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

911 was an inside job

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: Judge Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/7/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 398 times Debate No: 83601
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




False flag events are very common in the history books if you know how to read between the lines and research the fine print.

1.The Gulf of of Tonkin attack was a case of American aggression, not Vietnamese aggression. The American destroyer was only 30 kilometres off the coast of Vietnam looking for trouble, so when a few torpedo boats came near to investigate; the destroyer decided to get some target practice. Thus, we had the beginning of the Vietnam War.
2. Pearl harbour - The Japanese navy had radioed Pearl Harbour to advise them that they were going to attack days before hand. The radio message was not passed on. Thousands of civilian lives were lost unnecessarily as a consequence. This gave the American Government an excuse to enter the Second World War.
3. The Lusitania - This ship was loaded with passengers and ammunition at the same time. A German newspaper in New York tried to publish a warning about submarines in the area where the Lusitania was about to cruise. The article was stopped by the American government who needed lots of causalities so that America could have a reason to enter the First World War.
4. 911 - Suspicious circumstances
- Marvin Bush (George's brother) was in charge of security of the World Tower buildings.
- Passports of terrorists found totally intact without any burns or damage. (very convenient)
- George Bush's friendly relationship with the Bin Laden Family.
- Mobile phones working on planes at high altitude (impossible)
- Donald Rumsfeld slip-up about a missile hitting the pentagon.


Thanks Pro for challenging me. Hopefully this goes fairly and without malice. I will first do my best to counter some of your arguments then present my own, all the while being as factual as I can. All my sources will be cited in parentheses after the statement, and my main source the be the actual 9/11 commission report (

You say the Japanese Navy radioed PHNAS warning them of an attack. In actuality, this event was much more discreet. The AMERICAN navy gathered intelligence that Japanese military officials and agents were focused on Hawaii. This was so broad and far-fetched that Roosevelt thought nothing of it. This was obviously regretted, and it emphasized American passiveness on the growing worldwide conflict, but no messages were exchanged between the US and Japan.

You also mention the Lusitania. You are correct in saying that many outlets warned of danger on North America-UK shipping routes, but I have no knowledge of US government halting these stories. In fact the line that operated the Lusitania posted a sign at the ticket office and on the docks warning of danger on the route ( Therefore the public signed up to travel at their own risk. The Germans warned allied countries of U-boat presence and potential, but the United States allowed its shipping industry to continue because they didn't want their booming economy to be slowed by the growing international tensions. This, as with the last incident I described, illustrates American passiveness when it came to global affairs and fears.

Since I see that I have taken up much space countering you, I will only address one more statement of yours. You probably saw my post in the comments section about the phones used by passengers on each of the four flights, but I will restate that.
The phones used by a majority of the passengers were airphones, which were installed in the planes by the manufacturer (Boeing and subsidiaries, in all four intances) specifically designed for use at high altitude. Calls were made from personal phones, and I understand these were the least successful in terms of quality and preventing a dropped call.

Now I will begin my arguments. Since this debate is basically me trying to prove a notion false, I will focus on debunking several popularized "truther' assertions.

It is often claimed that no planes hit the towers and that what we saw as planes really were illusions or missiles altered to look like planes. I don't know where to begin with this. If no planes were lost that day then how did 2 Boeing 767s, and 2 757s just disappear including their registrations? And what about the passengers? No more words should be wasted on this ridiculous thought.

The most famous defamatory claim is "jet fuel cant melt steel beams." This actually is correct, jet fuel can't melt steel beams. However, if you take that jet fuel, roughly 23,000-25,000 lbs. of it (necessary for flight between LA and NYC), and add to the equation a 350,000 lb. Boeing 767-200 making approximately 500 knots, you are dealing with a lot of force. Upon impact, that force immediately trapped oxygen, a necessary component of fire, in each stairwell. Needless to say, a very large explosion will occur, and we saw one. Unobstructed, the resulting fire reached over 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, well under the possible burning heat of jet fuel ( This heat could soften the steel, and after prolonged exposure, including being under the weight of the tallest buildings in the world, the steel could reach a point of collapse.

I could, and would like to, go on and continue debunking theories, but there are more rounds for that and I will give Pro a chance to say his peice.
Debate Round No. 1


1. The full details of what happened at Pearl Harbour can be found in an article by John T. Flynn Oct 1945

In this article it is found that purposeful military incompetence was to blame for the delayed message to warn of an attack on Pearl Harbour. The American central intelligence had all the information but were afraid to send the information immediately because it might have been intercepted by the Japanese fleet. Now, can you think of a more stupid or inadequate response?

Excerpt from article -
Can we believe that, thus warned, the High Command in Washington, on the edge of such a precipice, would not with whatever speed science had yet devised get this tremendous news and its implication to the Commanders in Hawaii? Instead the three aging secretaries sat down to a conference. General Marshall did not get the news until 11:25 A.M. He then sent a warning message to General Short. There was yet an hour and three-quarters before the explosion. The most precious hour and three-quarters the War Department had ever lived through. Time to get many of the ships in motion. Time to get every available man mobilized. Time to get every available plane off the ground. General Marshall had a scrambler phone which would reach Short instantly. He had also the Navy's powerful shortwave transmitter. Instead of using these he sent the message to General Short by commercial radio at or near 12:18 P.M., Washington time. That would be 6:48 A.M. Honolulu time. It reached Honolulu at 7:33 A.M. The Japanese planes were at that moment winging to their kill. The message was sent through the streets as the bombs were falling. Thus delayed it reached Army Intelligence office at 11:45 A.M. to be decoded. It was delivered to General Short at 2:58 P.M., hours alter the great base had been destroyed. Why did not General Marshall use the government's short-wave apparatus? Why did he not use his scrambler phone which would have put this information in the hands of General Short from two and a half to an hour and a half before the attack? His explanation to the Roberts Commission was that he was afraid it might be intercepted, What would have been the difference? If intercepted the Japanese would merely know what they knew already. But Short would have known it also.

Thus, I have sufficiently proven that the American government deliberately forestalled the relaying of information to the Pearl harbour command.
The local commanders were told to "not do anything that would incite the local Japanese population" Note - Pearl Harbour had a population of 160,000 Japanese. Thus, political correctness was alive and well way back then too.

2. The sinking of the Lusitania.

Article quote -
Not only did Churchill not come to the assistance of the Lusitania but he ordered her planned escort, the destroyer Juno, to return to Queenstown harbour. Earlier, the Lusitania had been ordered to reduce speed by shutting down one of her four boilers (ostensibly to save coal). She was a sitting duck and the entire Admiralty knew it.

Article quote -

In contravention of the rules of war at the time (the Hague Conventions and the Cruiser Rules) the RMS Lusitania was carrying a considerable amount of ammunition, explosives, and other war materiel for the armies of England and France. Germans knew that The Lusitania was carrying military supplies bound for Germany's enemies on the Western Front. The German embassy in Washington even took the precaution of placing an advertisement in 50 U.S. newspapers warning civilians not to sail on the Lusitania. Due to the intervention of the State Department most of the notices were not published.

Thus, my opponent has supplied false and misleading information about these too previous incidences which both led to the Americans participating in World Wars I and II.

3.Testimony of physicists - Jeff Farrer on the thermite theory of why the steel melted in the 911 buildings.


4. This article shows that the on board cell phones were deactivated.


I don't understand how my arguments were "false and misleading." I basically just highlighted American apprehension and sluggishness when it came to mobilizing the military or protect citizens. However, I will drop that part because this debate surrounds the events of September, 11, 2001. I hope Pro does as well. If not, he can challenge me to a debate on a topic regarding WW1 or 2 history.

If the air phones were completely deactivated how did all those on the ground receive phone calls, many of which were recorded, such as the one between American 11 flight attendant Betty Ong and AA operator Nydia Gonzalez ( Are you to say these were acted out by government-hired actors in a studio? The page I cite has the words, and the call itself is all over youtube. Further, one of Pro's articles talks only about American Airlines disabling air phones. Not sure how much weight this holds, but the United Airlines may not have been under the same procedure.

Another major cry made by "truthers" such as my opponent is that United 93 (registration N591UA) never existed, and the government just set off a bomb in a southern Pennsylvania field and tossed aluminum scraps here and there. This is also untrue, as "the small crater" was just a minute part of the crash site, which extended underground below the crater, scattered about the field and for miles around, and also into the tree line, which was noted to have been squirted with jet fuel. Engines, fuselage sections, and some belongings of passengers were found. As a testament to the force of impact, no more than a section of a backbone was initially found. The flight data recorder was also found, 25 feet below the crater. The contents of this recording, per the commission report, document the unmistakable sound of people trying to retake an aircraft overtaken by terrorists who can be heard saying, "should we put it in?" The black box also shows that the aircraft took erratic motions before plunging and striking the ground at 580 mph (Commission report). Due to the design of the black box, it would have not been possible to record these events in some recording studio and insert them into the machine. It quite frankly just doesn't work that way.
To conclude this last paragraph, the plane/passengers/plane registration is gone, the debris field of the crash site is much larger than the media says it is, and everything from the flight data recorder to bits of the fuselage to human remains (all of those found were identified with those on passenger list) were found.

I look forward to seeing what Pro propagandizes next.
Debate Round No. 2


1. My opponent is hoping that I will drop the argument that the American Government has already killed thousands of its own citizens as a means of angering and inciting its citizens into a state of war frenzy and revenge.
First, in order to establish that 9/11 is a plausible conspiracy theory, we must first establish if this type of behaviour and action is a normal activity that governments do every so often.

The evidence that I have presented so far, clearly indicates that the American Government has a long standing record of murdering its own people for the purpose of going to war. Thus, it would not be implausible to assume that the American Government would continue to murder its own people, if such a situation developed which required them to do so.

I have established previously that wars were primarily about securing oil supplies to he American people. Ref -

Thus, the American Government needed to stop Saddam Hussein from excluding America from oil supplies and to take control over the Arabic region. The purpose of creating Kuwait after World War II was to secure a foot hold to the Persian Gulf. Saddam Hussien was not cooperating with the OPEC countries and needed to be expelled. The American Government couldn't do this without first establishing a legitimate excuse. Thus, the idea of 9/11 was hatched.

2. My opponent has not bothered to investigate my reference to the Consensus 9/11 website.

This website clearly shows that the cell phone conversations were impossible and implausible.

3. President Bush's statements both contradict and mimic some of the evidence.

"Let's roll" Which was a phrase supposedly stated by the passenger Todd Beamer before they attacked the 'so called terrorists' on flight 93. Note - The same phase used by George Bush when he announced that America was going to war with Iraq.

4. "we can't breathe due to mace" This comment by Betty Ong doesn't make sense. If she is talking on a cell phone, she is breathing.
"Cool, where is it?" The reaction of technician Shelly Watson - on hearing about the 'real world' hijacking. This doesn't sound like a qualified and trained military officer to me. It sounds more like a 10 year old on-line gamer who has found a new game to play.

5. How did the hijackers know how to turn off the transponders? Note -They were only trained to operate small propeller planes which don't normally have transponders.

6. Flight 93 - The distribution of plane pieces is inconsistent with the flight recorder information. According to the flight recorder the plane was forced down by the hi-jackers. The evidence contradicts this information. Pieces of the plane were found over an area of 2 kilometres which suggests that the plane was shot down while in the air.

7. The four planes crashes should have resulted in the recovery of 8 black boxes. Note - Black boxes are indestructible. No amount of fire or violence of impact would be enough to destroy a black box. Thus, the missing black boxes must have been purposely removed by the government agents.


president_Ian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Easy win!


president_Ian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


Very easy win!


president_Ian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by KRTxBallistic 9 months ago
Con would easily have won, had he stayed. 911 is too easy to debunk.
Posted by president_Ian 10 months ago
You absolutely do not have me stumped. Its finals week. I will try to post an argument today or tomorrow if I can. I do not understand why people like you cannot except random, and everything has to be a "conspiracy" and a huge government coverup. t that is me being opinionated, and not presenting facts. Stay tuned.
Posted by Akhenaten 10 months ago
I guess I have you stumped! lol
No votes have been placed for this debate.