9/11 was an inside job

I deny that i have gone off topic in the slightest. I was trying to explain to you how many of the arguments coming from the truth movement, suggesting that 9/11 was an inside job, mostly the work of Israel, according to the vast majority of truthers, is infact far right propaganda. I think this is extremely valid, if you do not mind me saying so. Anyway, as this is my last post on the subject, my opponent has not given me much to work with in the way of debate. Therefor, i can only assume that he is keeping his ace card up his sleeve to hit me with it in round5, when i will not be able to reply. So, i am going to try and predict what his argument could be. Perhaps, he might try and use one of the more common arguments from 9/11 truthers, which is regarding the mainstream newspaper reports straight after 9/11, suggesting that some of the hijackers named by the FBI on September 14, 2001., where actually still alive. 9/11 truthers like to use this debate. However, what they never mention, and never use in their debates was the public apologies from those mainstream newspapers, that after the FBI released photographs four days after the cited reports on September 27, the mistaken identities were quickly resolved, and the newspapers wrote articles correcting their mistakes. It is true, that one Saudi airline pilot of the same name as one of the 9/11 bombers, had walked into a Police station in Saudi, and asked to know why he had been accused of flying a plane into the twin towers. However, the man in question was not him, as photographic evidence proved, it was simply a pilot with the same name, the names of two of the allegedly surviving attackers, Said al-Ghamdi and Walid al-Shari, are "as common as John Smith in the United States or Great Britain.". Another argument my opponent might use, is to try and say Al qaeda do not exist and therefor could not have been behind the 9/11 bombings. However, Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, which is the forerunner of Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn, commonly known as Al-qaeda, do exist, and are very real, as are mujahideen, which is based on a Jihadist notion dating back to the prophet Muhammad and the Qur'an in the 600's AD, long before Cristobal Colon had even founded the Americas, and just because the CIA had a database called Al-qaeda back during the Soviet invasion of 1974, is no more proof that the Mujahideen network does not exist any more than Milwall football hooligans not existing just because Scotland yard may have a database called "Milwall football hooligans". Also it is debatable the amount of influence the CIA had over Mujahideen during the Soviet uprising, as despite claims by the likes of Robin Cook, and the BBC documentary of 2004 named "Al-Qaeda's origins and links", the facts are, with a quarter of a million local Afghans willing to fight there was no need to recruit foreigners unfamiliar with the local language, customs or lay of the land with several hundred million dollars a year in funding from non-American, Muslim sources, Arab Afghans themselves would have no need for American funds Americans could not train mujahideen because Pakistani officials would not allow more than a handful of U.S. agents to operate in Pakistan and none in Afghanistan the Afghan Arabs were militant Islamists, reflexively hostile to Westerners, and prone to threaten or attack Westerners even though they knew the Westerners were helping the mujahideen. Also, regarding the claims that Osama Bin Laden once supported USA, made popular by Bandar bin Sultan, Bin Laden himself once said "the collapse of the Soviet Union ... goes to God and the mujahideen in Afghanistan ... the US had no mentionable role," but "collapse made the US more haughty and arrogant." There is one thing about 9/11 i find genuinely concerning regarding 9/11, and that is the affair with the Carlyle group, and i think these are sincere and genuine concerns, in that the Bin Laden family did have a small percentage of shares in the Carlyle group. However, The Bin Ladens had always mentained that Osama Bin Laden, had been disowned by the family back in 1990, and that the family had nothing to do with him. The Carlyle group did used to hire George Bush as a buisness advisor, however after 2001, the bin ladens were asked to relinquish their shares in the company amid concerns that they may inadvertently profit from the contracts of services, to which they agreed. And this is really the most credible worry i can see, and as much as it is a genuine concern having multi billion dollar industries employing some of the most powerful men in the world, and thus creating a conflict of interests, those genuine concerns are made a complete mockery of by the more bizarre claims and theories of 9/11 truthers, many of which, would try have you believe that no planes went into the twin towers at-all. Anyway, i apologise if this argument was not in line with my opponents, but my opponent really did not give me much to work with in terms of debate, or questions to answer, so i kind of just had to predict what his next debate might be. Ok, over and out, thank you for the debate.