The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

9/11 was not a inside job

Do you like this debate?NoYes+6
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: 4/16/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,034 times Debate No: 22881
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)




I keep seeing people that say 9/11 was a inside job which could not be further from the truth. I will argue that 9/11 was not a inside job and conspiracy to rest.

My arguments against the conspiracy about 9/11:

1. There was no controlled demolition
2. Our government had no reason to cause 9/11
3. Why would they use thermite which cuts steel without announcing it, then switch to explosives? To tip people off?
4. Our government was not prepared for the attacks does not mean they were involved.

If my opponent would like to add his/her own arguments please do so


Sometimes the truth is a conspiracy. So I will argue against the conspiracy for the truth. The American people are one of the most gullible of human beings that walk the earth. I have met Germans, English folks and they do not believe the truth or X as the U.S. people would believe truth. That is a subjective opinion though but I just felt compelled to state that in the opening round. For example the WMD in Iraq was the truth and that is the reason for the invasion. The UN did in fact go into Iraq before the invasion and none was found but that is a conspiracy or is it? The U.S. presence in Iraq was because as the son of Bush senior put it Saddam's "Got em" so let the body bags pile up for what, the truth? Recall the Florida election was that in fact the truth that Bush won? It is interesting stemming off that election that society in general did not erupt but, the blanket of truth is comfortable. A citizen is just like a pawn on the chess board, the chess board will survive.

The Spanish American war was sparked by a Spanish mine that sunk the USS Maine. The U.S. people had an outcry and the war was raged. McKinnely stated that this was an attack. After the war, investigations proved that no Spanish mine sunk the ship. That was a lie that in time rendered as one. It would be a conspiracy for anyone in that timeframe to state that a Spanish mine did not take down the ship. If any one thought of the conspiracy that no Spanish mine took down the USS Maine in that time period they would be looked at as a crazy conspirator, when infact that person was truthful. A nice a virtue to have.

The Gulf of Tonkin dilemma. It is now a fact that Johnson lied about the torpedoes and who knows what. But what is known is that 58,000 U.S. soldiers died and a ton were subject to the harshness of the jungles, mountains, rivers, oceans except for the fortunate sons as CCR would put it. As daddy, the money man or the politician would lie, they were in the cozy blanket of truth when they went night-night. And for the Vietnam vets not that I am a patriot, but there was no hand out of PTSD and love by the people as today there is plenty of high salutes to current vets. Plenty of people fresh off the plane from Vietnam were spit on returning home after being spit on by the government. Today that is not the case and I know for a fact how a veteran gets treated today.

The above was to point out a few lies that the U.S. government has been caught in the cookie jar not just once but many times. The government is composed out of people. People do lie. Sometimes lying is for the better interest of the common good. Now I would like to tell a 12 year old nephew venturing off to middle school that Santa is not real before an 8th grader tells him, and that reaction he will have is one that many U.S. citizens might have if someone gave them a document called the Truth, not that I have one, but 9/11 is not so black and white.

The government knew about 9/11 or they did put their hand in the cookie jar, wait….again, but for a tasty fresh cookie that is gooooood.

Now many people think that when a plane goes missing in U.S. airspace it would need a high-level security clearance before a jet is allowed to engage and kill that lost plane (goes of radar, a threat, whatever). That is false but on the 1st of June 2001 the rules changed. Now for a jet to engage any missing plane, hijacked plane, a friendly plane, or a plane that is of a threat that is looking to blow something up would need approval from Rumsfield which was the secretary of defense at the time to destroy the plane, Cheney, or Bush who was in Florida. It was called the "Derelict Airborne Objects". That is a bit odd, that the law was changed that summer prior to the event. Rumsfield is also known for the restructurization and the enhancing of today's U.S. military, where it is more job like and professional (like going to work for X company or firm). Like Nero who rebuilt his city, Rumsfield did take part in modeling a distinct military of today's age. (Though with Nero some historians believe that he did burn down his city or allowed the great fire to happen so he can remake it. Other historians do not, but that is irrelevant to this though. The Christains were still eaten by the wolves and his historic baths and fountains were erected anyway).
Need an adobe reader for the document above.

Now Cheney was on the record stating that he did order the remaining lost planes to be shot down. That was on the record for the citizens to hear…but is that the truth? Cheney ordered the jets not to engage, even after the first plane hit the tower, and it was obvious if other planes are missing where must they be headed? Obviously to blow something up and the planes were full of fuel on that morning making the boom like boooooooom.

Now in the video Mineta was a transportation secretary back in 2001. Mineta testified that Cheney ordered the jets to not engage unless he states for the jets to engage.

Now that was established, I would like to view footage demolition of a department store. It does fall into its footprint.

Now these are people that are eyewitness to the so called "explosions".

Now regardless of what took down the towers. What is known is that the twin towers were made to take a hit from a plane bigger than the one that hit the tower. American Airlines flight 11 was a Boeing 767. A 767 by class is about a middle size for a passenger plane. The towers were designed to take a hit from a 707. From engineering point of view tower one should have been golden to take that hit from a 767 which is slightly bigger but, slower (full of gas). The man who designed it was Yamasaki who composed the buildings with the idea and the engineering capability that the towers could be hit by a plane and still be up like Grandpa who took too much Viagra.
This is building 7 was it due to a demolition, or was it due to shrapnel from the towers, or another empirical reason? Building 7 never did get hit by a plane that is for sure.

9/11 is questionable. That is a for certain. To belief everything the government tells is what the government wants citizens to do however, many questions need to have light shed on them for someone or a group to figure something out hopefully to find certainty to the real heroes, the ones that jumped out of the buildings, the once that burned alive, the ones that lost their lives in our lifetime due to 9/11. Hey a democracy is run by the people. If the people can conclude that it was inside job get out the people's rocks and its medieval style on Bush junior and company. If its not, then at least the government did not lie but, how does government not lie? Everyone lies, unless the Messiah is present within the offices.
Debate Round No. 1


All the things you mentioned you cant prove. The government could not hide a blue dress with a semen stain(Clinton scandal)and these are the people you think kept this massive secret ?

Massive Conspiracy:

All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off.

1.The NYC Fire fighters


3.The NYC port Authority

4.All the people in the Pentagon

5.The more than 1,600 widows and widowers of 9/11

6.The media

7.The photographers

8.Everyone in the NIST



11.American Airlines (Pentagon)

12.United Airlines (Pentagon)

13.Logan, Newark and Dulles Airport for losing the planes

Conspiracy theories and are not real:

Conspiracy theorists are the people who spread fear and rumors that there is some kind of negative or evil force behind an incident.

But it's important to remember conspiracy theories are just that theories. There is no evidence to prove that they are true. A theory, according to the dictionary, is 'a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances'.

For example, a theory that all fish will turn green in the future is a theory. We could come up with a theory that the sky is purple. We could put together a scientific paper explaining why we believe it is real. But that doesn't make it true. Any scientist will tell you that nothing can be proved, things can only ever be disproved.

Part of my opponents argument is that events in the past were conspiracies---which they were not---but let us just say they were that still would not be a relevant fact. Simply because the people in government office then were not in office or in charge on 911.

Controlled demolition:

Scientists investigating the 911 collapse of the WTC towers said, "the WTC towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground." There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse.

Several minutes before the WTC buildings collapsed, the structures of the buildings were clearly failing and the exterior steel columns could be seen buckling. This simply would not be happening if explosives caused the collapse because explosives don't go off in slow motion for several minutes. Explosives don't slowly buckle steel columns over several minutes.



Why would they(government) use thermite which cuts steel without announcing it, then switch to explosives? To tip people off? They would not.

Another reason the thermite argument is not likely at all is the amount that would have to used.

***Example: Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6x3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass.

Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in WTC to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft.

*Amount of aluminum can be ascertained by counting the droplets and measuring their size compared to the known size of the window. It's not easy to get a good number on this. It's based on the number of slugs seen in video stills, their size relative to the window width which was about 22 inches, and the density of aluminum, assuming this was aluminum.

The weight of a gallon of aluminum is about 22.5 pounds. A hundred of these would already be 2250 lbs. A gallon size is not unlike the size of the slugs that were pouring out the window. Look at them relative to the window size. They look small at first, but when you realize how big the towers were, the slugs were fairly large. It must have been in the thousands of pounds.

**See for yourself below**

The biggest nugget of evidence in my opinion is that George W Bush was and is to stupid to even dream a attack on the scale of which it would have had to be.

***To my opponent can you please organize your arguments your kind of all over the place it is kind of hard to see what you are trying to say***



"Massive Conspiracy:" it is massive but not massive as in all of this:

"All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off."
Absolutely not. One person can change history alone and it has happened. Society is a thin line that can easily be destroyed by one person or a few.

"1.The NYC Fire fighters"
They were just pawns on the chess board. They did not need be apart of any conspiracy. They were just doing there jobs. It would also include NJ fire Fighters… Connecticut Fire Fighters, as well. Some fire fighters noticed that the government was in a giant rush to get rid of basically all of the evidence. Even the top ranking Fire Fighters would not be tipped off by the government if the government let's say was to orchestrate the attacks.

Same as 1. Average Joe going to work listening to 10-10 wins on his way. The Top Ranking NYPD Chief would be in the dark as well. If he wasn't the high command would definitely whistle blow.

"3.The NYC port Authority"
Opinion: The port Authority is a joke, I live in 10 miles from NYC. If a took a crayon and colored a badge I would pass through security as a NYC-NJ Port Authority officer.

"4.All the people in the Pentagon"
The pentagon reported that 2.3 trillion dollars went missing from the pentagon on September 10, 01. It was gone and know one knows what the government spent it on. What is known is that where the pentagon got hit was where the records would be for the 2.3 trillion dollars. The accounting field of the pentagon. The people in the pentagon were victims.

"5.The more than 1,600 widows and widowers of 9/11" and the people who died.

They were casualties of a much bigger game. If I knew that I was going to die in a plot I would not go to work that morning. They were victims. By their families in grief does not imply anything or imply that they were apart of the 9/11 conspiracy in a game to trick the U.S people in a major hoax. They were just pawns who are the real heroes. They do not have to be a part of the conspiracy.

"6.The media"
The media points two ways one being that 9/11's events were true and unfolded as such and the other being 9/11 was something that government was aware or did have something to do with it. Media can also consist of small media information, like this site. This site is not owned by Disney so forth. I have my own ideologies, not a Disney one that like a robot I will throw up.

"7.The photographers"
The photographers and 1st hand account witnesses who took picture/video had two sides. Not all photographers agree the official story of 9/11.

"8.Everyone in the NIST"
NIST reported that no controlled demolition was used. They started their investigation on Aug 21, 2002. An article in the "Open Chemical Physics Journal" that is peer reviewed found small chips of nano thermite at Ground Zero in dust samples. A Dr. by the name of Harrit (chemistry)concluded from his review that thermite was used to take down the towers and building 7. Thermite could be used for welding, or to melt iron. It can serve as an explosive, or to give off more heat. It has more energy than dynamite and is similar to rocket fuel. The rocket fuel was gone after it collided into the towers. Now with all huge fires there is explosions. Now to deem that the towers were taken down because explosions were heard would be a fallacy because they are going to occur but some of the explosions that were witnessed were not so cut and dry and did model after a demolition. But that will be brought into the debate later on. So in conclusion thermite was found at ground zero. Whether it was in the controlled computer rooms as some workers latter implyed or where ever, what is known is thermite was present.

A structural engineer in South America would not have anything to do with 9/11 so we cannot be talking the whole world and every single engineer. Many structural engineers have stated that the way the towers fell is unlikely that the 767 could knocked them down. The flammable gas was gone on impact. Now a problem many engineers face was that 4 companies who were highly monitored were contracted by the city to move the debris and steel. Even the Mafia had a hand in the debris. The building assessment team was not allowed to take any samples of the debris. This is odd that the assessment team was not allowed to assess the debris scientifically and if so would be sanctioned by the government. The evidence was shipped overseas expediently. What is the rush when so many groups want to review ground zero and the steal? It does not point to any proof other than a fact that the government was in a rush to get rid of the evidence when many independent groups wanted to do their own survey.

"10.The CIA-The FBI-FEMA"

How do you know that the CIA or the FBI was not in on the cover-up or Fema? Bush stated that they were not. The CIA and the FBI were totally aware that there was a 9-11 concern. There were many threats about the date. They just dropped the ball or let it happen, or were in on it. With the new war on terrorism is similar to the war on communism. Today the Patriot act totally violates a citizens amendments and it still occurs . Cameras all over the place for the purpose of monitoring people. 9/11 created a George Orwell 1984 environment that is simililar to the 60's communism red scare. There is more power for the FBI and the CIA to put cameras where they please and how they please. To watch people how they feel. To watch Muslim communities in NYC for no justifiable reason other than that they are Muslim (which is occurring currently). Was any high ranking members involved?
"11.American Airlines (Pentagon)"

"12.United Airlines (Pentagon)"

"13.Logan, Newark and Dulles Airport for losing the planes"
11.-13. The airport planes were high jacked that does not mean that these airports were necessarily in on the massive cover up. They in their own frame were victims of a much a bigger picture. They were in awe as much as anyone of age to be in awe if they wanted to be in trepidation.

Warnings prior to 9/11
Bush did state that if he would have known that terrorist were to hijack any planes he would move "the heavens and the earth".
Aug 2001: received a memo "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S."
The CIA (Tenet) June 2001: warns Rice but she ignored the warning.
These two are noteworthy because the 9/11 commission knew about the advisements but left it out of the report.
Israel advisement Aug 2001: Israelian agents stated in Washington that over 200 hundred terrorists are prepared for a strike against the U.S.
French advisement Feb 2001: 9 reports were sent to Washington regarding possible airplanes being used as flying bombs.
CIA asset Lindauer: Dr. Park under oath in NY Courtroom: the asset warned him that "we expected a major attack on the south part of NYC regarding the WTC, and a possible nuclear bomb." She was only defer to the Counter Terrorism office.
In conclusion the U.S. government was aware that the 9/11 attack was a possibility and an imminent threat. In the debris thermite was found regardless of how any one wants to put it.
Debate Round No. 2


As I said massive conspiracy because that is what would have to be if any of it were true. These people have no reason or motive to cover-up anything.......

Opponent stated:” They were just pawns on the chess board. They did not need be apart of any conspiracy. They were just doing there jobs."

Fire fighters who know more about building collapses than most, if not all, of them. It's their LIFE to know. Literally! Yet they don't call for an investigation into the MASS MURDER of over 300 of their brothers... Why? No reason to do so.

Opp stated "same reason as one"
Police department who lost over 20 lives. They didn't ask for an investigation. Motive for cover-up? None...

NYC port authority:
Who also lost personnel. Motive for cover-up none.

My opponent stated $2.3 trillion went missing(ok I will bite for the comedy in this claim). For one thing, the 2001 defense budget was only $289 billion, so even if Rumsfeld had pulled off the incredible feat of stealing every last penny, we would barely be approaching $2.3 trillion. Motive for cover-up? None.

1,600 widows and widowers:
Who would rather have investigations of the decisions which led to the terrorist getting away with this. They don't want to waste time investigating the mass murder of their loved ones simply because it was the terrorist that pulled off the mass murder. Motive? None.

The media:
This one I almost believe) who doesn't follow up on the biggest mass murder and conspiracy in American history. It seems no one wants a Nobel prize for journalism. Not only the American media but foreign press like the BBC and Al Jazeera. Why? No answer here either...

The photographers:
Photographers from around the world who took pictures of the towers which clearly show bowing of the perimeter columns. These photos support the NIST hypothesis that the sagging trusses lead to the collapse. Some photos also show the core intact shortly after collapse which also not only support the NIST hypothesis but discredits the "Controlled demolition" account.

Everyone in the NIST:
This independent organization doesn't have a moral person in hundreds of employees because not one has come out exposing this so called "Conspiracy". In fact, the hundreds of scientist who signed onto the report are willing to not only lie for Bush but cover up the largest mass murder in American history. Some suggest only a handful can do the job but that's simply impossible. The team in charge of the computer modeling has to be in sync with the team of structural engineers and so on. There are hundreds involved in this investigation and every team has to work with other teams using the same evidence and specifications.

And for the record my opponent stated "rocket fuel" which is false it was "jet-fuel"

Every structural engineer in the world who doesn't write a paper for a mainstream peer reviewed journal saying the towers were brought down and could not have fallen due to fire. If laymen can prove things just by looking at videos and reading interviews out of context, then all those structural engineers MUST be working for Bush right? Even the ones in other countries. Why? The answer they give is that the engineers don't know about Steven Jones work. So in all this time no one has e-mailed Jones' work to any structural engineer?

Even conspiracies with a few people are doomed. Look at Enron and Watergate. The more people you involve, the more likely the conspiracy will fall apart. The amount of people needed for this conspiracy could fill one of the towers. It's absurd to think this many people could keep a mass murder for Bush secret for this long.

A common excuse for no one coming out who was part of this so called "911 conspiracy" is they fear death. If you analyze the argument carefully you realize they are debunking themselves. Why would even people in the military be more fearful of exposing this than the common conspiracy theorists behind a computer monitor? Either they don't believe what they're saying or they actually think they are more fearless than the thousands of others who would have had to be "in on it". As if people in the CIA, FBI, FEMA etc. couldn't figure out how to get the message out if they wanted to without exposing who they are. People, dates, places, memos and other evidence could easily be disseminated to the public without exposing who they are. The only reason they claim the people are paralyzed with fear is because they have too in order for the conspiracy story to work.

My opponents prior knowledge argument is the same as the rest of his arguments. None of them have factual credibility to back it up.

Even if all my opponents conspiracy arguments are true(which they are not) it does not prove that 911 was an "inside job" I am sure our audience can see that.



The Bush admin knew about it, had their hand in the cookie jar, or did it.

NYPD The FDS Port Authority,
The people who compose this are people like anyone else. Some Police, some Fire people, some Port Authority folks do make the claim that 9/11 was poorly looked into by the 9/11 commission and some are spectacle of the official statement.

The Pentagon "comedy"

No one said Rumsfeld stole it. What is known is no one knows where it went, there is no receipt. If someone knows where it went please tell the authorities.

The widowers.
My colleague lost a son, and the family does not believe the official statement (They live in NJ, They can see the city (NYC) from home). Yes terrorists did take planes and flew the planes into the towers.

Structural engineers , video,NIST
there is plenty of engineers and architects that put a damper on NISTs claim. They also use photographs and video, usually the same ones.
This is just one link: poor at that but just one.

"Even conspiracies with a few people are doomed. Look at Enron and Watergate. The more people you involve, the more likely the conspiracy will fall apart. The amount of people needed for this conspiracy could fill one of the towers. It's absurd to think this many people could keep a mass murder for Bush secret for this long."

Back in WWII The CIA employed the Gehlen Organization, about 100 Nazis that helped the CIA. This was not a movie about killing Hitler or a mission of that kind. Krichbaum who deported 100s of thousands of inferiors to work or death was involved with the CIA. That was one guy but many followed suit in war crimes. This information is relatively new. If anyone stated in the 50s that they knew about the CIA working with Murderers at the time that would be deemed as so crazzzy.

Wilkes conspired to kill Lincoln and got the job done, and was eventually caught. The conspiracy to kill Lincoln was pulled of oceans 11 style. The few people that were involved pulled the conspiracy off and it did not fall apart. Wilkes was then killed by Corbett as wilkes went to a farm thinking the south would protect him.

The word conspiracy is more negative in context henceforth i stated in the begining the truth.

The initial hit, thermite discovery, The Fire, history
The two 767s with twin engines hit at 440 and 550 mph. The steel and concrete was designed to take a 707 hit at 600mph.
The buildings fell roughly within 30 mins of each other. 200,000 tons of steel 425,000 cubic yards of concrete.
No other sky scraper has ever been known to collapse due to fire and the damage caused by the fire. Keep in mind these were two steel framed buildings. The official story is that molten and an intense fuel mixture from the planes took the towers down. So in 10 seconds a plane causing a fire took down a building that fell into its own footprint. A physicist named Jones stated that a collapse from gravity without demolition makes a mockery out of the laws of physics. Hell it should be proof to a new physics book if no demolition was used. The beams that weighed over 200,000 pounds were tossed like Peyton Manning passing yards per game----over 500 yards.

Molten metal burning months and months after the initial hit was due to a plane hitting a building releasing jet fuel. Metal at over 2200 thousand degrees F. That is absurd scientfically.

Bringing in this again: thermite was found by researchers for the "open chemical physics Journal" at ground zero.

The janitor's Testimony The man with a master key to the building
Will Rodriguez ran out of the buildings and then went back in using his master key to unlock doors to save people. Testified that he and 10-15 others heard and felt an explosion that rocked the building and suspended him in the air. His boss heard the same noise before the plane hit and was jolted into the air. Rodriguez testified to the 9/11 commission.
Rodriguez: is on the no fly list by the way after he gave the commission his testimony. A person that saved other people with that key that opened up the door called life.
The 9/11 commission never put his name/testimony or any of the others he was with on the official document or even bothered to hear the others testimony.

Building 7 and others

Other buildings were way worse than building 7 from getting hit by loose metal and objects. The fires were small compared to other skyscraper fires that have taken place. The buildings around 7 never collapsed. 7 like the towers fell into its own footprint. Before the attack the alarm system was on test status. The power was shut, and mostly everyone in that building was evacuated by the time the second plane collided.

Hess report. Hess was rescued out of the 8th floor by the FDs. Fires were present on all sides of the building. A man named Hess heard a huge explosion on the 6th floor. Not just a regular normal explosion that a fire or big fire at that would make but a distinct explosion of its own kind. NISS is made out of people, and they lied to cover building 7s a**.

Building 3 was essentially not even one building but two. It was in half. Still erect.
Building 4 destroyed beyond belief. Still erect.
Building 5 severe fires, smaller than building 7
Building 6 Like 5 severe fires, smaller than building 7
Building 7 fires on only some floors. Collapsed in 6-7 seconds, 47 stories high. If 7 would have collapsed with less than severe fires, and structural damage than 3,4,5,6, why then did 3,4,5,6 not collapse, or why did 7 not collapse with less damage done scientifically?

Until round 4
Debate Round No. 3


Let me start this round by reiterating just because my opponent makes a statement it does not make it true/fact and is not evidence that 9/11 was a inside job. It is nothing more than a theory.

NYPD The FDNY Port Authority:
Poorly looked into which is my opponent's statement does not prove 9/11 was an inside job.

The Pentagon:
For the sake of argument if ten trillion went missing it does not prove 9/11 was a inside job.

The widowers:
Once again not proof of anything foul.

Structural engineers:
Notice the link my opponent posted which is nothing more than a website to buy a DVD and capitalize on the tragedy that was 9/11 (sickening if you ask me)

WW2 and Lincolns murder have nothing at all to do with 9/11 you are using a conspiracy to prove another conspiracy. Which is basically a circular argument if it is not the audience I am sure see my point.

******By definition a conspiracy is: A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful****** Call it "the truth" if you want to but it is still a conspiracy.

The Twin Towers:

The complete collapse of the Twin Towers has more to do with the construction than anything else. There were a lot of firsts for the WTC. In all the history of high rise fires, not one has ever been hit with a plane traveling 500 miles an hour and had its fire proofing removed from its trusses. In all the history of high rise fires, not one has ever had its steel columns which hold lateral load sheared off by a 767. In all the history of high rise fires, not one has ever been a building which had its vertical load bearing columns in its core removed by an airliner. For Building 7, in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been left for 6-7 hours with its bottom floors on fire with structural damage from another building collapse. Not the Madrid/Windsor tower did not have almost 40 stories of load on its supports after being hit by another building which left a 20 story gash. The Madrid tower lost portions of its steel frame from the fire. Windsor's central core was steel reinforced concrete. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been without some fire fighters fighting the fires. I could go on with the "Firsts" but the audience gets the drift. The statement that the WTC buildings were the first high rise buildings to collapse from fire is deceptive because it purposely doesn't take those factors into account.

Professor Steven Jones:

I assume my opponent is commenting about Professor Steven Jones much has been made of Jones' new paper. Some have suggested that I correct the statement that not one paper has been published by conspiracy theorists to date proving the collapse was a controlled demolition. To be clear, let me restate the test which makes a real scientific paper. It has to be published in a respected scientific journal. As an example, The Journal of Engineering Mechanics is a well respected scientific journal. The peer review process is tough and precise. The reviewers are well respected in their fields of expertise. The Journal of the American Chemical Society is another which Jones can submit his papers. There are many well respected journals which have an impact in the scientific community. Bentham, where Jones has submitted his latest paper, is the Wiki of Journals. They have been criticized in the past for passing "gibberish".
***read site below***

The only likely source of the heat great enough to actually "melt" significant quantities of iron in the piles (or even just raise so much of it to red-hot or to 2000F) would be chemical energy (i.e., "combustion" of some sort). Professor Jones assumes that all the carbonaceous "combustible" matter in the "piles" would have burned away long before the time that the red-hot and molten iron was discovered (weeks after the collapse of the WTC towers). Perhaps it did, by weeks after the collapse. But Professor Jones obviously does not comprehend that the hot, red-hot and molten IRON IS COMBUSTIBLE matter.

Here, Jones clearly missed it, when he wrote:
"At these temperatures, steel will melt, and aluminum materials from the buildings should continue to undergo exothermic oxidation reactions with materials also entrained in the molten metal pools including metal oxides which will then keep the pools molten and even growing for weeks despite radiative and conductive losses. ... The government reports admit that the building fires were insufficient to melt steel beams then where did the molten metal pools come from?"

Jones has no clue because he has conception of Steel Burning (iron oxidation) in air.


Professor Jones' comments and conjectures about the origin of the alleged molten iron found within the three huge piles of combustible matter burning after the collapse of the WTC towers, distinctly prove that Professor Jones is oblivious of the fact that Iron Burns in air.

I found this children's educational webpage that further illustrates that "Professor Jones" (among the "9-11 Scholars") is an incompetent person because he ignores the scientifically provable (or disprovable) fact that Iron metal itself burns, and that when amassed in large piles can ignite fires (and can even melt itself). The article discusses child-safe experiments observing a very slow oxidation of iron (rusting at room temperature), but also mentions:
"Sometimes a big load of iron in a ship can get hot. The heat can even set other materials on fire. Thats because the iron is rusting, which means it is burning very, very slowly. Iron rusts in a chemical reaction called oxidation. That means the iron reacts with oxygen gas from the air. Oxidation is the chemical reaction that occurs when anything burns in air. Like most oxidations, rusting gives off heat."

Building 7 and others:

Conspiracy theorists say WTC7 is the best proof for because it wasn't hit by airliners and only had a few fires. But this is deceptive because while building 7 wasn't hit by an airliner, it was hit by the large perimeter columns of the Tower collapse. It was 400 ft away but the towers were more than 1300 ft tall. As the tower peeled open, it easily tilted over to reach building 7.

William Rodriguez:

William Rodriguez now says he heard explosions in the basement but that's not what he said before he became a media star and sued the government.
**See for yourself below**

Sounds of explosions:

Could transformers or other electrical equipment explain some of what people saw and heard? What about an acre of concrete floor slamming into another? Would steel bolts snapping under tremendous tension make a pop or explosive sound? How about the fact that two of largest buildings in the world fell. Do you honestly think anyone with an untrained ear could distinguish between a bomb and a skyscraper as they are running for their life?

My opponent has shown no proof that 9/11 was an inside because there is none. The problem with conspiracy theorists is they ask you to demolish your mental programming, but demand you replace it with their own. The result is to exchange one unproven worldview for another. And unfortunately, basing your decisions on the conviction of “knowing” is responsible for many of the world’s ills. The only real truth is that it’s impossible to “know” anything. And the only real method of making decisions is through probability.

Vote Pro my OPP shown nothing that will prove that 911 was an inside job....


The Bush Admin knew about, let it happen, or did it
9/11 commission was just used for biased ends
Fact 1: 6 members doubt the official story.
Max Clemen resigned "from a national scandal and it was absolutely disgusting"
Senior counsel to the commission: John Farmer wrote a book "The Ground Truth" how the truth was from the way it was rendered by the 9/11 commission. Again disgusted by the official story. Farmer's thesis was that the tapes told an extremely different point of view from what was told to the public.

Fact 2: Building 7 Emergency responders were told before that the building was about to blow up.
BBC reported that building 7 was collapsed before it fell
CNN reported that building 7 collapsed again before it fell. Other buildings as mentioned were way worse.

Fact 3 : NIST refused to test for explosions or even look into reports that the building fell from explosions.
Testimony from police, FDs that that bombs were used was ignored by NIST.

Fact 4: Drills and war games
Fighter planes were disabled by 20 different drills that day.
Vigilant Guard Four war game simulations that morning

Fact 5: FBI gag order broken: Edmunds- whistleblower
Wire taps she translated: That Bin Laden was working with the government all the way up to Sept 11.
Tim Osman was Bin Laden's code name

Fact 6: A book "Rebuilding Americas Defenses" PNAC 2000 worked closely to the Bush Admin till the end of his term in 08: Theseis: That a new Pearl harbor could bring about a new empire. A grand catastrophic event could create a new American Empire.
The Council on Foreign Relations Gary Hart: Use this disaster for a "new world order". Bush also made a speech back on Sept 11,1990 for a New World Order.

Fact 7: Returning vets, Supporters of a Third Party, Outspoken Americans, Tea Party Activists, and much more has been suspected as terrorists: Homeland Security Memos render this with statements on top statements. The police state was built for the people. Unnecessary searches, Wire taps, so forth that are occurring today.

Fact 8: The Bushs and Bin Ladens had ties through oil investments.

Fact 9 : Multiple evacuations were done in the weeks leading up to 9/11, Which is completely out of the norm for even 3 in one week. Does that tip that the Gov knew about anything? Well what is with the multiple odd evacuations?

Fact 10 Warnings : Ashcroft an attorney general was advised to not take any Passenger Jets in the months leading up to 9/11. But the Bush Admin made it clear to the public that he would move the "heavens…the earth" if he knew about any threat. Even Putin gave a warning of a possible homeland security threat to the U.S. Gov.
The Mayor of San Francisco was warned by Rice to not take any passenger planes hours before the pathetic ending for tons of people on 9/11. I stated pathetic not to offend anyone. But Aristotle defined in The Poetics that the word tragic and pathetic. So essentially the terrorists had a tragic ending and the people who died that day had a Pathetic ending. Not to offend anyone, but Newspapers constantly get the two words mixed up.
Goldman Sachs who have thick ties to the U.S. government and endorse U.S. politicians advised their employees and investing clients to stay away from any tall structures. Timothy Geithner is the U.S. treasurer who had tyes to Goldman Sachs. Who also gets bailed out…Goldman Sachs and the people fond of Goldman Sachs, during the days of the Bailouts.

Top Pentagon Leaders cancel their public flights on the early morning of 9/11.

FBI: John O'neill the former head of counter intelligence geared up to his new job that morning. Head of security of the WTC. He died that day. Perhaps O'Neill knew something for his years of work, maybe he was on the outs, nobody knows, unless someone can speak to dead people.

Bush's cousin Jim Pierce had a fortunate schedule change the night before the attack. That essentially saved his life.

The Mayor of New York was told prior on that morning that the buildings would collapse. Hence he was stating in many videos that the building will collapse. It will collapse!

Fact 11: FEMA was in town on September 10th participating in Bio war fare drills.

Fact 12: Some of the hijackers were trained rigorously in U.S military schools. schools prior to 9/11.

9/11 = Iraq argument
I for one do not assert that 9/11 was done to get into Iraq. If the U.S. wanted to go into Iraq they would simply go into Iraq regardless. But like any other war there is money to be made by a select ruling few. 9/11 creates an atmosphere that is pro government to do what ever they please how they please. Whether it is to survey a citizen, or to wire taps that are occurring today regardless of the patriot act. 9/11 did get the U.S.'s foot in the door in the mid east. Money is made in war. The ties Cheney had to Halliburton, Black Water, just like Vietnam money was made and is still being made. Irronically though on the day and the days preceding there was already talk about Iraq and going into the country.

"The administration succeeded in creating a sense that there is some connection 911 and Hussein," said Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the Maryland University.

Fact 13: The black boxes that were found in the rumble at ground zero disappeared and the existence of these boxes is that it never did exist in the 9/11 report. This was the account of first responders who witnessed the boxes being carried off.

Pilot Training and the alleged terrorists that flew the planes into the towers and the pentagon
"I could not believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had" Chevrette AZ Flight School Manager
I am still to this day amazed that he could of flown into the Pentagon, he could not fly at all" Staff Member from AZ Aviation School

"It was like dumb and dumber, I mean they were clueless, it was clear to me they were not going to make it as pilots" - Garza Flight Teacher

Personally I am no aviation expert, I am not an expert in anything. But even a highly trained pilot would admit that the feat pulled off by these pilots were amazing. To fly a plane into the pentagon where the trillion dollar receipts were with that much skill to hit the target is breathtaking and amazing at almost street level altitude. The U.S. did in fact have the technology 20 years ago to control a Boeing remotely. That does not point to anything but how can these -subjective opinion-bums pull of the Pentagon and the towers flying past buildings with such skill. Skill as an 8000 feet drop with a 350 degree turn at the Pentagon airspace. Another oddity that is difficult to add up in the case of the Pentagon. Was the government involved in securing the job to get done? The black box, where is it? The Plane really just vaporized. O that makes scientific sense.

Truth and Knowing
"The only real truth is that it's impossible to "know" anything. And the only real method of making decisions is through probability."
So essentially the 9/11 official statement is only a probability that it is in fact truthful and of knowledge henceforth, could lead to another side of differing probability that the official statement is not true. Then 9/11 can not be concluded that it was in outside job by all knowing means that state the ends that it was.
Debate Round No. 4


I applaud my OPP unwavering argumentation. That being said he has failed to prove that 9/11 was a inside job.

My OPP stated that the Bush Admin knew about, let it happen, or did it 9/11 commission was just used for biased ends. That is his theory it is not factual. If the Bush Admin is guilty of anything it is lying to cover up its own mistakes but that does not prove an inside job.

Defying countless official and non-governmental enquiries, media reporting, and often common sense, a significant number of people fervently disbelieve that Osama bin Ladens al Qaeda sent 19 hijackers to execute the 9/11 massacre. Instead my OPP blames elements within George W. Bushs administration or that the US government didn’t actually blow up its citizens, but knew full well the attacks were coming, then did nothing to stop them. Which is false. Even a decade later, the conspiracy movement is alive and kicking. Groups such as Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, or Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth see themselves as serious researchers exposing perhaps the biggest cover up in US history.

A summary of the leading theories is contained in "Loose Change," a homemade documentary viewed nearly 125 million times on Google and some 30 million worldwide on You Tube according to director Dylan Avery.

Splicing news footage and interviews, all set to a fast paced beat, Loose Change collates and expands on all the urban legends about 9/11.

For example:

- The Twin Towers could not have collapsed from airplane impact alone.

- The astonishingly rapid collapse of World Trade Center tower 7, despite not being hit by a plane, bore the hallmarks of professional demolition.

- Wall Street trading on stocks directly affected by the disaster showed some people knew in advance about what was coming.

- A US missile, not American Airlines Flight 77, smashed into the Pentagon.

- United Airlines Flight 93 did not crash in a Pennsylvania field, but vanished, perhaps after being shot down by a fighter jet.

The United States has long been fertile ground for conspiracy theories. In this parallel world, JFK was assassinated by anyone ranging from the CIA to Cuban exiles. The Moon landing pictures were taken in a studio, while the US government is covering up evidence of UFOs. And American GIs are still held in bamboo cages in Vietnam.

Some of them turn about to be true, after all Pearl Harbor was a Japanese conspiracy and Nixons Watergate break in was a cover-up. But with so few that turn out to be true, why do people believe in conspiracies?

A new article in Scientific American tries to figure that out. Michael Shermer outlines in his Skeptic column four traits of those who believe:

* patternicity, or a tendency to find meaningful patterns in random noise

* agenticity, or the bent to believe the world is controlled by invisible intentional agent

* confirmation bias, or the seeking and finding of confirmatory evidence for what we already believe

* hindsight bias, or tailoring after-the-fact explanations to what we already know happened.

A conspiracy theory takes flight when all of these are concocted into a heady mix of conviction. Its called "conspiratorial cognition," and its the fuel driving belief in the 9/11 conspiracy.

Anyway my point is that as I stated before conspiracy theories are just that theories. If there was any proof that would that 9/11 was a inside job it would known by now.

In conclusion I have shown that there are explanations to the arguments my OPP has put forth. My OPP has not shown any factual evidence that proves 9/11 was an inside job and that is what debate was about. His arguments are based on theory alone.

It's vitally important to remember conspiracy theories are just that theories. There is no evidence to prove that they are true.

I urge a PRO vote simply because there are no facts that prove a inside job on 9/11 if there were any they would surely be known by now.

Any questions can be answered below:

Once again thx to my OPP and thx to our audience for taking time to review out arguments.



Regarding conspiracies I agree with my opponent that the U.S. "fertile grounds for conspiracy theories".'
Elvis still exists and some folks will die with that believe.

Did the U.S. in fact do 9/11 I do not know for certain or can make such of a conviction, I am an expert on nothing.

Do I want to believe the Gov. did it. No.

Did a select few make money off of 9/11 and the wars that ensued. Yes.

Is the war on terrorism similar to communism. This would be a whole new debate but, as communism elevated the Govs power so is terrorism. It creates a George Orwell environment. If anyone lives in NYC what is with all the cameras, is it really just too spot terrorists and other unlawful behavior? Then if it is then why didn't the cameras spot the car bomb fella in Times Square years back before he began to detonate the failed explosives. A vendor notified police. Though the NY times did state the camera recorded it.

Does the official 9/11 story add up to being true and well thought out to be a conclusive statement of the event? I liken to state no.

Does the Gov. lie? Of course, it is sometimes for the common good that the Gov. lies as a virtue and does not tell the people everything.

Is all the facts leading up to 9/11 and preceding 9/11 just a pure coincidence regarding the warnings, the law changes, the building damage of the towers and pentagon, the manner the buildings fell, the war games that morning, the wars in Iraq and the Forgotten War or in sum, the wars on instability , the thermite discovery, first hand accounts…?

Most of all, Thanks for the debate IveGotUrOuts.
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by campbell1991 1 year ago
obvious false flag.
Posted by K.GKevinGeary 1 year ago
the bop is to demandintg to proof that 9/11 was an inside job. if anyone can do that I wish they would come out with the actual facts. I am just skeptical of the offical report and so forth. But there is no way I can proof that 9/11 was an inside job and going in to the debate I was just seeing what there is to the other side. I do not fully believe that 9/11 was an inside job even though i am skeptical of the day but I thought taking the con side would be interesting which it was.
Posted by Double_R 1 year ago
Not sure how I came across this debate but since no one voted I figured I would give my 2 cents:

3-0 Pro. 3 points given for most convincing arguments. RFD:

Con had the burden of proof because he was the only one who can bring evidence for his claim. Con made many assertions with no factual support, however Pro rarely took advantage of these instances and in some cases failed to refute them so overall Cons arguments were stronger in that respect. However, Pro did rightfully point out that Con made no coherent case to affirm his argument. Even if we accept all of Cons claims, with the exception of very few, they do not affirm an inside job. Also, Con seemed to bring a different case to every round of the debate and resorted to argument spamming in the last round.
Posted by m93samman 2 years ago
I left the website because I didn't have time to read such interesting debates. I really want to read this but I just don't have the time :( well done by both sides, I hope the time and effort you spent pays off!
Posted by K.GKevinGeary 2 years ago
That plane does not look like the "True" plane that hit the pentagon. damage done does not add up.
Posted by K.GKevinGeary 2 years ago
Posted by CousinVinny92 2 years ago
When buildings fall they go LEFT or RIGHT never fall straight down. Very interesting debate
Posted by K.GKevinGeary 2 years ago
debunking 9/11....just found an interesting video....though it points more to pro.
Posted by K.GKevinGeary 2 years ago
The videos got a bit messed up...I had them orderly, but they ordered themself.
No votes have been placed for this debate.