Resolved: The Government Was behind the 9/11 attacks

In my final speech, I will tell you why Pro, myself, has won this debate. First, so set one fact straight! "Here again my opponent fails to recognize that not only the fires caused the collapse, but a combination of the fires and the damage caused to the structure by the impact of two planes flying at 500 miles an hour! " It's stuff like this that causes me to wonder at the intelligence of debators on this site, and I use that word loosely. One felt I must set straight, ONE TOWER WAS NOT HIT BY TWO PLANES! !! !! ! There were two towers that day, and two planes. One plane hit one tower, the other plane hit the remaining tower. THE TWIN TOWERS WAS NOT ONE STRUCTURE! !! !! ! They were two buildings, with two seperate plane crashes. Genius arguemnts like my opponent's causes me to worry about the state of our youth. And maybe you should take your own advice, and look at the Official report. While it is full of evidence that I have negated numerous times, with both my sources, and my statements written based on these sources, even the magazine understands that each tower was hit by ONE PLANE! ! I'll tell you why I have won this debate ladies and Gentlemen. All of my contentions still stand, and I have proven that the official story is bogus, which my opponent stated was his entire case. I have proven that the official story is a hoax, with both scientific evidence, common sense, and my sources. And I promise you sir, everyone in the world who disagrees with your opinion is not an "idiot" Because that's all you're offering here! Your opinion! You are not presenting proof to support your case! You cite one source, and simply say everything in it is infallible, even though I have proven that the towers could not possibly have fallen according to the official story. Also, my opponent has not remarked on my statements of how the towers were designed to be foolproof against bigger planes, traveling at higher speeds, with much more fuel with it! My opponent has let my remaining contentions stand as well. He has not remarked on the evidence I posted about how the bush administration has been wanting to go in iraq since they took office, stating that "9/11 and the invasion into iraq are not linked" I guess my opponent is not familiar with the term "War on Terror" My opponent has also let my last contention stand as well, providing no evidence about Operation northwoods, negating nothing. He has not addressed my statements of the NANOTHERMITE remains found ON THE SCENE! Here's a link, if you want it: . http://www.globalresearch.ca... I hope this one is "suitable for you" He has not addressed by quoted by the leaders of government, stating that there is NO LINK BETWEEN 9/11 AND OSAMA BIN LADEN THAT WE CAN FIND! !! ! Look, I know I am asking a lot from you judges. I understand I am challenging some beliefs you might hold dear to you. But you must set aside your personal beliefs, and look at the arguments. My case is superior to cons, because he has none. I have negated EVERY statement he has made. As judges, it is your obligation to choose a winner based on who has proven their point more persuasively. In this debate, that person was me.