9/11 must have been assisted by the US government

Okay, so I'd first like to respond by saying that Einstein's quote had nothing to do with 9/11 and was taken out of it's original context. ;) Seeing as my opponent mostly didn't support his non-mainstream argument about 9/11 with reputable sources, despite my previous post asking him to do so, this post will be shorter than my last. I said "mostly didn't support" because, looking over the official accounts, I now acknowledge that President Bush was in contact with Vice-President Cheney and that my previous claim was inaccurate. Now having said just that, I noticed some inaccuracies in my opponents counter-argument: 1. The 9/11 Commission did not conclude that that the Pentagon deliberately tried to mislead them. In fact they ended up having to make a compromise and pass the case along to the Inspector Generals at the DOD and DOT. This can be found under my opponents own source http://www.washingtonpost.com... 2. A link on the same website that my opponent cited as evidence for the hijackers being alive, leads to a page on the same website that talks about how there are many different explanations for why the information of the hijackers match those of people still alive, explaining that one person had his passport stolen for example. http://911research.wtc7.net... 3. As for my opponents argument about the jet fuel and the WTC, his facts come from a website that also tries to argue that President Obama was born in Kenya. The type of people that create these websites do not have the best track record with facts. This is neither a credible nor reputable source. A paper from "The Chronicles of Higher Education" which is a prominent academic news source attempts to debunk Dr. Jones's claim as well as those of other controlled demolition proponents. http://eagar.mit.edu... 4. Regarding my opponents claim that the renovation of the pentagon was already completed, a quick look at a page from the Pentagon's main website will show the audience that it was still under construction and that my opponent was again incorrect. http://pentagon.osd.mil... I am not being rude when I call out my opponent's lack of knowledge on certain topics. This is a debate, and that being the case, it is expected that one makes accurate points and acknowledges their own mistakes if those points are shown to be inaccurate or misleading. My opponent has done neither of those things, and frankly, deserves to be called out on it. My opponent asked me to put more citations in my argument and so I have. I asked him before to put reputable sources in his citations and he has failed to do so, with the exception of the Washington Post and Guardian UK (both of which have a large consumer audience that expect factual news), although both sources failed to confirm the statements that were supposedly citing them. **To my opponent: If you believe that I have missed anything or failed to adequately address any of your points, please let me know so I can address them if they are valid. Also, please, PLEASE use reputable sources (meaning those that are from mainstream newspapers or scholarly papers, rather than ones from websites devoted to conspiracy theories) Thank you.**