IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Collection Of Hard Facts, share anything u consider "undebunkable"

Sanders
post Dec 19 2006, 02:02 PM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



If anyone believes something fits the description of an "undebunkable" incriminating fact, list it (them) here in a post. Links to source material, it may even be something already in this Library, are requested. This thread is open, anyone can reply in it. Some of the members may even try and compile something with teeth from the info that finds its way here.

salute.gif

This post has been slightly edited by painter
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pinnacle
post Dec 19 2006, 02:28 PM
Post #2





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 276
Joined: 14-November 06
Member No.: 242



Multiple videos, audio recordings, transcripts and eyewitness statements prove a
four engine White Jet ( suspiciously similar to the E-4B National Airborne Operations Center)
was flying near the White House and Capitol Buliding between 9:40 am and 9:50
am September 11, 2001. Yet the air force denies knowledge of any aircraft being there in the letter I have from the Pentagon dated November 8, 2006 which was sent to my Congressman in response to a request for information he made on my behalf.
This is an undeniable conflict between the news media and the US air force. I have sent copies of this letter to several journialists and asked them to investigate why "air force officials" have
in effect said that major news media persons like Peter Jennings, John King, Katie Couric and many others were reporting about an aircraft that did not exist.
You would think they would have a stake in defending the accuracy of the free press
which accurately reported this aircraft on September 11, 2001 and then never mentioned it again.
Instead they ignore the factual data and question why I would bring up such a glaring
and well documented issue that they have failed to investigate for five years.
I have no particular theory to push but as a taxpayer I just want to know who sent
that plane into restricted airspace during a terrorist attack, what advance information did they have that enabled them to get there 20 minutes before the first jet fighters arrived, and why has the US air force and the 9/11 Commission refused to acknowledge it's existence for more than five years?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grizz
post Dec 19 2006, 02:31 PM
Post #3


aka Oceans Flow


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,211
Joined: 19-October 06
From: Oregon
Member No.: 108



Osama bin Laden is not wanted by the FBI for 9/11. I can't find that article by the guy who noticed that and called the FBI and was told there was no evidence linking OBL to 9/11.

[Edit] FBI says:“No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”

This post has been edited by Tarya: Apr 12 2007, 03:21 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_librarian_*
post Dec 20 2006, 03:16 PM
Post #4





Guest






Senator Dayton: NORAD Lied About 9/11
Sunday, August 1, 2004

Mark Dayton has become the first U.S. senator to challenge the rush to consensus that "The 9/11 Commission Report" settles the open questions of Sept. 11, 2001.

In hearings last Friday, Sen. Dayton (D-MN) raised an obvious point: if the timeline of air defense response as promoted in the Kean Commission's best-selling book is correct, then the timeline presented repeatedly by NORAD during the last two years was completely wrong. Yet now no one at NORAD is willing to comment on their own timeline!

@ Infowars
http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/dayton_911truth.htm

The transcript of Senator Dayton's remarks has been removed.
I'm noticing this more and more lately, especially with particularly incriminating information angry.gif

................................
edit: I found it
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20040805095600503
and 911Truth.org's print of the same article
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20040731213239607
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pinnacle
post Dec 20 2006, 03:59 PM
Post #5





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 276
Joined: 14-November 06
Member No.: 242



Not only has Osama bin Laden not been indicted for the 9/11 attacks but niether has
Ayman al Zawahiri. This may be a legal loophole that allows the government to ignore them since
the Congressional authorization to use force was supposedly aimed at the "perpetrators" of 9/11
and indicting them might make it necessary to actually go after them, which we apparently don't want to do.
It does seem that somebody would indict these guys if the evidence is so strong that they did it, just for appearances sake, but it has not happened yet.
It does seem weird that Bush publicly blames Osama for 9/11 all the time but won't even try to get an indictment as was done against members of his own administration for far lesser
reasons.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 20 2006, 11:55 PM
Post #6



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,602
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



http://pilotsfor911truth.org/index.html


and every link on that site...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
georgie101
post Dec 21 2006, 07:22 PM
Post #7



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 1,221
Joined: 20-October 06
From: south london, uk
Member No.: 114



i think the discrepencies between the times, and the seizmic reports are pretty much hard facts.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
skywatcher
post Jan 13 2007, 12:33 AM
Post #8





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 20
Joined: 5-December 06
Member No.: 289



From Kristen Breitweiser's book Wake Up Call....

"The widows fought, and won, on the principles of the inquiry's independence and its right to summons witnesses and documents. And then they went head to head with the White House's first candidate as head of the investigation - the fabled Henry Kissinger. The veteran Republican warrior and contemporary Washington lobbyist invited the Jersey Girls to his office for coffee, over which he was somewhat taken aback when they demanded to see his client list, to ensure that there was no conflict of interest.

Breitweiser writes: "Kissinger told us to trust him. We told him we couldn't … Kissinger seemed stunned … He didn't understand the fuss about his client list - they were all reputable people, he said.

"Kissinger seemed stricken and became unsteady. In reaching for his cup of coffee he bobbled, knocked the pot, spilled his own cup and nearly fell off the couch." Kissinger never answered their question and the next day he resigned from the chairmanship of the September 11 commission."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Jan 28 2007, 01:15 AM
Post #9



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



This was e-mailed to JDX, was posted by him elsewhere on the board, I think it should be noted here as well for reference

http://www.members.shaw.ca/truth914/mineta.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
waterdancer
post Jan 28 2007, 06:19 AM
Post #10


Polymeta.com search Sibel Edmonds bradblog


Group: Library team
Posts: 1,696
Joined: 15-October 06
Member No.: 77



QUOTE (Sanders @ Jan 28 2007, 05:15 AM)
This was e-mailed to JDX, was posted by him elsewhere on the board, I think it should be noted here as well for reference

http://www.members.shaw.ca/truth914/mineta.html

I dunno. Dick Cheney in the PEOC well before 9:58, I agree with. One of the 9/11 CONmission's many lies. But, here's my take on what the orders may have been. Not saying were, just saying may have been.
Orders for SS agents to shoot down the incoming plane using SAMs. But the plane didn't get close enough to the White House. I wouldn't call the stand down scenario undebunkable evidence based on that overheard conversation. We just don't know what the order was that "still stands". We do know that we need a new investigation bcause of this and many other lies by the 9/11 CONmission.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pinnacle
post Feb 16 2007, 07:49 PM
Post #11





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 276
Joined: 14-November 06
Member No.: 242



I don't know what it means but it is an undebunkable fact that many of the
people who were in the hijacked planes on 9/11 are not listed
in the Social Security Death Index as having died on September 11, 2001.
Many of the names appear with different dates, and some names do not appear at all.
A large number of crew members are not listed and many of phone callers are also not shown as having died on 9/11.
The SSDI has about 80 million names
and is constantly updated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Mar 30 2007, 08:53 PM
Post #12



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



Pakistani wire transfer to Atta's bank account, and the fact that reference to the ISI General was deleted from the official transcripts of a press conference where an Indian Journalist asked Condi Rice about the money and the General's visit to Washington the week of 9/11??

At least it's evidence of a cover-up.

And of course the BBC reporting the collapse of WTC7 23 minutes too early. That's a smoking gun that is hard to argue with.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post Apr 10 2007, 05:19 AM
Post #13



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



courtesy of jo56:

http://www.911proof.com/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MichaelMR
post Apr 11 2007, 04:44 PM
Post #14


Veteran


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 737
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 46



http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq36.html

This is an edited version of Chapter 4 from the explosive 400-page exposé, "The War on Freedom: How and Why America was Attacked, September 11, 2001", by the leading British political scientist and human rights activist Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, Director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development in Brighton, UK. This book was featured on Barry Zwicker’s MediaFile documentary series, ‘The Great Deception: The War on Terrorism – An Alternative View?’, Vision TV, Canada (February 4, 2002): "The most complete book I know of, at this time, summarizing the relevant background and foreground intersecting upon the events of September 11, 2001."

This post has been edited by MichaelMR: Apr 11 2007, 04:45 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sanders
post May 20 2007, 04:27 AM
Post #15



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 7,990
Joined: 13-September 06
Member No.: 49



Steven Jones, X-ray spectrometry evidence from samples taken at the WTC site.

Perfect match with thermate.

http://stopthelie.com/the_evidence_is_in.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ricochet
post May 14 2008, 03:58 PM
Post #16





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 746
Joined: 25-April 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,225



Guns encased in melted concrete.Temperatures had to exceed 3000 degrees to obtain results.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/9-11guns/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lunk
post May 15 2008, 01:15 AM
Post #17



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 4,982
Joined: 1-April 07
Member No.: 875



That's the first time I heard that the,
"Fire temperatures were so intense
that the concrete melted like lava
around anything in its path."

"A special pretreatment procedure was adopted for DTA experiments with mixtures containing 10 wt% concrete because of concerns
that (1) these samples would not melt sufficiently to provide good contact with the thermocouple because of their high liquidus temperature ( >2500 C) and (2) the samples, if not pretreated at a high temperature, would not contain equilibrium phases. Thererfore, these samples were heated for up
to an hour under flowing Ar-3%H (at 15 kPa) at temperatures as high as 2500 C for limstone-concrete and 2200 C for siliceous concrete."

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:9TXx-...t=clnk&cd=1

"The U.S. Customs House stored a large arsenal of firearms at its
Six World Trade Center office."

What building was the U.S. Customs House in, at the WTC?

WTC Building SIX!?

These must be holographic melted concrete covered guns...

WTF?!

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/9-11guns/

I'm not really into smoking guns...
but these guns have already been smoked...
heavily!

imo, lunk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ricochet
post May 15 2008, 01:25 AM
Post #18





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 746
Joined: 25-April 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,225



I thought you might like that.You don't have to be a Phd to see that there is nothing in the OCT fires that could create this amount of heat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
KP50
post May 15 2008, 03:26 AM
Post #19



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 835
Joined: 14-May 07
From: New Zealand
Member No.: 1,044



QUOTE (Ricochet @ May 15 2008, 05:25 PM) *
I thought you might like that.You don't have to be a Phd to see that there is nothing in the OCT fires that could create this amount of heat.


Hi Rico,

Do you have any "non-conspiracy" links to the concrete encrusted guns? It certainly is a bizarre sight.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post May 15 2008, 03:54 AM
Post #20



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



QUOTE (KP50 @ May 15 2008, 01:26 AM) *
Do you have any "non-conspiracy" links to the concrete encrusted guns? It certainly is a bizarre sight.


Hi KP50,

Mike Rivero's site says "THESE GUNS ARE ON DISPLAY AT THE NEW YORK POLICE MUSEUM"- maybe one of our NYC friends could verify (cetainly NOT me, by any stretch). It certainly looked like a "proper" museum photo to me.

I could fairly confidently identify a "fossilized" Beretta and Sig Sauer [probably both 9mm Parabellum by the 2001 date, or else .40 Smith & Wesson caliber (later LE use in MOST of the US)] by the "fossilized" slides. That "revolver" looked like a volcanic rock to me, though. dunno.gif

FWIW on the model numbers- the 9mm Beretta is an M92... the .40 Beretta is an M96, and the "squared" 9mm Sig is a P226 from what I recall (again- please verify- don't quote me here).

Dunno if this helps,
d
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th April 2014 - 04:07 AM