Resolved: The Government Was behind the 9/11 attacks

The Twin Towers were built using a tube-frame structural system, the foundation of the buildings was connected and intertwined, so you can indeed speak about one structure, especially because the damage caused to one Tower directly affected the structural integrity of the other tower. Of course my opponent does not understand this point because he has no knowledge of architecture and structural engineering, which transpires into his absurd statements and ridiculous claims on what caused the towers to collapse. I think it's funny that a 16-years old with no education in the field he is trying to debate using misinformation and bogus arguments that take an IQ of 2 to take apart is worried about the "state of our youth". My opponent has failed to prove even one single argument that he has brought forward and has not cited one single reliable source during this entire argument, and instead made nonsensical claims such as s "as the steel sags two things will happen: the columns, as they shorten, will become wider, which is obvious; and the inherent strength of the steel will increase, which is not obvious" and that Osama bin Laden "claimed that he was not responsible. It was only years later, when the entire world was convinced of his guilt, that he claimed responsibility, apparently affirming what everyone else already believed. "I have provided my opponent with the 9 11 commission report and with the article compiled by popular mechanics, which explained in detail why all of my opponent's claims are non-sensical and non-scientific. I have provided my opponent with a video of a real control demolition which shows the difference between what happened to the twin towers and what happens to a building that is filled with explosives. My opponent has of course ignored all the real, scientific, peer-reviewed evidence. My opponent has infringed every rule of proper debating, including not providing sources, posting links and arguments in the comments after submitting a round, and misquoting me, for example as he writes "9/11 and the invasion into iraq are not linked" even though I have never written that passage and posting a new argument, the alleged presence of nanothermaite, which is of course false, in the last round of the debate. I'm just going to post this link for my opponent so he can get an idea of what kind of non-sense he has been writing in this forum: . http://www.debunking911.com...My opponent does not only lack a basic understanding of structural engineering and physics, he lacks humility. The collapse of the World Trade Center is the most-researched architectural failure in the history of mankind. Real experts have analyzed the accidents dozens of times and came to the conclusion that the structural damages caused by the impact of the planes and by the burning fuel are the reason the towers collapsed. He however believes that his high school chemistry classes and a few dubious websites he found on the internet provide him with a better insight of the accidents than the US Government and the American Civil Engineers Association. I invite my opponent to check out this video interview with Dylan Avery, one of the biggest 9 11 conspiracy theorist in the US, who went head to head with the chief editor of popular mechanics on the events of 9 11. . http://www.youtube.com...The 9/11 attacks were an act of cowardliness and terrorism, and a national and personal tragedy for thousands of people. Trying to implying the complicity of the US Government by posting non-sensical misinformation and pseudo-scientific arguments is not only as stupid as beating a dead horse, but highly offensive as well. My opponent has failed to provide one single intelligent argument.