9/11 was an inside job

"Okay, the idea that things unobserved before cannot be explained is not that great. Thats not what im saying at all though. .. My point is that its hard to explain all the qualities and nature of the collapse of the twin towers since an event like flying fully loaded planes into towers that subsequently collapsed has never been seen before, so its difficult to explain why everything happened the way it did. .. .. "I think you're entirely missing the idea of physics and engineering which maintains that what happened to the twin towers was not physically possible given the maximum heat of jet plane fuel and etc. "The idea of physics and engineering maintains that its more then possible for the towers to collapse the way they did. .. . Anybody who thinks otherwise has a tremendously idiotic concept of engineering and physics itself. .. .. For example, some idiots think you have to be able to melt steel in order for it to lose its structural capacity, but that simply isnt the case. All you have to do is bend and make it a little more malleable then it currently is (flaming hot jet fuel and the impact of an airplane will do that) and then steel loses its ability to hold the weight above it (and there was a LOT of weight above it too)"given this knowledge the question would be logical why did it focus so much on that and the answer i provide fits soundly it focused on the terrorists so the goverment could blame them and therefore justify a war based on that. "Outlining who was behind the attacks though isnt evidence that the government is behind 9/11 itself though, your leap of faith that it does is based on zero evidence whatsoever and isnt a valid conclusion to make. By that logic, the official report behind the attack of Pearl Harbor (that primarily outlines how the Japanese were behind the attacks) would be evidence that the government somehow hired the Japanese to attack them so that they could justify a war against Japan and its axis allies. .. .. .. Which is an idiotic conclusion to reach. "I think that the government being in different sectors has areas that are effective and areas that are not. "And keeping secrets is not a sector in which they are effective! I mean for f*cks sake, Edward Snowden managed to leak just about the entire database of the NSA almost entirely by himself. If the government cant even keep THAT a secret then how in the hell do you really believe they are covering up a massive 9/11 conspiracy? "Actually thats not needed to prove it at all. Firstly you have to prove motiff- the government has this as the attacks were used to justify wars. Then opportunity- given their resources they definitely have this. "Motive and opportunity isnt enough to prove their guilt though idiot. .. .. You need ACTUAL evidence like authorizations to pay off people, evidence of intentions to cover up studies and operations that suggest the government isnt behind it, and evidence that the actual story that Al-Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks is somehow false and fabricated, and how all these other angles of the story are somehow related to this conspiracy which is something you have utterly failed to prove. "for a long time the us government and al Qaeda were tight as pees in a pod, they provided arms to them previously and even had them on their bankroll. "Yeah, IN THE 80's. .. .. In the 20 years after that Al-Qaeda routinely waged holy war against the US, bombed US embassies, attacked US warships, denounced American troops stationed in Saudi Arabia. To imply that Al-Qaeda and the US are decent allies is utterly idiotic and ignores over 20 years of history when Al-Qaeda waged war against the US. "for instance the golf of tonkin incident, and the burning of the reichstag by the nazis but blamed on the communists"Which as you admitted arent even close to as big as the proposed conspiracy behind 9/11 would be, so your argument is invalid. "even if it has never been attempted that doesn't change the plausibility of the event itself"It kinda does since it is outlandishly impossible for it to actually be carried out. " the logic behind your initial statement is akin to "the moon landing was never attempted before it was and therefore was fake"It isnt because prior to the moon landings the US had made several leaps and bounds in the exploration of space. .. . We put people into orbit, we've sent satellites to explore other planets, telecommunications and spy satellites were routinely launched into orbit. .. .. . The US had more then enough means to feasibly put a man on the moon, the same cannot be said of pulling off a conspiracy as massive as this one. What examples of the government trying to stage domestic attacks and blame it on Islamist extremists existed prior to 9/11? The answer is ABSOLUTELY ZERO. The government never once tried to stage a false flag operation and blame it on Middle Easterners with the intent of using the event to justify going to war with them. Therefore its outlandish to claim that a 9/11 conspiracy is feasible since the US literally never attempted to stage any kind of event to intervene in the Middle East like this prior to 9/11, or even after 9/11"im sure some of the famiiies believe that the terrorists were behind it however if you research you'll find that many of the people who are most advocative of the conspiracy are fire fighters and family members who were involved in the events. "Thats not even close to being true. Many of the people who advocate the conspiracy are conspiracy retards who have no basic concept of reality or physics. .. .. . "this is based on the premise that the government made a mistake in invading iraq which to me just shows lack of research as well. The us government invaded iraq for numerous reasons all relating to oil and how it keeps the us dollar afloat. "Using one idiotic conspiracy theory to reinforce another idiotic conspiracy theory doesnt justify your original conspiracy theory, it only doubles down on how stupid you are when it comes to understanding the nature of both events in question. .. .. =================================================================================The simple truth is that there simply isnt enough tangible evidence that comes even close to proving that the US government is behind 9/11. .. .. . Most conspiracy theories are based entirely on discrepancies in official accounts, combine that with something only a science-fiction writer could come up with, produce one or two idiotic arguments that act as evidence for the conspiracy, and then pass it off as fact. It simply doesnt work that way though. .. .. . There is overwhelmingly more evidence that Al-Qaeda, who waged war against the US for 20 years before 9/11 even happened, who later even admitted they were the ones who planned and carried out the attack, were the ones behind 9/11, not the US government. Al-Qaeda has the clear motive and intention to carry out the attack, they had admission of guilt that they were the ones who carried it out, and they had the means of hijacking planes and fly them into targets in the US which all evidence suggests they did. .. .. The US government on the other hand has a much more clouded alleged motive, they do not have the capacity to carry out a cover-up of 9/11 which would be infinitely times harder to carry out then the attack itself, and they do not have the capacity to pull something off as elaborate as this since the government has shown to be incompetent when it comes to keeping secrets from people.