9/11 was an inside job and the official 9/11 Commission Report does not explain what really happened

A. My opponent claims there was not "Actionable Intelligence", but this is not the case.[1] 1. "Intelligence agency heads describing themselves with their "hair on fire" to characterize the imminent nature of the threats they were intercepting from Al Qaeda and their sense of urgency in relating them to the Bush Administration" 2. "...CIA Director, George Tenet ...described the non-routine meeting that he and Cofer Black called for with then National Security Advisor, Condoleez Rice as one of the "starkest warnings" ever given by the CIA to the White House on Al Qaeda." If no action can be taken on "one of the "starkest warnings" ever given then what IS it possible to take action on? B. My opponent is simply trying to apply a case of "mistaken identity" to each man. There are a ways, however to get confirmation that goes beyond just the name: pictures that go with the name, take DNA samples, and autopsy reports. According to my source[2] the report on DNA samples and autopsy reports support my proposition (Pro). "the alleged hijackers could have been positively identified only if samples had been obtained from their relatives, and there is no indication that this occurred. Indeed, one can wonder why not... The Jarrah's family has indicated they would be willing to provide DNA samples to US researchers, ...[but] the FBI has shown no interest thus far." The lack of positive identification of the alleged hijackers is consistent with the autopsy report, which was released to Dr. Thomas Olmsted, who had made a FOIA request for it. Like the flight manifest for Flight 77, he revealed, this report also contains no Arab names. If there is no proof that Arab men committed the crime then why did the USA rush to war? ('false flag' connection) As far as pictures to go with the names: "...the BBC published an article by David Bamford entitled "Hijack "-Suspect' Alive in Morocco." It showed that the Waleed al-Shehri identified by the FBI as one of the hijackers was still alive. Explaining why the problem could not be dismissed as a case of mistaken identity, Bamford wrote: His photograph was released by the FBI, and has been shown in newspapers and on television around the world. That same Mr Al-Shehri has turned up in Morocco, proving clearly that he was not a member of the suicide attack..." (Others are confirmed by pictures also) C. Other reasons the tape is not real: 1. In Bin Laden's first interview after the 9/11 attacks he denied any involvement. Terrorists always claim responsibility for attacks they have perpetrated. 2. 9/11 was not specifically mentioned on Bin Laden's wanted page on the FBI website, because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11. Also Bin Laden and al-Qaeda were simply incapable of orchestrating these attacks. Several political and military leaders from other countries have stated that bin Laden and al-Qaeda simply could not have carried out the attacks. General Leonid Ivashov, who in 2001 was the chief of staff for the Russian armed forces, wrote: "...They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders..."[3] D. You don't usually cover a crime scene with sand, a construction yard sure, but not a site when forensics evidence is needed. What I see in my opponent's source 1 is charred spools of wire (is that supposed to look like plane wreckage?) and in source 2 I see 1 twisted piece of metal and a scrap piece, and some papers over by the building, that is not too convincing to me. I also tried to do a bit of critical thinking here, and I was thinking that with the height of a 757 the upper stories on the Pentagon would have been hit. My opponent's picture shows only 26ft high on the building being hit. I listed the height of a 757 last round as 14.9 YARDS high (plus higher with the cockpit). That would mean it was at least 44.7 FEET high. If it had indeed been a 757 that hit the Pentagon those upper stories would have been hit. I also didn't remember seeing any green paint inside of planes I've flown in, so out of curiosity I looked at pictures of the insides of a 757 from American and found there is no green paint.[4] E. My opponent's 2 crash photos aren't really that convincing to me. Here is a video that 1. Explains a bit about what the crash site looked like before [5](2:00) and 2. What real plane crashes look like.(2:00-4:00) F. Here is another way the official pancake theory is not logical. There are only 2 things that could have happened to the floors: 1. They fell and added weight and momentum to falling on the next floor. If this happened (pancake theory) one would expect to see a pile of floors stacked up. We do not see a pile of floors stacked up. 2. The floors could be pulverized, but if this is the case then there would be no weight of these floors to help collapse the next floor. "If there was enough kinetic energy for pulverization, there will be pancaking or pulverization, but not both. For one thing, that energy can only be spent once. If the potential energy is used to pulverize a floor upward and outward, it can't also be used to accelerate the building downward. In order to have pancaking, a force is required to trigger the failure of the next floor. If the building above that floor has been pulverized, there can be no force pushing down. As observed in the pictures below, much of the material has been ejected upward and outward. Any pulverized material remaining over the footprint of the building will be suspended in the air and can't contribute to a downward force slamming onto the next floor."[6] G. Even though it may be true the war games are run every year, what are the odds of it being held on this day? 1/365 = .003% (but the real odds are 1/1825 because of 5). No matter how fast the response time sounds (or was) they were not able to intercept the hijacked planes because there were false blips on the radars, that is why I am highlighting the exercises being held. I do disagree with my opponent's times however: "Myers told the Senate that no fighter jets were scrambled to intercept any of the 9/11 flights until after the Pentagon was struck . The Pentagon attack occurred at 9:38 a.m., a full 1 hour 20 minutes after the first of the 9/11 flights was diverted from its designated flight path."[7] H. NIST has admitted free-fall speed occurred in their own reports. The main question is why did WTC7 fall at all? Here is a picture of a steel constructed building like WTC7 that was burned in a WORSE fire and it never even fell at all. No fire has ever caused a steel-framed high-rise building to collapse.[8] I. Here is an online petition[9](signed by 33,469 people) which includes some of the ulterior motives that people want to be investigated. Which includes (but not limited to): 1. Insider trading of United and American airlines 2. Over 100 million dollars that electronically passed through WTC on 9/11 8.Unocal's oil pipeline across Afghanistan 9. Carlyle Corporation's role 11. George W. Bush's possible foreknowledge of the attacks 12. Role of Northern Alliance in explosive growth of opium production in Afghanistan after US military intervention. I thank the readers and my opponent and wish him good luck. 1.http://www.rawstory.com... 2.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info... (8 -11) 3.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info... (12) 4.http://www.airliners.net... http://www.airliners.net... 5.http://www.youtube.com... (see above if not here) 6.http://www.drjudywood.com... (see pictures a-d)(These pictures clearly show the floors were pulverized.) 7.http://www.infowars.com... 8.http://911research.wtc7.net... 9.http://www.petitiononline.com...