justifying the Ari Fleischer storyline and manipulating pieces of the puzzle to fit this oversimplified propaganda tale, knock yourself out.

Knock yourself out believing the physically impossible, or listening to idiots who haven't the slightest clue about the subject matter.

But be sure to pat yourself on the back every time another village in Central Asia gets collaterally damaged... Your blind regurgitation of GOP talking points is the exact kind of intellectual laziness that enables our military to post forces there indefinitely,

Just how dense are you? Seriously? How many times must I write about the utter incompetence of the Bush Administration? Republican talking points? Like all conspiracy minded people, you blather.

despite the lack of a clear mission or real indications that the boogeyman to whom you describe the most amazing powers might still be there (and alive).

You are as incompetent as Bush was. Just like Bush, you simply want to dismiss bin Laden as no threat. It's this lack of taking intelligence seriously that directly lead to 9/11.

Tell me, how did that Bush administration assertion that Atta was working with the Iraqis work out?

Like much of the intelligence they got wrong about Iraq. That has little bearing on whether bin Laden was responsible for 9/11.

Surely if they were wrong on that one, they must have still been completely honest and accurate on all other accounts!

Exceedingly typical conspiracy nut thinking. It's the key stone argument, you hope that if you can show one falsehood, then everything unravels. It's doesn't work that way.

The Holocaust happened, even if some eyewitness testimony is untrue. Why because the overwhelming body of evidence supports the Holocaust happening.

Al Qaeda was involved in 9/11, even if the Bush Administration is incompetent and lied about Al Qaeda in Iraq. Why, because the overwhelming body of evidence supports that conclusion.

... I've never been in the Air Force, the FAA or NORAD. Nor did I say that shooting down civilian aircraft was standard procedure. However, the chain of information and emergency response to the situation means that the information about the flights was indeed in the hands of the national security decision makers... And even though he didn't have a hands on role in the events of the day, even US New And World Reports noted, in re: shootdowns "Pentagon sources say Bush communicated the order to Cheney almost immediately after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon". And an FAA employee told the Nashua Telegraph that "an F-16 fighter stayed in hot pursuit of another hijacked commercial airliner until it crashed in Pennsylvania ... and made 360 degree turns to remain close to the commercial jet ... [The pilot] must've seen the whole thing [the crash]".

Why don't you try maybe reading about 9/11 a bit before you spout off, instead of parroting what CNN told you???

"First, it was obvious from the time the second plane hit it was Al Queda."

and

"Look neither Saudi Arabia nor Pakistan are stupid enough to have their hands in the attack."

...tells me I'm an idiot, I guess it must be so! Obviously you speak with such great authority that you don't need to even consider evidence and contradictory public accounts when wild conjecture will do! Like I said, if you want to spend the time justifying the Ari Fleischer storyline and manipulating pieces of the puzzle to fit this oversimplified propaganda tale, knock yourself out. But be sure to pat yourself on the back every time another village in Central Asia gets collaterally damaged... Your blind regurgitation of GOP talking points is the exact kind of intellectual laziness that enables our military to post forces there indefinitely, despite the lack of a clear mission or real indications that the boogeyman to whom you describe the most amazing powers might still be there (and alive).

Tell me, how did that Bush administration assertion that Atta was working with the Iraqis work out? Surely if they were wrong on that one, they must have still been completely honest and accurate on all other accounts!