911 inside job

Once again as I said before with all my 911 debates CON avoids the science which prove thermitic reactions did take place and relies on there only argument which is 'how did they put the bombs and get away with it argument'Science proves that there were explosives.Your belief that they couldnt have gotten away with it is irrelevant to the scientific evidence.Who or how they put the explosives in is irrelevant. We can only theorize as to how. Anyway great circumstancial evidence has lead to another set of suspects in the wtc attack.Q1. Do you see them in jail?, these people have the media and military in their pocket .We know who they are , we know they are criminals but they dont care.Nanothermite is an explosive! Thermite is an incendiary.By changing the reactant size in a thermitic reaction the reaction rate can be modified between incendiary and explosive. This is important because you can time an explosion, one of the great advantages of the use of nanothermite is the ability to control the speed of the reaction . A steel beam could be cut in a timed fashion which would be beneficial in the destruction of the towers as the building had to look like a natural collapse.Here is a video of someone with a homemade device that cuts vertifcal column.. lol homemade but the US military couldnt invent such a device.They invented invisibility cloaks and remote control insects but something like a vertical thermite cutter is just too unbelievable .http://www.youtube.com...Here is a video of a vertical thermite cutter, they do exist and not so hard to make either.http://www.youtube.com...Remote hijackingConsidering remote control was around since the days of Nicolas Tesla I dont see how the theory is farfetched. Since 1959, NORAD personnel have been installing remote control units in a variety of aircraft and remotely controlling those aircraft in sophisticated aeronautical maneuvers, including combat practice. See "Thwarting skyjackings from the ground," written by Alan Staats for Facsnet, and posted on October 2, 2001. (Facsnet is an education service provided for its reporters by Associated Press.) http://www.facsnet.org...;or http://www.Public-Action.com...;(Look at paragraph entitled "History on remote control.") "Controlling the aircraft from the ground is nothing new. The military has been flying obsolete high performance fighter aircraft as target drones since the 1950s. In fact, NORAD (the North American Air Defense Command) had at its disposal a number of U.S. Air Force General Dynamics F-106 Delta Dart fighter aircraft configured to be remotely flown into combat as early as 1959 under the auspices of a program known as SAGE. These aircraft could be started, taxied, taken off, flown into combat, fight, and return to a landing entirely by remote control, with the only human intervention needed being to fuel and re-arm them." Re-read that final sentence in the above quote: "These [NORAD] aircraft could be started, taxied, taken off, flown into combat, fight, and return to a landing entirely by remote control … " Given over 40 years of institutional experience, flying remotely controlled "suicide" jets into the World Trade Center towers would have been a piece of cake for NORAD. This information puts NORAD's failure to protect our skies on September 11, 2001 in a new light. NFormer German Minister Von Buelow Already Knew About Remote Control. In his interview with the German daily "Tagesspiegel" on January 13th, former German Secretary of Defence Andreas Von Buelow made the following statement: "There is also the theory of one British flight engineer: according to this, the steering of the planes was perhaps taken out of the pilots' hands, from outside. The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting [automatic pilot system]. This theory says, this technique was abused in this case..." Not quite so much a theory as might first appear. When I released the above report about "Home Run" remote control in October 2001, I mentioned that one European flag carrier was aware of the technology, though at that precise point in time I thought it prudent not to name the actual airline: "As long ago as the early nineties, a major European flag carrier acquired the information and was seriously alarmed that one of its own aircraft might be "rescued" by the Americans without its authority. Accordingly, this flag carrier completely stripped the American flight control computers out of its entire fleet, and replaced them with a home grown version. These aircraft are now effectively impregnable to penetration by Home Run, but that is more than can be said for the American aircraft fleet..." The European flag carrier which completely stripped the American flight computers out of its aircraft was Lufthansa, the German national airline. Bearing in mind his former posts as Secretary of Defence and Minister of Science and Technology, Herr Von Buelow would have known all about this mammoth but secretive task. How very clever (and discreet) of Von Buelow to sort of "drop the information" into the middle of an interview about the 9/11 attacks! 1 Hacker uses an android to remotely attack and hijack an airplanehttp://blogs.computerworld.com...Remote hijacking is a plausible theory especially when no pilot has managed to recreate the flight paths taken by the unskilled hijackers in a virtual flying training machine.http://pilotsfor911truth.org...Q2. he was in the basement and rescued like 30 people from the building before the building collapsed so yea if you dont want to believe a hero like this man your really stupid .As I explained thermite is an incendiary used for cutting or weakening steel, this was used on the upper columns to make it look like a natural collapse otherwise the building would look like it had been blown up randomly.We have to theorise how the explosives were put there , what we know is that they are there. Thermite is not a theory out of a hat its because they have found unexploded and exploded thermite , evidence of molten steel with evidence of sulphidization etc etc.The only explanation for the molten steel shows evidence of extreme temperatures, actually as hot as the surface of the sun.Where do these temperatures come from the only explanations would be incendiary devices or some nuclear device. Jet fuel and office furniture cannot i repeat cannot explain the temperatures found. Q3. Neither does it disprove that the US has many classified military projects and technologies. Linear thermite cutting devices are not so unimaginable as spartan nazis or whatever your fantasys with scarlet johanssan are, I would prefer jessica alba please. Q4.The dog was only present in the parking lots, whether or not it has any relevance to the placing of bombs however is unknown.CONS source Rational wiki also denies the nazis were responsible for the burning of the reichstag, If you want to read a pro nazi source like this which seems to think that conspiracies never happen because theres no proof a nazi set the fire in the building go ahead. Q5.Fema found steel samples which had melted and had been attacked by sulphur, molten steel + sulpur = evidence of thermitic reaction.FEMA said it was a mystery a mystery which has not been answered by NIST, the thermite theory however provides a solid explanation for the finding of sulphidized steel .