The Instigator
american5
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points
The Contender
Omnipotent
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

the government did not attack America on 911

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 1 vote the winner is...
american5
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 901 times Debate No: 18533
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

american5

Pro

I believe the 9-11 conspiracy is not only false but ridicules to believe that our own government would attack us with our planes sending two into the twin towers. Then destroy our own national defence system and then send one spiraling into the ground it is ridicules. Then blame it on a baron waist land like Afghanistan so we could invade Iraq giving it no credibility for the Iraq invasion for oil and attacking a worthless piece of land with few trees no mines or oil that is ruled by a group of crazy Muslims. This conspiracy makes no since and I believe that the nine eleven conspiracy is a joke.
Omnipotent

Con

I believed it was a terrorist act, but after i've watched "loose change", a well formed video of 9/11 conspiracy with numerous evidences and historical evidences.

http://video.google.com...

Some of surprising evidences are:
-World Trade Center's owner (i guess of it's property) leased it 6 weeks before 9/11/01, with an insurance of $3.5 billion in act of terrorism.
-The FAA HQ and Command center's dialogues right when the plane hits... "oh, i don't know, everyone just left the room"

I highly recommend you to watch this documentary video, and post your comment on the next round.
Debate Round No. 1
american5

Pro

american5 forfeited this round.
Omnipotent

Con

I don't know if the Pro gave up or stop checking on this debate, but again,
This video views 9/11 terror as a conspiracy, and it's a high likely chance to be it rather than a real terrorist act.
Debate Round No. 2
american5

Pro

well yeah people look at new York as the Icon of America and the twin towers were a sign of capitalism plus they were attacked before by terrorists it would be a good Idea to get insurance on that sort of thing. Also yeah it would probably be smart to leave the room when you see a plane heading at the building your in this video proves nothing it shows no other side to it.
Omnipotent

Con

Omnipotent forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
american5

Pro

I will await my opponents response.
Omnipotent

Con

I apologize for 'forfeiting', I wasn't aware that my opponent would still continue to debate. But now, I'll continue to defend my case.

Before 9/11, the government was heavily, yet secretly working on how to successfully execute the attack. There are too many evidences to just ignore it as a mere terrorist attack.
Few days before 9/11, people involved with the towers and government put insurance on the tower, especially in case of terrorist attack. Usually, insurance policy wont compensate for the loss if they had insurance for only short time, because it could result in fraud.
The day of 9/11, they stopped all the aircraft from flying on the day (Before the towers were hit) with exception of few military craft that had permission to. Why would they stop the flow of the aircraft on the day where they'd be hit with, say terrorist attack? Maybe they knew it'd occur.
The days after 9/11, people who theorized against what government claimed the incident was, (plane fuel and engine incinerated the body of plane which resulted in only parts of it left in the scene), were soon to be found out that they were either 'accidentally' dead after their public speech about this incident, or they changed their mind and announced their agreements with the government. Why would they agree or change their mind so soon?

This should be enough evidences to prove that 9/11 was indeed an inside job. There are no solid evidences that I've heard of that supports that it was really a terrorist job.
Debate Round No. 4
american5

Pro

once again I would like to say to my opponent that the towers are not only an American Icon but have been attacked before it would be smart to have insurance for that kind of thing also what reason would the government have to start a war and blow up their towers this movie loose change is a joke and proves nothing.
Omnipotent

Con

So you're claiming that it wasn't our government that was behind 9/11?
I would've appreciated if you would show proof and evidence to prove so then.

What's the likelihood of someone getting an insurance right before the incident? Its because they knew it were going to happen. An insurance policy specifically toward terrorist attack on those towers.
Again other evidences that show proofs of government's innocence or terrorist's guilt.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Jebediah-Kerman 3 years ago
Jebediah-Kerman
Just getting insurance on a building does not mean a conspiracy is happening...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
american5OmnipotentTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:21 
Reasons for voting decision: 911 was not a government plot... Arguments were very poor for both sides, sources were not used for pro but con based all of his on one sad movie which ignores basic facts of what happened that day. Con did have better grammar though