The Instigator
Letsdebate24
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
brontoraptor
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

9/11 was a false flag event

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/20/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 6 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 337 times Debate No: 93930
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Letsdebate24

Pro

There is a devastating lack of evidence to support the claim that radical muslims carried out the attacks of 9/11. Ranging from the twin towers to the attack on the pentagon as well as the supposedly downed flight 93 in Pennsylvania.
brontoraptor

Con

Pro:
"There is a devastating lack of evidence to support the claim that radical muslims carried out the attacks of 9/11."

(Clue 1)
Since 9/11, Islamic extremists have went on a terrorism spree in the West.

http://mobile.wnd.com...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

In 2015, 450 of 452 suicide bombers were Islamic.

http://www.theblaze.com...

Islamic extremists seem to have destruction and devastation of things in the West on their minds.

(Clue 2)
Osama Ben Laden and Al Queda took credit for the attack.

http://www.foxnews.com...

(Clue 3)
Muslims attacked the twin towers 8 years earlier in 1993.

http://www.cnn.com...

(Clue 4)

The 9/11 hijackers underwent flight training school in the United States, 9/11 happened, and they are now nowhere to be found. Many of these hijackers were caught on camera in verifiable 9/11 planes' related locations and verified by name by hotel records.

http://www.wanttoknow.info...

Security camera footage-

http://youtu.be...

(Clue 5)

The 9/11 Report shows that Saudi Arabia helped fund 9/11. Even Barack Obama, who plays patty cake with Islam at every turn and protects it, never denied this being true. He DID mention that the victims could not sue Saudi Arabia because a precident would be set that allows other countries to in turn sue us.

http://m.washingtontimes.com...-/

http://www.breitbart.com...

http://www.independent.co.uk...

(Clue 6)
Hijacking planes is rather normal Islamic extremist behavior.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

http://www.breitbart.com...

http://www.express.co.uk...

http://shoebat.com...

http://m.disclose.tv...

https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com...

During one hijacking of an Egyptian plane, Muslims in mass, took to twitter saying they "wished they had been on the hijacked planes".

http://www.aljazeera.com...

(Clue 7)
The Quran, Sunnah, and Hadith are full fledged "hate speech" of commands to kill non-Muslims.

http://worldmediamonitoring.com...

http://sunnah.com...

-"Verily the strongest handhold of faith is that you love for the sake
of Allah and that you hate for the sake of Allah." (Ahmad 4/286)

www.bakkah.net/en/shaykh-ibn-baaz-on-love-and-hatred-for-the-sake-of-allaah.htm

(Quran 3:151)
"We will cast into the hearts of the unbelievers terror, for that they have associated with Allah that for which He sent down never authority; their lodging shall be the Fire; evil is the lodging of the evildoers."

--

Seeing no other groups practice suicide attacks, it is safe to say that Islam is a heavy suspect even if they hadn't admitted anything.

--
Debate Round No. 1
Letsdebate24

Pro

Firstly let it be said that despite the undeniable recent attacks by Islamic extremists it is not plausible to believe that 19 terrorists could have successfully committed the attacks of 911.
2nd, my opponent did very little to show proof that terrorist had anything to do with 911, instead providing character references and stating their obvious objectives. However intent alone is not proof.

1. Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi were said to have trained at a flight school in Florida in a single propeller plane. Their flight instructors described them as having "average" or even "very poor" piloting skills.
http://shoestring911.blogspot.com...

2. Veteran pilots of every conceivable background have stated that it would be impossible for two amateur pilots trained in a single engine plane to maneuver a 767 the way that was reported.

https://www.youtube.com...
http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

3. The F.B.I. supposedly found a passport of one of the terrorists a couple blocks away from the twin towers. This proposes that a paper passport somehow managed to get outside the plane that was supposedly incinerated in the initial impact and then flew a couple blocks away in almost mint condition. It's important to note that not one body aboard either flight was found. So this passport magically flew out of the terrorists possession and then out of the fireball to land safely on the ground. Its also important to not that the black boxes were "never found" Black boxes are almost as indestructible as the engines of these planes. Built to withstand a crash with a full load of fuel.
https://www.youtube.com...
http://911research.wtc7.net...

4. According to the 9/11 commission report (supported by NIST and FEMA) the Twin Towers fell due to fire. However, hundreds of engineers and architects have come forth stating that it is not possible. History has examples of skyscrapers that were ablaze far longer and were more consumed by fire but did not collapse. The WTC engineers specifically designed the Twin Towers to withstant multiple planes striking them. Its important to note that no skyscraper in history has collapsed due to fire, but we were told 3 did in one day.
https://www.youtube.com...
http://www.ae911truth.org...
https://www.youtube.com...

5. WTC 7 was not struck by a plane and only had minimal fires and yet it collapsed at free fall speed into its own footprint. This is indicative of a controlled demolition as many demolition experts have spoken out.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

Since this is a 5 round debate ill save more points for later rounds but I would ask that my opponent stick to 911 specifically.
brontoraptor

Con

Pro:

"my opponent did very little to show proof that terrorist had anything to do with 911."

I did point out that Al Queda/Osama Ben Laden took credit for the attack. He also then began baiting the U.S. with more claims and more threats even at risk to his own life, which later was taken by U.S. forces. He also was behind the first attack in 1993.

We also know that "said" 9/11 report is damning to Saudi Arabia, an Islamic nation of the denomination of Wahhabism, the ideology of ISIS, apocalyptic in nature, and a strict adherant to Sharia Law where punishments and justice are extreme.



The melting point of steel, depending on the alloy, is 2,000+ degrees Farenheit.


We have no way to know the exact temperature inside the World Trade Centers, but we do know people decided to bail out of windows, accepting a free-fall death over being cooked alive.

What we do not know is what all was in the planes nor what was in the buildings. Every building will have MSDS somewhere. Now what was actually in these buildings and how much oxygen was being sucked in and out like a fire starter enraging the heat?

Many chemicals burn well hotter than 3,000 degrees. An example being Cyanogen, which can burn at over 8,000 degrees Farenheit. Who can say what was in the cabinets, the closets, or the disposable hazardous waste containers?


Here are 2 short videos of a candle burning down in a time relapse. It looks more controlled than the WTC collapses, yet was not manipulated, nor did it need be. A demolition simply tries to better control the already natural effect of gravity.

(Short video demonstration)



--

JIHADIST 101

Pro:

"However intent alone is not proof."

But intent and motive are needed as a variable in judging this case. The nature and methods of Islamic extremists has no bounds. They behead children, mass rape women, burn people alive, and drown people in cages with no remorse. The Taliban blew up over 100 girls' schools for issues as basic as not wearing hijabs in class or simply being female. 9/11 simply fits the narrative of a typical jihadist mind. It has no mind or soul. Killing 3,000 people in one day is not above the mind of someone who beheads a 4 year old girl then forces her mother to soak her hands in her own child's blood.




Boko Haram takes children and? Sets them on fire to be burned alive.


--

Pro:

"Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi were said to have trained at a flight school in Florida in a single propeller plane. Their flight instructors described them as having "average" or even "very poor" piloting skills."

This accounts for 2 of the 19. They may not have been the pilots. Of the 19, we also do not know who received training elsewhere in the world. Most Islamic countries have an airforce and flights coming in and out of those countries. One can claim you need great skills to fly the plane, but that would be to fly it well. The mission wasn't to fly well, but to crash. We also do not know how long the American pilots were alive or in control of the aircrafts.

--



Debate Round No. 2
Letsdebate24

Pro

The Bin Laden family (Namely the elder brother Salem) has had financial ties to the Bush family since the 1970's. Over the years the two families have made some very profitable business deals in which Osama had a hand. Osama was an accomplished engineer. Salem being a close friend to the Saudi King Fahd who ruled from 1982-2005. Saudi Arabia being an ally since WW2 has had no clear benefit to the 911 incident considering they made literal fortunes from our relationship. Saudi Arabia holds the worlds largest reserve of crude oil and also happens to be our top provider, certainly a country that has nothing to gain by damaging U.S. relations.
http://www.cfr.org...
http://www.mafhoum.com...
http://humansarefree.com...
http://www.globalresearch.ca...

The FBI and VP Cheney went on record stating that there is not sufficient evidence to prove Osama or Al-qaeda had any ties to the attack. The US has been proven in having a direct hand in financing and organizing Al-qaeda, the CIA being the recruiter. The US utilized the group to combat Soviet forces entering Afghanistan so that we could engage in combat through a cover. Ultimately the endeavor was a complete success, the Soviets withdrew their forces.
http://www.globalresearch.ca...
https://vault.fbi.gov...

The allegations of Saudi involvement was based entirely on 28 classified pages of the 911 commission report. These 28 pages were classified for 15 years. More importantly, Saudi Arabia suffered virtually no consequences for their alleged involvement but instead the US invaded Iraq. The excuse for entering Iraq was suspected weapons of mass destruction, which no proof was ever found nor provided before hand. Former President Bush made little attempt to connect Iraq to Bin Laden other than he may be taking refuge there. Suppose he was hiding in Iraq, Bush provided zero evidence to suggest Iraq had any knowledge of him being in the country.

Steel melts at 2,500 degrees F
http://www.onlinemetals.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

History has given us a many examples to turn to in regards to tall structures catching on fire and burning for many hours, but never once collapsing from fire. And yet we were told that 3 towers did for the first time in history all in the same day. Keep in mind they burned for far less time and were no where near being consumed as the towers were in the videos below.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
People were jumping out of the towers because they were being suffocated by the acrid smoke billowing out.
Regardless of what was in the planes or buildings the video evidence clearly proves that the fires were not consuming the towers enough to cause a total collapse.There is there absolutely no evidence or even any reason to believe that there would be enough chemicals in not just one both all three towers to bring them down. It's absurd to suggest they had any reason to be in the building unless someone strategically placed them around each tower. That being said there is an explosive that could easily burn through steel and cause total collapse, and that is nano-thermite. This would explain the molten metal caught on video and the fused elements of concrete and steel found in the rubble (which office fires have never produced)
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

The most important factor in the theory of controlled demolition was the admission of building 7 being "pulled" by Larry Silverstein, the leaseholder of the WTC buildings. The problem with what Silverstein said is that in order to collapse a building at free fall speed and into its own footprint, you would need weeks of planning. They did not have that kind of time considering how quickly the tower fell. Furthermore, firefighters are not trained to demo buildings. This means that the explosives would have to have been placed weeks in advance.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

No one is disputing the extreme brutality of radial Islamics around the world. What is being questioned is the claim that 19 terrorists being controlled by a man living in a cave somewhere in the middle east could organize and execute an attack as enormous as 911. This would be extremely difficult for even our own special forces to pull off.

My opponents entire is based purely on speculation instead of the evidence provided on 911.
brontoraptor

Con

"Saudi Arabia being an ally since WW2 has had no clear benefit to the 911 incident considering they made literal fortunes from our relationship. Saudi Arabia holds the worlds largest reserve of crude oil and also happens to be our top provider, certainly a country that has nothing to gain by damaging U.S. relations."

This is a tactic referred to in Islam as "taqiya" and maruna, and the overall foundation of their tactic is called "stealth jihad".

Taqiya is to lie about your identity or loyalty to destroy your enemy from within.

The Prophet of Islam, Muhammed, said, "War is deceit".

https://islamqa.info...

----

Islam wants the West in chaos-

Black Lives Matter are not African Americans in the sense of being the descendents of the slaves. They are the descendents of Islam.

The founder of BLM? Muslim

http://www.barenakedislam.com...

Dallas cop killer? Islam

http://m.clarionproject.org...

Baton Rouge cop killer? Islam

https://news.vice.com...

---

The general construct of this philosophy is:

1)Become the citizens of the nations considered non-Muslim

2)Outbreed them.

3)become their influential people, such as tv personalities, politicians, etc.

4)Destroy them from the inside. In this case it is:

A)Break them financially.

B)Put them in a state of fear

C)Use political correctness and liberal politics against them. Use freedom to destroy freedom.

QUOTE:
Walid Shoebat, ex Muslim-

"What the West does not understand about Islamism is that Jihad is very systematic. It has stages. If Muslims have the upper hand, then Jihad is waged by force. If Muslims do not have the upper hand, then Jihad is waged through financial and political means. Since Muslims do not have the upper hand in America or Europe, they talk about peace in front of you while supporting Hamas and Hezbollah in the back room. The whole idea of Islam being a peaceful religion emanates from that silent stage of Jihad."

"Although the word Jihad standing by itself means "struggle," what Westerners need to focus on when reading the Hadith regarding Mohammed"s Jihad is similar to the focus needed when reading Mein Kampf by Adolph Hitler."

https://www.goodreads.com...

So...what did Adolph Hitler say on the matter?

"Demoralize the enemy from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination. This is the war of the future."
Adolf Hitler-"Mein Kampf"

http://mobile.brainyquote.com...

----

So...what is happening in real life?
Well...something that looks like this:

Video:

http://youtu.be...

----

Obama's America 2016 trailer-

http://youtu.be...

In this clip Dsouza talks later about how he guessed it right. It wasn't a guess...-

http://youtu.be...

And now we have Hillary's America. The Democratic leadership are preparing to steal the greatest thing the world has ever produced.

Hillary's America-

http://youtu.be...

And who do you think Hillary's campaign is being paid for by? Saudi Arabia.

---

http://www.islam-watch.org...

https://www.jihadwatch.org...

This isn't immigration. It's an invasion.

This slow, silent jihad has turned Denmark and Sweden into the rape capitals of the world. We are next.

http://www.independent.co.uk...

http://www.frontpagemag.com...

http://www.breitbart.com...
Debate Round No. 3
Letsdebate24

Pro

Saudi Arabia being an ally since WW2 has had no clear benefit to the 911 incident considering they made literal fortunes from our relationship. Saudi Arabia holds the worlds largest reserve of crude oil and also happens to be our top provider, certainly a country that has nothing to gain by damaging U.S. relations."

"This is a tactic referred to in Islam as "taqiya" and maruna, and the overall foundation of their tactic is called "stealth jihad".

Taqiya is to lie about your identity or loyalty to destroy your enemy from within.

The Prophet of Islam, Muhammed, said, "War is deceit"."

While my opponents response to my paragraph is accurate in regards to terminology it is unclear whether he is accusing the Saudi government or just the alleged 19.

Yes, Islam does want chaos in the west.

It would seem my opponent and I agree a great deal when it comes to the intention of radical islamics but I would ask that he stick to the events of 911 such as providing tangible proof it was not a false flag event.

1. The Pentagon:
-Pillars are still intact where the wings are claimed to have impacted. If the wings were ripped off, there would have been a massive amount of debris to support the claim.
- There should be craters where the planes engines dug up the front of the pentagon but there are no craters.
- The roof of the pentagon maintained its general outline despite the planes tail supposedly slamming into it.
- The last hole reportedly created by the plane is still very circular in shape suggesting that the plane maintained its cylindrical shape and yet no such debris was found.
- Exit hole has burn marks indicative of rocket propulsion.

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

Flight 93

-There was virtually no debris that would indicate a large plane had crash (see examples of real plane crashes)
- There were virtually no bodies found (this has never happened)
- It was reported that the plane did a nose dive and buried itself in the ground (this has never happened)
https://www.youtube.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...
https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...
brontoraptor

Con

Pro:
"Yes, Islam does want chaos in the west. It would seem my opponent and I agree a great deal when it comes to the intention of radical islamics..."

We have motive.

*

Pro gives us a decleration that radical Islamists had nothing to do with the attacks in the opening round, which is fine, but I ask, who exactly does Pro say WAS behind the attack and for what purpose?

*

Pro states:
"Exit hole has burn marks indicative of rocket propulsion."

Is Pro indicating a missle hit the Pentagon rather than a plane? Questioning these types of things is a part of responsible citizenship, I agree, but...

Seeing I don't neccessarily denounce Pro's claim, without proof, it's still speculation at best. And who would send the alleged missile and why? Is Pro claiming the U.S. attacked itself for giggles? For what gain? What motive would the U.S. have to attack itself?

*

Nevertheless...

1)Many witnesses claimed they saw a Boeing 757 hit the pentagon.

2)Wreckage from Flight 77 on the Pentagon's lawn, proof that a passenger plane, not a missile, hit the building.

3)Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash.

Quote-

"I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box."

"I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

*

Eye witness testimonials-

“I was going up Interstate 395, up Washington Boulevard, listening to the radio, to the news, to WTOP, and from my left side, I don’t know whether I saw or heard it first -- this silver plane; I immediately recognized it as an American Airlines jet,” said the 25-year-old O’Keefe, managing editor of Influence, an American Lawyer Media publication about lobbying. “It came swooping in over the highway, over my left shoulder, straight across where my car was heading. I’d just heard them saying on the radio that National Airport was closing, and I thought, ‘That’s not going to make it to National Airport.’ And then I realized where I was, and that it was going to hit the Pentagon. There was a burst of orange flame that shot out that I could see through the highway overpass. Then it was just black. Just black thick smoke. The eeriest thing about it, was that it was like you were watching a movie."
-John O'keefe

"I was right underneath the plane." "I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles."
-Kirk Milburn

"Suddenly, an airplane roared into view, nearly shearing the roof off the trailer before slamming into the E ring."
-Michael DiPaula

---

There are numerous eyewitnesses who saw the events unfold at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

-Of the 136 witnesses interviewed, 104 specifically claimed to see the plane hit the Pentagon.

-26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

-39 mentioned that it was a "large jet" or "commercial airliner".

-7 said it was specifically a Boeing 757.

-16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles and/or trees.

-42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris.

-No one saw a military aircraft, missile, etc, but did see a commercial plane strike the Pentagon, and no one saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly off.

---

"I was at a complete stop on the road in front of the helipad at the Pentagon; what I had thought would be a shortcut was as slow as the other routes I had taken that morning. I looked idly out my window to the left -- and saw a plane flying so low I said, “holy cow, that plane is going to hit my car” (not my actual words). The car shook as the plane flew over. It was so close that I could read the numbers under the wing. And then the plane crashed."
-Christine Peterson

*

The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology had a group of over 50 forensic scientists who used DNA to identify the remains of 184 of the people who died in the impact, including 58 of the passengers on board the plane.

*

The plane left physical damage along the road before it hit the Pentagon. This evidence included light poles somewhat far apart knocked over and a power generator smashed by one of the plane's wings.

--

www.oilempire.us/eyewitnesses.html

https://archive.org...

https://m.youtube.com...

http://rense.com...

http://911research.wikia.com...
Debate Round No. 4
Letsdebate24

Pro

I believe all the evidence shows that the Bush administration was behind the events of 911. To make it easier to respond i'll list the reasons in numerical order so that each one can be addressed.

1. The science behind the official report does not add up. NIST attempted to create virtual models depicting how the all 3 towers were brought down as well as the attack on the pentagon. The problem is that virtually every model they created lacked vital variables.
For example: in the model depicting the pentagon attack, the planes were shown without the engines. The engines are the most durable parts of any plane and would have cause a devastating amount of damage but their model forgot them as well as the tail section. There were no holes punched in the side of the pentagon where the engines would have struck nor any damage from the tail and yet you can clearly see the damage in the twin towers. Bush also claimed that he watched the first plan strike the tower, however the first strike was not shown live on television. There was only one video that showed the first tower being struck and it was provided by a documentary on the New York fire department being filmed at the time of the attack. It was not shown on live televison.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
2. When the country has been attacked, the primary objective for the secret service is to evacuate the president to a secure site and yet they simply left him out in the open where everyone knew his location. This means they were certain the president would not be a target.
https://www.youtube.com...
3. War games were allegedly taking place on 911 and they sent the jet fighters off in the opposite direction leaving that portion of the skies unprotected at just the right time. By the time the FAA alerted the Air Force the fighters were too far away to respond in time.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
4. Bush was briefed before 911 that terrorists were planning to use planes to attack the US.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
5. Bush was actively seeking a way to invade Iraq
https://www.youtube.com...
6. Bush and Cheney refused to testify separately as the commission requested. They also refused to testify under oath.
https://www.youtube.com...
7. On the FBI most wanted list, Bin Laden was never charged with the attacks of 911. The FBI went on to admit that there was no evidence he had anything to do with the events.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
8. There was an ongoing investigation attempting to discover how the pentagon was unable to account for 2.3 trillion dollars. The files needed for the investigation were housed in the section of the pentagon that was attacked as well as tower 7.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
9. The FBI confiscated 84 surveillance tapes from the surrounding area of the pentagon. If a plane had truly impacted the pentagon as the official report claims there would be no reason to do this.
https://www.youtube.com...

In response to the following statement:
"Seeing I don't neccessarily denounce Pro's claim, without proof, it's still speculation at best. And who would send the alleged missile and why? Is Pro claiming the U.S. attacked itself for giggles? For what gain? What motive would the U.S. have to attack itself?"
1. The plane was alleged to have penetrated several walls and the last one was still in a cylindrical shape. This means the plane was somehow able to maintain its general shape, meaning there should be a large section of the plane intact. No such debris was found, even NIST claimed the plane was mostly incinerated and the rest broke up into very small pieces.
See pic below
https://www.google.com...
As far as the motive is concerned, I previously stated that from day one Bush was actively seeking a way into Iraq.

1. I have no evidence to prove that these people were lying, being threatened, or being bribed to give these witness accounts. However it is important to not that some of there stories do not make sense. Such as the taxi cab and the light pole.
https://www.youtube.com...

2. No debris that would indicate a 767 struck the pentagon such as the wings, engines, or the tail were found. Evidence can be planted. The debris found on the lawn was small enough to be picked up by individual people. I gave examples in previous rounds of real plane crashes and the debris left behind. The photos prove that there was no plane that struck the pentagon.

3. I have no knowledge of Allyn E. Kilsheimer but his claim of holding the tail section is without any proof. The black box was allegedly found but the information it was supposed to yield conflicted greatly between the NTSB and 911 commission report. They tell two different very contradicting stories.

The video evidence tells a different story from O'Keefes'.

The physical evidence left behind in the pentagon confirms no plane hit the building. As I stated before the twin towers were undoubtedly struck by planes as the video evidence confirms. In both of the towers the general outline of planes could be seen but that was not the case in the pentagon. More to the point, if a plane actually struck the pentagon why would the FBI confiscate 84 recordings of that section of the sky.
It's especially curious that every camera stationed atop the pentagon failed to capture any pictures or video of the supposed plane. Virtually every square foot of the pentagons perimeter is under 24/7 surveillance but for some reason they failed to capture a plane that literally flew right beneath them.
https://www.google.com...

https://www.google.com...

And yet despite all these witnesses the physical evidence still tells a different story.
https://www.youtube.com...

Cadavers could easily be placed prior to the missile impact. There has been no DNA tests done on these bodies to confirm identities.

One of the biggest red flags is the fact that the FBI confiscated 84 videos that were aimed in the direction flight 77 supposedly came from. If the official story were true why confiscate the videos?

Why does the physical damage in the pentagon show the no plane struck the building. The damage in the pentagon does not match the damage seen in the twin towers. How is a Boeing 757 which is 45ft tall supposed to squeeze in the first floor and not leave wing or engine damage?
brontoraptor

Con

I watched the second plane hit the WTC live in real time. I also saw the videos taken by individuals from hundreds of viewpoints. A plane hit the tower. I've seen the conspiracy theory that no plane hit and it was added in later. This would mean the government literally bought the city of New York to stage the whole thing. Yeah right.

Pro:

"As far as the motive is concerned, I previously stated that from day one Bush was actively seeking a way into Iraq."

This is speculation. I don't see any logical reason for Bush to "want to invade Iraq". His father invaded Iraq, but it was because Iraq invaded Kuwait. What would be Bush Jr's motive for an invasion? Just for giggles? What exactly did we gain in this war? More national debt and lost soldiers?

*

Pro:

"War games were allegedly taking place on 911."

Notice the word "allegedly".

*

Pro:

"Bush was briefed before 911 that terrorists were planning to use planes to attack the US."

A typical brief of the President. We are constantly under threat. Most are ignored for this reason.

*

Pro:

"Bush and Cheney refused to testify separately as the commission requested. They also refused to testify under oath."

They must have had good lawyers. Any good lawyer will try to keep you from testifying even if innocent of any crime. The best way to win a battle in court is to never get in unneccessary ones in the first place.




*

Pro:

"I have no evidence to prove that these people were lying, being threatened, or being bribed to give these witness accounts."

I agree.

*

Pro:

"Evidence can be planted."

True, but as is typical in the U.S. judicial system, you still have to prove it, or it is speculation.

*

Pro:

"Pillars are still intact where the wings are claimed to have impacted. If the wings were ripped off, there would have been a massive amount of debris to support the claim."

I've done many science experiments that yielded unexpected results. Things don't always happen as you think it should. I could give complex examples, but I'll give a simple one.

Example:

If you shake up a bottle of pop, it will probably spew when you open it. But it doesn't always. Why? It just didn't work out that way that time.

The point? Trying to simulate what would happen when 2 massive skyscrapers with unknown chemical contents are hit by planes with unknown chemical contents is impossible. There are some things when mixed become toxic, explosive, highly flammable, etc.



*

Pro:

"The photos prove that there was no plane that struck the pentagon."

I've seen the photos. I cannot tell what hit the Pentagon other than to say something powerful. I can also say that rockets/missiles could make bigger, much more unorthodoxed holes. I can also beleieve the limbs of the plane(tail, wings) were clipped off or crumpled inwards on impact.

*

Pro:

"The black box was allegedly found but the information it was supposed to yield conflicted greatly between the NTSB and 911 commission report. They tell two different very contradicting stories."

This is typical in most any case. This is why it takes a series of evidence, testimonies, etc to come to the best conclusion. What I would conclude from the complete package of information is:

1)Many witnesess saw a plane headed at the Pentagon flying low.

2)Physical evidence: Something big hit the Pentagon.

3)Planes hit the WTC the same day.

Verdict: A plane hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

*

Pro:

"And yet despite all these witnesses the physical evidence still tells a different story."

Pro would have to prove they were all lying and in a part of a mass conspiracy. If Pro could prove the witnesses all had something strange in common that he could present, then he might have a case, but he did not in this debate, thus it is speculation.

*

Conclusion: Is Pro wrong? Probably, but even if he is not, he has eye witness accounts, unknown variables, and the concept of how complex and difficult it would be to create the theoretical scenario he is claiming.

Thanks. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by brontoraptor 6 months ago
brontoraptor
I don't disagree. I think Obama, Huma Abedin, and Sadiq Kah are Islamic moles practicing taqiyya and muruna, but proving it is a whole nother thing.
Posted by ssadi 7 months ago
ssadi
Who are they(!)?
Posted by dsjpk5 7 months ago
dsjpk5
You mean besides their taped confession?
No votes have been placed for this debate.