Undeniable 911 facts

Ok with all the crazy theories going around which cannot be proven I wanted to start a thread which only shows absolute facts. Or at the very least something which cannot be put into the crazies boat.

I'll start it off with General Mahmoud Ahmad.

In early October 2001, Indian intelligence alleged that Mahmoud had ordered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh — the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl — to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta's two bank accounts in Florida.

.....and was with Republican Congressman Porter Goss and Democratic Senator Bob Graham in Washington, discussing Osama bin Laden over breakfast, when the attacks of September 11 2001 happened.

www.answers.com...

screwloosechange.blogspot.com...
Here they try to discredit this because someone tried to pin it on the FBI, however even screwloosechange acknowledges the story from India.

www.atimes.com...

Ok well hopefully that's gotten the ball rolling, please anything which may be of interest provided there are decent links. Prisonplanet or Rense isn't going to convince anyone. And will probably just discredit the rest as well.

there WERE drills mimicking the type of hijacking attack, while the attack happened.
despite this, condoleeza rice DID say that nobody anticipated this type of attack.
bush DID say he saw the first plane hit the tower, when it hadn't been shown on teevee, yet.
rumsfeld DID say on more than one occasion that missiles were used.
there WAS an overwhelmingly anomalous amount of put options on the two airlines used, united, and american airlines.
tower seven's four corner's DID fall down at almost exactly the same rate and time, and that time was 0.6 seconds longer than the time it would fall through a vacuum.
every single live broadcast DID report that there were 'secondary explosions'.
many eyewitnesses to the clean up DID say they saw 'molten metal', and some said, 'running'.
the 911 commission DID completely ignore certain testimony about explosions, and they completely ignored wtc7.
people who speak out against the official story DO get ostracized, marginalized, fired, and ridiculed by the mainstream.
flashes WERE reported, and flashes CAN be seen on many videos.
FEMA DID show up the night before(the 10th), and 'didn't get a chance to work the whole site until tuesday morning(the 11th)'.
the only plane that was allowed to fly on the 12th WAS a plane full of bin laden's relatives.
in the late sixties, when the towers were going up, the bin laden construction company DID help build the towers, and DID ask paul lafoley(someone on the architectual team) where he thought the best places to place explosives were, if they wanted to demo it.

it's just so obvious, it's painful. i could go on and on with these facts, but, i'm tired.

the owner of building #7 did in fact say that it was 'pulled'. this is of course the 'industry word' for demolishing a building.

Pull it remark

www.youtube.com...

Drills

www.youtube.com...

Here are some 9/11 facts:

Former President Clinton National Security Advisor Sandy Berger admitted to stealing and destroying terrorism related documents from the National Archives prior to his testimony in front of the 9/11 Commission. The Justice Department allowed Berger to plead guilty and not receive any jail time. The Justice Department also prevented the 9/11 Commission from knowing that Berger stole and destroyed documents. Later, the 9/11 Commission thanked Berger for being forthright in his testimony and claimed that their investigation wasn't hindered by Berger's destruction of evidence.

After the 9/11 Commission disbanded, Berger hired former 9/11 co-Chairman Lee Hamilton to work as a senior advisor for Berger's consulting company.

Fact: It is physically impossible for jet airplanes to have destroyed the WTC towers as they did.

The destruction of the towers and the after-effects at ground zero (all that dust, molten steel, etc.) required massive energy sources which are not accounted for by the airplane impacts--or that magic jet fuel.

This is all you really need to know; the rest is window dressing.

or the link of Daniel Pearl to Richard Reid, and a hamdful of others who attended the same mosque. Pearl was CIA/gov't contract if one would so believe.


Fact- it is physically possible for the WTC towers to be destroyed as they did. There was no magic jet fuel, and no one credible states that.

Originally posted by esdad71

Fact- it is physically possible for the WTC towers to be destroyed as they did. There was no magic jet fuel, and no one credible states that.

esdad,

Your statement is correct only in that you left out the part about airplanes causing the towers to fall. Clever semantics.

Obviously it is possible for the towers to fall as they did--after all that is what happened.

What caused them to fall as they did is whole other question. There the laws of physics are immutable.

And as for the jet fuel, it was supposed to have caused the core to have melted, causing the collapses, to have gone down the elevator shafts and caused the destruction in the basements, and have caused the molten steel hotspots at ground zero.

If that's not magic, I don't know what is.

Fact: 4 Israeli 'art students' were arrested filming the attacks and celebrating before being released after 60 days of high level negotiation between high ranking officals in the respective governments. Also Israeli intelligence had tabs on some of the hijackers and were aware of at least some proportion of the attack.

I do not buy into the theory of the melted steel, that did not happen. However, take a look at NOva's documentary and it was pretty dead on with how it could have occured.

Steel did not melt, it weakened.

The most outlandish conspiracy theory IS the official story. Not only does it defy logic, common sense, several laws of physics, and the law of averages; but also, the glaring contradictions are far too numerous to overlook.

www.serendipity.li...

www.saunalahti.fi...

portland.indymedia.org...

Originally posted by gottago
Fact: It is physically impossible for jet airplanes to have destroyed the WTC towers as they did.

It didn't take long to derail this thread with speculation instead of fact.

It is not a "fact" that WTC towers could not have been destroyed by the planes. This is in the realm of conjecture, unless of course you can provide a physical proof of this that nobody has yet to see in 6 years.

Originally posted by Krahzeef_Ukhar
Ok with all the crazy theories going around which cannot be proven I wanted to start a thread which only shows absolute facts. Or at the very least something which cannot be put into the crazies boat.

I'll start it off with General Mahmoud Ahmad.

In early October 2001, Indian intelligence alleged that Mahmoud had ordered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh — the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl — to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta's two bank accounts in Florida.

HELLO?? the OP states "facts" ... did anyone bother to read the first one?

His first sentence states "ALLEGED".

The FACT is, not one CT has been proven beyond a resonable doubt. It's funny that the Silverstien quote is STILL being used in here.

As far as the towers go. Please provide ONE peer reviewed paper that makes a claim that the towers well due to something OTHER than what was outlined in NIST.

Those of you that state that the casue was from steel melting have not read ONE page of the NIST report.

Edit spelling

[edit on 123030p://5019 by CaptainObvious]

Originally posted by jprophet420
the owner of building #7 did in fact say that it was 'pulled'. this is of course the 'industry word' for demolishing a building.

The only 'fact' is that he said "pull it". It's NOT a fact that he meant pull the building. Unless Silverstein himself comes out and says that that's what he meant, we have no proof of what he was thinking.

Fact-Silverstein was late for work because of a 'dermatology appointment' the morning of September 11th. His son and daughter were also late for work that morning. Had they all been at work and on time, they would have most likely died in their 88th floor office of the North Tower.

Fact-The North and South Tower did not fall in "8-10 seconds" as always reported. It was more like 18-20 seconds.

Fact-Securacom, who performed security for various places such as the World Trade Center and Dulles Airport, went public September 11, 1997, with Marvin Bush as one of it's board members.

Originally posted by gottago
The destruction of the towers and the after-effects at ground zero (all that dust, molten steel, etc.) required massive energy sources which are not accounted for by the airplane impacts--or that magic jet fuel.

Of course, you ignore the massive amount of energy stored in the buildings themselves: The energy used to create them. This stored energy being released as the structure failed.

Here is the only undeniable 9/11 "fact":


The collapse of the WTC buildings was unprecedented.


Truth folks will take that as a sign that something underhanded occurred.

Everyone else simply takes it as a sign that something extraordinary occurred…that “something extraordinary” being a couple massive aircraft slamming into the side of the buildings at 500 mph.

Who is right? We may never know.

But there are two things I do know:

1)
Every other “undeniable fact” is meaningless because it has not been attached in any provable way to the motives of a perpetrator. All of these facts sound really good when phrased as a question (e.g., “Why was Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh having breakfast with Porter Goss and Bob Graham on 9/11?” or “Why did the President just sit there in that elementary school classroom?” or “Why did NORAD crap the bed on stopping the attacks?” or “Why have people been allowed to destroy evidence regarding 9/11?”)…and don’t get me wrong, I would really LOVE to know the answers to these questions…but until the answers to those questions don’t include circumstantial conjecture, they will never be taken seriously because they would get laughed out of any court in America.

2)
The Truth Movement is one legitimate, repeatable laboratory simulation of the WTC collapses away from being dead and buried…and I mean GONE FOREVER. If someone proves that the collapse was possible…it’s over. No other arguments have the load-bearing capacity to prop up the Movement.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

Originally posted by Krahzeef_Ukhar
Ok with all the crazy theories going around which cannot be proven I wanted to start a thread which only shows absolute facts. Or at the very least something which cannot be put into the crazies boat.

I'll start it off with General Mahmoud Ahmad.

In early October 2001, Indian intelligence alleged that Mahmoud had ordered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh — the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl — to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta's two bank accounts in Florida.

HELLO?? the OP states "facts" ... did anyone bother to read the first one?

His first sentence states "ALLEGED".

The FACT is, not one CT has been proven beyond a resonable doubt. It's funny that the Silverstien quote is STILL being used in here.

As far as the towers go. Please provide ONE peer reviewed paper that makes a claim that the towers well due to something OTHER than what was outlined in NIST.

Those of you that state that the casue was from steel melting have not read ONE page of the NIST report.

Edit spelling

[edit on 123030p://5019 by CaptainObvious]

The fact is, you clearly haven't reviewed all the "CT's". There were NORAD drills going on which interefered with any shoot down efforts. That's a "CT", and it's been proven. So there goes your claim.

I do agree with you that it's funny that the Silverstein quote is still being used. It's useless.

When you, and others, learn to at the very least accept the possibility that these people have been bought off to back up the official story, then we'll start giving more respect to agencies like the NIST.

I don't pretend to know what happened in the Twin Towers. Unlike most "conspiracy theorists", I admit that it could go either way. The steel also did not "melt", it didn't have to. That's what alot of "conspiracy theorists" get confused. All it had to do was weaken, which was very possible given the heat.

However, our whole 'story' isn't based purely on the Twin Towers. That's not all we have. Most people in the "Truth Movement" make it about the Twin Towers because that's the front and center aspect of the 9/11. When you think 9/11, you probably think of the South Tower being hit and that large explosion. That's just the common thought. But there are plenty more aspects of the "Truth Movement's" story that make it more than just your average "conspiracy theory", and turn it into something that should be looked at with an open mind and considered.

Originally posted by Essedarius
2)
The Truth Movement is one legitimate, repeatable laboratory simulation of the WTC collapses away from being dead and buried…and I mean GONE FOREVER. If someone proves that the collapse was possible…it’s over. No other arguments have the load-bearing capacity to prop up the Movement.

That shows how little you know about the Truth Movement. I'll agree with you that there are alot of bs theories that need to be dropped. But the Twin Towers theory is not the only thing the Truth Movement has. It goes much deeper than just the events of that day, and much deeper than just the Twin Towers. If you knew anything about the Truth Movement, you'd know that.

Originally posted by esdad71
I do not buy into the theory of the melted steel, that did not happen. However, take a look at NOva's documentary and it was pretty dead on with how it could have occured.

Steel did not melt, it weakened.

this is supposed to be a thread dedicated to undeniable facts about 911.

whether or not you 'buy' the testimony of eyewitnesses, changes not an iota of what they say they saw.

"that did not happen" is not an undeniable fact.

the temperature of the debris pile as measured from space by NASA, would suggest that there easily could have been molten steel under it.
the molten metal pouring out of the tower(another undisputable fact) just before collapse, proves there were steel melting temperatures in at least one spot. the steel spheroids in the debris prove that that steel was molten. the now famous picture of a glowing, possibly dripping, beam being pulled out of the pile proves that the some of the steel in the pile was at least close to molten.

if that beam was the only object near that temperature in it's vicinity, it would have quickly cooled. heat goes one way....towards less heat. in order for that beam to stay that hot for that long, there had to be immense heat in the pile around it, as well.

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
It goes much deeper than just the events of that day, and much deeper than just the Twin Towers. If you knew anything about the Truth Movement, you'd know that.

I know the basic characteristics of thermite, I can tell you what day Larry Silverstein secured the lease on the WTC buildings, I've googled the name "Porter Goss", and I managed to sit through every supercharged dramatic moment of "Who Killed John O'Neill"...I'm pretty sure that means I know more about the Truth movement than 97% of the world's population.

If you want the Truth Movement to actually achieve something, then I'd hurry up and go public with those irrefutable deep dark secrets of yours. Because while I don't know much...next to the average Joe I'm Dr. David Ray freakin' Griffin.

If you can't convince me, you don't have a prayer with my dad...or his fishing buddies...and their families...and their cities...