Many questions remain about 9/11 as we near the 18th anniversary.

[the other mike]

The towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition is bottom to top. The main supports at the bottom and the building collapses, all at the same time, from bottom to top with kicker charges break up the debris as it collapses.

But the towers came down from the point of impact down......with the debris field destroying each floor individually, one at a time, all the way to the ground. With the lower floors destoyed last.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

You learned all that from a Flintstones episode ? Cool.

So vague allusions to.....what? If even you can't openly and clearly state your claims, why would we take them seriously?

So the title and OP speak for themselves.
If you're just here to spout the usual arrogant sarcasm
aimed at anyone who dares question the official narrative then
run along please.

 

[Skylar]

The towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition is bottom to top. The main supports at the bottom and the building collapses, all at the same time, from bottom to top with kicker charges break up the debris as it collapses.

But the towers came down from the point of impact down......with the debris field destroying each floor individually, one at a time, all the way to the ground. With the lower floors destoyed last.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

You learned all that from a Flintstones episode ? Cool.

No, watching actual demolitions. They knock out the main supports at its base and the building, all at the same time, falls. Kicker charges are used to break up the debris as its falling.

Here's a lovely example, in slow mo. Notice how the entire building is falling all at the same time. The lower levels, the mid levels, the upper levels...all together. With the bottom destroyed first.



Which isn't how the towers fell at all. The collapse initiated at the point of impact with the planes and continued down, destroying one floor at a time, all the way to the ground. With the bottom of the towers being last part destroyed. In fact, that's where the survivors were actually found: at the bottom of the tower.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

So vague allusions to.....what? If even you can't openly and clearly state your claims, why would we take them seriously?

So the title and OP speak for themselves.
If you're just here to spout the usual arrogant sarcasm
aimed at anyone who dares question the official narrative then
run along please.

So no, you can't actually make any specific accusation against Silverstein, nor back them up. You just vaguely allude to....something. Which you won't actually say.

If you're ever curious why you're not being taken seriously, that's definitely a reason.

 

[the other mike]

The towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition is bottom to top. The main supports at the bottom and the building collapses, all at the same time, from bottom to top with kicker charges break up the debris as it collapses.

But the towers came down from the point of impact down......with the debris field destroying each floor individually, one at a time, all the way to the ground. With the lower floors destoyed last.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

The towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition is bottom to top. The main supports at the bottom and the building collapses, all at the same time, from bottom to top with kicker charges break up the debris as it collapses.

But the towers came down from the point of impact down......with the debris field destroying each floor individually, one at a time, all the way to the ground. With the lower floors destoyed last.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

You learned all that from a Flintstones episode ? Cool.

No, watching actual demolitions. They knock out the main supports at its base and the building, all at the same time, falls. Kicker charges are used to break up the debris as its falling.

Here's a lovely example, in slow mo. Notice how the entire building is falling all at the same time. The lower levels, the mid levels, the upper levels...all together. With the bottom destroyed first.



Which isn't how the towers fell at all. The collapse initiated at the point of impact with the planes and continued down, destroying one floor at a time, all the way to the ground. With the bottom of the towers being last part destroyed. In fact, that's where the survivors were actually found: at the bottom of the tower.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

So vague allusions to.....what? If even you can't openly and clearly state your claims, why would we take them seriously?

So the title and OP speak for themselves.
If you're just here to spout the usual arrogant sarcasm
aimed at anyone who dares question the official narrative then
run along please.

So no, you can't actually make any specific accusation against Silverstein, nor back them up. You just vaguely allude to....something. Which you won't actually say.

If you're ever curious why you're not being taken seriously, that's definitely a reason.

The last thing I want is to be taken seriously and targeted by a team of goons.

 

[Skylar]

The towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition is bottom to top. The main supports at the bottom and the building collapses, all at the same time, from bottom to top with kicker charges break up the debris as it collapses.

But the towers came down from the point of impact down......with the debris field destroying each floor individually, one at a time, all the way to the ground. With the lower floors destoyed last.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

The towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition is bottom to top. The main supports at the bottom and the building collapses, all at the same time, from bottom to top with kicker charges break up the debris as it collapses.

But the towers came down from the point of impact down......with the debris field destroying each floor individually, one at a time, all the way to the ground. With the lower floors destoyed last.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

You learned all that from a Flintstones episode ? Cool.

No, watching actual demolitions. They knock out the main supports at its base and the building, all at the same time, falls. Kicker charges are used to break up the debris as its falling.

Here's a lovely example, in slow mo. Notice how the entire building is falling all at the same time. The lower levels, the mid levels, the upper levels...all together. With the bottom destroyed first.



Which isn't how the towers fell at all. The collapse initiated at the point of impact with the planes and continued down, destroying one floor at a time, all the way to the ground. With the bottom of the towers being last part destroyed. In fact, that's where the survivors were actually found: at the bottom of the tower.

Exactly opposite of controlled demolition.

So vague allusions to.....what? If even you can't openly and clearly state your claims, why would we take them seriously?

So the title and OP speak for themselves.
If you're just here to spout the usual arrogant sarcasm
aimed at anyone who dares question the official narrative then
run along please.

So no, you can't actually make any specific accusation against Silverstein, nor back them up. You just vaguely allude to....something. Which you won't actually say.

If you're ever curious why you're not being taken seriously, that's definitely a reason.

So you just quoted me twice?

Have you even watched the conspiracy videos you're shilling? Because when I ask you specific questions about their accusations or point out specific holes in their reasoning......you implode.

Very much like the building in the go-pro slow motion video!



See how *actual* controlled demolition works? Bottom to top.

Exactly opposite of how the towers came down.

 

[Skylar]

https://www.bollyn.com/public/Solving_9-11_-_The_Deception_That_Changed_The_World.pdf

There would be, for example, no reporting in the mainstream media of Israeli involvement or prior knowledge of the attacks. And this was just the beginning of the censorship the controlled media was to impose on the events of 9-11.

The possibility that these men could be Israeli intelligence agents involved in a spectacular "false flag" terror attack was discussed in my article that went to print in the American Free Press on September 20, 2001. It was the only newspaper in the United States where such thoughts could openly be expressed.

Months later, Forward, a well known New York-based Jewish newspaper, confirmed that Urban Moving Systems, the Weehawken, New Jersey-based "moving" company that the men worked for, was actually an Israeli intelligence front operation and that at least two of the men, evidently the Kurzberg brothers, were known agents of Mossad, Israel's military intelligence agency. Dominic Suter, the Israeli "owner" of the company and a prime suspect, was somehow allowed to flee to Israel after the Federal Bureau of Investigation had initially interviewed him, but before they could interrogate him a second time.

He has not been extradited to the United States since. After being held for 10 weeks, the five Israelis were sent back to Israel on visa violations. Ellner, Marmari, and Schmuel appeared on an Israeli television show, without the Kurzberg brothers, in November 2001.

The Israelies in question didn't work at the tower. Nor is there any evidence that they did anything to them. Or could have.

Worse, you just 'alluded' to a Saudi security company being involved. So it was the Saudi's AND the Mossad? You know that Saudi Arabia doesn't get along great with Israel, right? But you're alluding to them somehow working together?

Or is this just a conspiracy free for all, when you just throw random conspiracy 'allusions' against the barn wall and see if any of that shit sticks?

No wonder you can't actually articulate your own claims.

 

[Skylar]

If you're ever curious why you're not being taken seriously, that's definitely a reason.

The last thing I want is to be taken seriously and targeted by a team of goons.

With anyone who disagrees with your conclusions and points out the huge, theory killing holes in the proposed explanations being a 'goon'?

You don't handle contradiction well at all, do you?

 

[the other mike]

If you're ever curious why you're not being taken seriously, that's definitely a reason.

The last thing I want is to be taken seriously and targeted by a team of goons.

With anyone who disagrees with your conclusions and points out the huge, theory killing holes in the proposed explanations being a 'goon'?

You don't handle contradiction well at all, do you?

Some of the most important questions in history as a matter of fact.

Here again is the fateful day that changed the world .

In 4:46.


Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say.

9/11 Explosive Connections - The 9/11 Masterminds

Architect Richard Gage destroys the official 9/11 narrative.

Mathematician to Refute Official Theory of WTC Destruction at Upcoming Conference

Troll alert.

 

[the other mike]

If you're ever curious why you're not being taken seriously, that's definitely a reason.

The last thing I want is to be taken seriously and targeted by a team of goons.

With anyone who disagrees with your conclusions and points out the huge, theory killing holes in the proposed explanations being a 'goon'?

You don't handle contradiction well at all, do you?

 

[Skylar]

If you're ever curious why you're not being taken seriously, that's definitely a reason.

The last thing I want is to be taken seriously and targeted by a team of goons.

With anyone who disagrees with your conclusions and points out the huge, theory killing holes in the proposed explanations being a 'goon'?

You don't handle contradiction well at all, do you?

And so you just quoted me again.

When I point out that the towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demotion, you flee.

When I ask what you're specifically accusing Silverstein of, you flee.

If even you won't take your conspiracies seriously, why would I or anyone else?

 

[the other mike]

When I point out that the towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demotion, you flee.

You punks always have to lie .....I've been spanking you fuckers since 2004 on various political forums.
So before you continue patronizing me, I've heard every spin you can toss my way, but if you want to play , bring it. For every lie you spit out I'll stomp on it with 50 truths.

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say.

9/11 Explosive Connections - The 9/11 Masterminds

Architect Richard Gage destroys the official 9/11 narrative.

Mathematician to Refute Official Theory of WTC Destruction at Upcoming Conference

 

[the other mike]

Lawyers Group Files New Petition Supplement With U.S. Attorney On Persons Who May Have Information Material To 9/11 WTC Grand Jury Investigation

As Cost of ‘War on Terror’ Hits $6 Trillion, NY Grand Jury Looks Anew at 9/11 - Validated Independent News

With fewer than half the US population believing the official World Trade Center narrative, a New York Grand Jury is being called to investigate unprosecuted 9/11 crimes.

Since September 11, 2001, the price for America’s war on terror has hit $6 trillion, and more than 480,000 people have been killed, according to a 2017 study released by the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University.

The casualties include 7,000 US troops, more than 100,000 military and police from other countries, and more than 244,000 civilians. The collateral cost of the “war on terror” is a tenfold increase in airport security, government spying on civilians, and war costs in Iraq and Afghanistan. War appropriations are funded by deficit spending and borrowing (not new taxes or war bonds) which add to interest costs totaling trillions.

The US is conducting counterterror operations in 76 countries while US troops are fighting and dying from Afghanistan to Niger, nearly two decades after the Twin Towers attack.

It is not clear what a victory in the War on Terror would be, but a deeper investigation into the official 9/11 story may help define it.

9/11 Grand Jury Update: U.S. Attorney's Lips Sealed, Lawyers' Committee to File Mandamus

 

[Skylar]

When I point out that the towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demotion, you flee.

You punks always have to lie .....I've been spanking you fuckers since 2004 on various political forums.
So before you continue patronizing me, I've heard every spin you can toss my way, but if you want to play , bring it. For every lie you spit out I'll stomp on it with 50 truths.

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say.

9/11 Explosive Connections - The 9/11 Masterminds

Architect Richard Gage destroys the official 9/11 narrative.

Mathematician to Refute Official Theory of WTC Destruction at Upcoming Conference

Thermite doesn't explode, Angelo. It burns at high temperatures. And extremely brightly. In fact, looking right at a thermite reaction can damage your eyes.



Thermite reactions are absolutely and completely obvious. And with 47 core columns and 240 perimeter columns per floor and the tower coming down from the point of impact with the planes to the ground, each floor would have had to been destroyed individually. That's roughly 90 floors on one tower and about 80 on the other, that would have been nearly 50,000 individual thermite reactions that would have needed to have gone off.

With the 240 perimeter columns are on the outside of the building, exposed to open air. So when the 10s or thousands of thermite reactions went off, they would have lit the WTC towers so brightly you would have been able to see the light from orbit.

Yet.....nothing. Not a single thermite reaction was ever seen. Despite your theory requiring 10s of thousands of them.

Thermite is an absolutely terrible explanation of the collapse of the towers. Thermite doesn't explode. Thermite is obvious. 3/4 of the columns destroyed would have been exposed to open air and the visible by any camera. Yet nothing.

And you can't explain any of these theory killing holes in your theory.

And there are so many more holes in the stupid, stupid Truther theory. Shall we go over them together? Or are you just gonna spam something you don't understand, and have never read.....again

 

[the other mike]

When I point out that the towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demotion, you flee.

You punks always have to lie .....I've been spanking you fuckers since 2004 on various political forums.
So before you continue patronizing me, I've heard every spin you can toss my way, but if you want to play , bring it. For every lie you spit out I'll stomp on it with 50 truths.

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say.

9/11 Explosive Connections - The 9/11 Masterminds

Architect Richard Gage destroys the official 9/11 narrative.

Mathematician to Refute Official Theory of WTC Destruction at Upcoming Conference

Thermite doesn't explode, Angelo. It burns at high temperatures. And extremely brightly. In fact, looking right at a thermite reaction can damage your eyes.



Thermite reactions are absolutely and completely obvious. And with 47 core columns and 240 perimeter columns per floor and the tower coming down from the point of impact with the planes to the ground, each floor would have had to been destroyed individually. That's roughly 90 floors on one tower and about 80 on the other, that would have been nearly 50,000 individual thermite reactions that would have needed to have gone off.

With the 240 perimeter columns are on the outside of the building, exposed to open air. So when the 10s or thousands of thermite reactions went off, they would have lit the WTC towers so brightly you would have been able to see the light from orbit.

Yet.....nothing. Not a single thermite reaction was ever seen. Despite your theory requiring 10s of thousands of them.

Thermite is an absolutely terrible explanation of the collapse of the towers. Thermite doesn't explode. Thermite is obvious. 3/4 of the columns destroyed would have been exposed to open air and the visible by any camera. Yet nothing.

And you can't explain any of these theory killing holes in your theory.

And there are so many more holes in the stupid, stupid Truther theory. Shall we go over them together? Or are you just gonna spam something you don't understand, and have never read.....again

Just connecting dots.

 

[Faun]

Demolition Access To The WTC Towers: Part Two - Security - 911Truth.Org %

Larry Silverstein owned WTC building 7, and in May 2001, he also finalized a 99-year lease of the WTC complex and took over operation of WTC buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 from the PANYNJ. His partners in the deal were retail operator Westfield America and real estate investor Lloyd Goldman. To finance his deal for the WTC, “Silverstein borrowed $726 million from GMAC Commercial Mortgage, a unit of General Motors. GMAC in turn converted the loan into securities, which it sold to investors like pension funds.” [123]

Alan Reiss of the PANYNJ had been working on a three-month transition plan with a team including Silverstein Properties, in the weeks before 9/11. Just before the attacks, the Silverstein group had asked Reiss to let it more fully operate all systems, from safety systems to tenant relations. [124]

Silverstein had hired someone to run the WTC complex for him. This was Geoffrey (Jeff) Wharton, who came to Silverstein Properties from Tishman Speyer, one of the city’s biggest office landlords. Wharton was in charge of the buildings when they were destroyed, and stayed with Silverstein for only one year after that. [125]

Wharton had been in the north tower at the Windows on the World restaurant where he had breakfast every day, and was said to be on the last elevator to descend, at 8:44 AM. He greeted and left behind the new PANYNJ executive director, Neil Levin, who was there waiting for someone although he had not been seen there before. [126] Shortly thereafter, it was Jeff Wharton that first told Larry Silverstein about the attacks. But Silverstein watched it all play out on television. Although Silverstein was said to be distressed by the loss of four of his employees, at the same time, “in a display of shrewdness, Silverstein was already delving into complex legal strategies by the next morning.” [127]

Wharton was a friend of Jerome Hauer, and through Hauer, Silverstein and Wharton met and hired an FBI agent named John O’Neill to run security. [128] It was reported that O’Neill “started out as an FBI support employee and worked his way up to titles such as assistant special agent in charge and section chief in charge of the counterterrorism division. In his 31-year career with the FBI, John O’Neill investigated nearly every terrorist attack aver attributed to Al Qaeda, many of those under the direction and close supervision of FBI Director Louis Freeh. “O’Neill … had been a key part of the investigation of the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and the attack on the USS Cole in Yemen last year.” [129]

O’Neill was known to dress like a gangster, and to fraternize with gangsters. He was also dating several women at the same time and was lying to all of them. A few weeks before 9/11, O’Neill got serious about returning to his Catholic faith and began going to mass every day. He repeatedly told people that he felt something was going to happen. On his second day at his WTC office, on the 34th floor, O’Neill was killed when the attacks occurred, although not immediately. It was reported that O’Neill escaped the building but returned in an attempt to help others.

In 2007, Larry Silverstein was awarded a $4.55 billion settlement in insurance payouts for the destruction of the WTC, as a result of the largest insurance claim ever made.

What exactly are you accusing Silverstein of?

Saying, "pull it." A term never used in a controlled demolition and said to firemen who don't perform controlled demolitions to bring down a building that was expected to fall for no less than 5 hours after a 104 story building rained thousands of tons of concrete and steel upon it.

 

[the other mike]

Saying, "pull it." A term never used in a controlled demolition and said to firemen who don't perform controlled demolitions to bring down a building that was expected to fall for no less than 5 hours after a 104 story building rained thousands of tons of concrete and steel upon it.

Another lie. Building 7 was 200 yards away from ground zero.
The north face was hit with the dust tsunami but fire didn't bring it down.

 

[the other mike]

Fire did not cause World Trade Center Building 7 collapse, UAF study suggests
It's been a point of controversy for more than a decade. Now, researchers from the University of Alaska Fairbanks are weighing in.

World Trade Center Building 7 was not struck by a plane, but collapsed hours after the twin towers on Sept. 11, 2001. A draft report released this week by researchers at UAF suggests that the fall was not a result of fires, despite the findings of the National Institute for Standards and Technology, an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, in 2008.

https://www.ktva.com/story/41015153/fire-did-not-cause-world-trade-center-building-7-collapse-uaf-study-suggests

 

[Faun]

When I point out that the towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demotion, you flee.

You punks always have to lie .....I've been spanking you fuckers since 2004 on various political forums.
So before you continue patronizing me, I've heard every spin you can toss my way, but if you want to play , bring it. For every lie you spit out I'll stomp on it with 50 truths.

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say.

9/11 Explosive Connections - The 9/11 Masterminds

Architect Richard Gage destroys the official 9/11 narrative.

Mathematician to Refute Official Theory of WTC Destruction at Upcoming Conference

Thermite doesn't explode, Angelo. It burns at high temperatures. And extremely brightly. In fact, looking right at a thermite reaction can damage your eyes.



Thermite reactions are absolutely and completely obvious. And with 47 core columns and 240 perimeter columns per floor and the tower coming down from the point of impact with the planes to the ground, each floor would have had to been destroyed individually. That's roughly 90 floors on one tower and about 80 on the other, that would have been nearly 50,000 individual thermite reactions that would have needed to have gone off.

With the 240 perimeter columns are on the outside of the building, exposed to open air. So when the 10s or thousands of thermite reactions went off, they would have lit the WTC towers so brightly you would have been able to see the light from orbit.

Yet.....nothing. Not a single thermite reaction was ever seen. Despite your theory requiring 10s of thousands of them.

Thermite is an absolutely terrible explanation of the collapse of the towers. Thermite doesn't explode. Thermite is obvious. 3/4 of the columns destroyed would have been exposed to open air and the visible by any camera. Yet nothing.

And you can't explain any of these theory killing holes in your theory.

And there are so many more holes in the stupid, stupid Truther theory. Shall we go over them together? Or are you just gonna spam something you don't understand, and have never read.....again

Just connecting dots.

Liar, you've already been show a photo of that beam before it was cut by the cleanup crew. Now you're simply lying in a failed attempt to keep your conspiracy bullshit alive.


Here's a photo of that beam after it was cut ... notice it just above and behind the cut beam in the white circle....

And here's a photo of the same cut beam in the white circle. You'll note the beam just above and behind it is the same beam you idiotically claim was cut to bring the tower down -- and it's not yet cut.

 

[the other mike]

You never "debunked" me on anything faunzie.
You're comparing photos out of context for one thing.

 

[Faun]

Saying, "pull it." A term never used in a controlled demolition and said to firemen who don't perform controlled demolitions to bring down a building that was expected to fall for no less than 5 hours after a 104 story building rained thousands of tons of concrete and steel upon it.

Another lie. Building 7 was 200 yards away from ground zero.
The north face was hit with the dust tsunami but fire didn't bring it down.

Liar ... 200 yards is 2 football fields. In reality, a realm you haven't seen in years, building 7 was across the street from building 6 which was adjacent to the North Tower...

.... was 370 feet from the tower accord to the NIST... roughly 40% closer than you falsely claimed.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

And of course, debris form the North Tower didn't fall straight down but mushroomed out....

 

[Skylar]

When I point out that the towers came down exactly opposite of controlled demotion, you flee.

You punks always have to lie .....I've been spanking you fuckers since 2004 on various political forums.
So before you continue patronizing me, I've heard every spin you can toss my way, but if you want to play , bring it. For every lie you spit out I'll stomp on it with 50 truths.

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say.

9/11 Explosive Connections - The 9/11 Masterminds

Architect Richard Gage destroys the official 9/11 narrative.

Mathematician to Refute Official Theory of WTC Destruction at Upcoming Conference

Thermite doesn't explode, Angelo. It burns at high temperatures. And extremely brightly. In fact, looking right at a thermite reaction can damage your eyes.



Thermite reactions are absolutely and completely obvious. And with 47 core columns and 240 perimeter columns per floor and the tower coming down from the point of impact with the planes to the ground, each floor would have had to been destroyed individually. That's roughly 90 floors on one tower and about 80 on the other, that would have been nearly 50,000 individual thermite reactions that would have needed to have gone off.

With the 240 perimeter columns are on the outside of the building, exposed to open air. So when the 10s or thousands of thermite reactions went off, they would have lit the WTC towers so brightly you would have been able to see the light from orbit.

Yet.....nothing. Not a single thermite reaction was ever seen. Despite your theory requiring 10s of thousands of them.

Thermite is an absolutely terrible explanation of the collapse of the towers. Thermite doesn't explode. Thermite is obvious. 3/4 of the columns destroyed would have been exposed to open air and the visible by any camera. Yet nothing.

And you can't explain any of these theory killing holes in your theory.

And there are so many more holes in the stupid, stupid Truther theory. Shall we go over them together? Or are you just gonna spam something you don't understand, and have never read.....again

Just connecting dots.

So now you're claiming it was a shaped charge, and NOT thermite?

Do you see how you're abandoning your thermite claim and skittering to explosive demolition the moment Thermite doesn't work? So are abandoning your thermite claim now? Because if you're not......then you run head long into the same problem you had last time: NO THERMITE REACTIONS were ever seen. Anywhere.

Despite your theory requiring 10s of thousands of them, with 3/4s of the columns cut exposed to open air and visible from the street.

And of course, the picture in question isn't 911. You can clearly see a construction worker in the background. This is during the clean up, when they were cutting the debris with thermal lances.

See the 'angled cuts' on the columns made by the construction worker? No? Let me give you a close up.

Look familiar? And no thermite or 'shaped charges' necessary. Just a construction worker with a thermal lance. Here's a picture of one being used to cut huge rolls of steel:

Notice anything familiar? Huge plumes of yellow smoke (just like the ground zero construction worker with a thermal lance), cutting steel like butter. Don't take my word for it, here's the video:



Your wildly elaborate conspiracy is completely unnecessary. As the facts are met BETTER by far simpler explanations; thermal lances at the clean up effort. We know they were at ground zero. And they produce EXACTLY the type of cuts your pictures show.

Meanwhile, there are exactly zero thermite reactions ever seen. Despite your theory requiring 10s of thousand of such reactions, 3/4 of would have been visible on the street. Yet, nothing.

And you are completely stumped, with no explanation for this enormous theory killing hole in your conspiracy.

As I said, your explanation is just awful. Its wildly complicated, completely unnecessary and doesn't match the evidence.