all 13 comments

[–]Tom_Bombadil 6 insightful - 1 funny6 insightful - 0 funny7 insightful - 1 funny -  (12 children)

A couple of problems with a liquid fuel theory:

  • The fires were small and located in one central location on the building, and the building collapse started at the base.
  • The rubble wasn't aggressively burning with excess fuel after the collapse.
  • There was a lack of black smoke that is produced from fuel fires.
  • Excess fuel didn't flow out of the building and continue to burn.
  • A count down was overheard that preceded the collapse.
  • Collapses caused by fire are asymmetric.

The proposed theory is implausible. (This isn't a criticism of you Vigte.)

Edit:. Does anyone think that this looks like a burning building that collapsed as a result of a fuel fire?

[–]magnora7 3 insightful - 2 funny3 insightful - 1 funny4 insightful - 2 funny -  (4 children)

I agree, there was no "explosion" involving fire in WTC7, so this theory doesn't make sense. Kind of disappointed it's getting so many upvotes when it so obviously is wrong

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny -  (3 children)

I doubt most actually processed the title. Also, Vigte's generally have substance, so they probably didn't scrutinize the title.

I also noticed that in recent videos the is more smoke from the twin towers than I recalled. Do you have any archived that you could compare the ones in the link?
I suppose the towers did smolder for 3 months, but I recall the smoke looking a bit different. I'll look into it, as well.

Tomorrow is the inverse 1/11/19.

[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 funny1 insightful - 0 funny2 insightful - 1 funny -  (2 children)

I do remember the twin towers smoking a ton, I don't think that's changed. I do have an original VHS tape I recorded of 9/11 from the news the day it happened though, I might have to break that out some day lol

I think you're right about the title, people just saw Vigte and WTC7 and upvoted

[–]Vigte[S] 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny -  (1 child)

We will just have to wait and see. Overlord said the files wouldn't make sense until the end.

For now all we have is scattered pieces of an investigation.

The documents say that is what the insurance company blamed WTC7 on. Could be their version of "find an excuse" - but the anhydrous coolant system was known before docu-drops, the insurance company's findings seem to back up the 9/11 truth "guess" regarding the coolant being a major factor. Could be the system itself was used as a bomb, seems more than likely.

Never did I said "I believe it was fire and fire alone" - I was merely copying the wording of the documents.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny -  (0 children)

Eh I think that Overlord stuff is a limited hangout by the CIA potentially. It's theater. I don't think we're going to learn anything new from some papers getting released (that could've been massively edited in the last 18 years).

I think what we know now is about as good as it's going to get, unfortunately. But it's interesting to dig in to, I guess. There's just so much active disinfo about it

[–]Vigte[S] 3 insightful - 1 funny3 insightful - 0 funny4 insightful - 1 funny -  (0 children)

shrug I am merely relaying the data from the dumps, no where else is doing it and quite frankly, this is suspicious to me - given that these documents are authentic - it's simply a matter of whether the content of them is correct or written down to perpetuate the lie.

I'm no 9/11 expert and aside from the fact it was a turning point in history for all nations, it's of very little interest as I have always presumed (and still do, despite this Dark Overlord stuff) we will never know what actually happened (A time-sink, like aliens or flat earth).

I'm HOPEFUL and thus sharing what has been found, but I'm not putting all my eggs into its basket.

I'm only revisiting this case because if we can undo the psychological effects of 9/11 (mental slavery to news, mainly) (or at least undo SOME of the damage) - then the world could go back to being only slightly shitty and I could finally feel happy for a family future.

[–]Vigte[S] 1 insightful - 1 funny1 insightful - 0 funny2 insightful - 1 funny -  (5 children)

Regardless - the facts are insurance companies basically forced the US gov't to admit culpability, which resulted in "insurance payout adjustments".

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny -  (4 children)

The banker controlled insurance companys? They definitely made their money back with all of the wars.

[–]Vigte[S] 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny -  (3 children)

While your comment is undeniably correct with what we know - it makes me wonder. Perhaps much of this occurs from an "ops account" (with a hefty ability to carry debt/handle losses) - rather than simply individuals "chipping" in.

Perhaps the taking of a loss as the documents state was already factored in.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny -  (2 children)

They never took a loss. The Pentagon announced 2.3 trillion dollars were missing from the Pentagon budget on 9/10/01. The previous day!

Any guesses on who was involved?

Could that money be laundered in 2001 without the assistance of the banks?

[–]Vigte[S] 1 insightful - 1 funny1 insightful - 0 funny2 insightful - 1 funny -  (1 child)

All I'm implying is that somewhere along the way, there had to have been a conscious decision to keep someone below someone else, out of the loop.

These documents are (it would appear) from people who were pressed up beneath this glass ceiling.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 funny2 insightful - 0 funny3 insightful - 1 funny -  (0 children)

Vigte. It's all good. We got your back.

BTW:. Today is inverted 9/11. 1/11/19