9/11 was an inside job.

By narrowing down to the debate to the WTC, I meant only to point the debate in a certain direction; obviously we are all talking about 9/11, but which event? Since your new here let me help you out, the Instigator usually clarifies the debate as much as possible. Attacking me does not give you a stronger position; it just makes you look more ignorant. But I digress, How can the debate be spirited if you don't respond to all my arguments, as this obviously slows the debate and doesn't allow for enough time to argue the matter? Let me respond to your 3 rebuttals. 1. << First, let's clear something up. There is no "official story"; there is however a general consensus of what happened that day by the public and experts. If you are just using this term to imply that, then I will do the same but I just want the audience to know that the government has not released an "official story".>> -It's called the 9/11 Commission Report. You haven't heard of it? It's the official story since it was commissioned by the President of the United States. Maybe you should really do some research before you try and debate a topic like this. You didn't know that there was a 9/11 Report, commissioned by the government and they actually have an official story? Wow this is really enlightening. 2. < > Then you quoted the NIST report that said: << (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers.">> Isn't that the same as "got so hot that it melted the steel causing a structural failure???" You just contradicted yourself big time. Just to be sure we are clear again: "The official story maintains that fires weakened the buildings. Jet fuel supposedly burned so hot it began to melt the steel columns supporting the towers. But steel-framed skyscrapers have never collapsed from fire, since they're built from steel that doesn't melt below 2750 degrees Fahrenheit. No fuel, not even jet fuel, which is really just refined kerosene, will burn hotter than 1500 degrees Fahrenheit."" http://physics911.net... 3. More than 80% of the public believe the government was behind 9/11 Scientific Poll: 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story Only 16% now believe official fable according to New York Times/CBS News poll "Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying? Telling the truth 16% Hiding something 53% Mostly lying 28% Not sure 3%" We all know the official story of September 11th: four jetliners were hijacked by groups of four and five Arabic men armed with box cutters, who proceeded to fly three of the four jets into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Subsequently the World Trade Center Towers, weakened by the impacts and fires, collapsed into piles of rubble. http://www.gpoaccess.gov... Let's just be clear the official story according to the NIST report cited by my opponent and the 9/11 commission report both state that the tower collapsed due to fire. 3. Evidence of Thermite(Used in controlled demolition) was found at the scene of the crime. The official Story however says: "In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view." "A thermite reaction generates extraordinarily high temperatures (>25000 C) and provides a credible explanation for the fires, hot spots and molten steel (a by-product of the thermite reaction) found in the collapsed buildings." http://www.whatreallyhappened.com... According to this source with photo evidence, thermite and evidence of temperatures reaching over 2500 degrees is noted. This proves that your official NIST report has holes. Please do not cite government sponsored studies (NIST) as I have just shown they are not credible. 4. I think this pretty much debunks any evidence my opponent has cited from government sponsored studies. 5. "Anyone who has ever watched a building being demolished on purpose knows that if you're going to do this you have to get at the under-infrastructure of the building to bring it down" Peter Jennings, ABC News 9/11/2001. The problem with my opponents line of thinking is that the basement, parking garage area (Foot Print) of the building would have to have been prepared, or blown up in order for the building to fall into it's footprint. Otherwise the building would have tipped over. My opponent still has not responded to the claims that there were squibs, steel columns flying outward as projectiles from explosions. 6. "We start walking back there and then I heard a ground level explosion and I'm like %^$#$%, and then you heard that twisting metal wreckage again." [James McKinley - E.M.T. (E.M.S.)] "I was standing next to 1 World Trade Center and then all of a sudden I heard rumbling and we all started running away from it. The glass like blew out and threw me onto the sidewalk ... and I couldn't see for like twenty seconds..." WMV video download (513kB) Here are eyewitness accounts (not government reports) that they heard eplosions in the base of the building. Did a plane fly into the basement?? 7. And what about WTC7, it was never hit by a plane, yet it also collapsed. Never in the history of the world has a building collapsed because a building nearby has collapsed. Again if you refer to the http://video.google.com... video I have cited here, you will see that WTC7 collapses in exactly the same fashion as a controlled demolition. You see the crease in the middle of the building, everything. The NIST report did not say or mention anything about this building. In fact official reports say: According to the 9-11 report by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), "the specifics of the fires in WTC7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time." (Really?) The owner of the building is reported to have said this about WTC7 and its collapse: WTC7 leaseholder Larry Silverstein on 9/11/2001: Silverstein states, "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." "To Pull it", is a demolition term for demolish or controlled demolition, again also on the vide I cited http://video.google.com..., Problem: Why did this building collapse? Because the owner gave the order to "pull it"? How long does it take to rig a building for collapse? How many hours, days, weeks? I will let my opponent respond since I'm out of room.