I made this comment to a post earlier today, but I thought it was worth its own post. I can't believe I had never looked this up before. Am I missing something? A jet engine is OPTIMIZED to burn jet fuel the most efficiently possible. Jet fuel burning in a building fire is NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO REACH THAT TEMPERATURE! (and even that would not melt steel!) This discrepancy, if as simple as it appears to be, should have been broadcast loud and far long ago. Perhaps this simple fact, if indeed as simple as it seems to be, so clearly indicates the official 9/11 narrative absolutely can't be true, is the reason it seems to have been buried all these years. Please correct me if this is not as simple as it seems.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (103)
sorted by:
Having tried to explain 911 to normies before, I believe that a technical explanation with proof and reason isn't the correct approach.
After all 911 is not about truth, it's about narrative and normies.
My take is that it isn't important exactly who was involved in 911 or how it was done, or whether it was an inside job.
It turns out that it's all about what the government WOULD do to get what they want, not what they DID do. You'll never convince a normie that the gov DID do 911 until you convince them that the gov WOULD do it. At that point it becomes immaterial who actually did it. The only take away of importance is that the government WOULD do such a thing and then use it to bring in the patriot act and the war on terror. That's all you need to know. How it was done and exactly who the players were no longer matters. I tell people this if they are going to argue about steel temperatures. None of it matters. It matters not whether it was a Davy Crockett, a DEW or thermite. It matters whether your government would do that to the people. That's the key implication which makes a normies different to an anon.
It's the same with Lahaina or anything else.
Perhaps the most important questions are: Why was it done? What happened as a consequence? Who benefitted?
Change out all the technical arguments and the whole c19 fiasco leads to the same questions of why it was done, the consequences and the benefit.
The covid partnership was much more inclusive in global orchestration.
Good point. The same principles apply.
https://greatawakening.win/p/19AxLLTzmR/x/c/4eSk0AZhket
Exactly.
(Only problem is that, in practice, I still argue with facts because I’m dumb like that.)
In the end we'll need the facts.