The easiest way to get someone to have an actual debate on the 9/11 subject is to cover issues that are not divisive, such as claims about explosions. The physical elements of the subject have done nothing but hurt any cause to get a new, independent investigation into the events.
Trying to present physics to people when you don't have an educated background on the subject matter to others who likely won't have that educational background either is a futile cause IMO. The TRUTH is I don't know if the buildings were blown up or anything of that nature. I know what my eyes see, but I also have an emotional reaction to that and could be wrong because I am letting my emotions get the better of me because I care about the subject. I have totally walked away from talking about those subjects, even WTC 7, because the truth is I don't know what I am talking about from a technical standpoint. Even if I did, I could still be wrong because I am emotionally attached to the subject. So I'll say planes brought down the towers and Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.
However, that by no means says I am comfortable with the story given by the 9/11 Commission Report. There is no question that Muslim extremists were training at various military bases for some objective. Was it to carry out 9/11? I don't know, I lean towards no. I think they were being trained to use for our own means in another country that we wanted to attack. I think they were co-opted by some group who used them for a different agenda. I don't know who that is. I lean towards foreign intelligence agencies, like the ISI, and at least one private aerospace contractor. With the support of very few actual traitors in the military/intelligence apparatus. The wargames that confused military personal point to people inside having helped coodrinate the attack IMO.
4 names I would point out should bring up reasonable questions to the 9/11 events. Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, Lt. Col. Steven Butler, FBI agent (Chicago) Robert Wright, and FBI agent (Phoenix) Collen Rawlley are very key to getting to hard questions that do not have good enough answers. Not the views of "activists" but of people in our government that are patriots that tried to stop those attacks. Not their views based on their professional background either, but of actual involvement with tracking terrorist cells and being pulled off the cases by someone from above. But don't take my word for it, look up those names and information that relates to this subject. Tell me what you find.
It is much easier though to stay away from divisive topics like controlled demos or any physical events of 9/11. The wargames, the actual terrorists being trained at various bases (Pensacola, FL and Monterey, CA for example), the stories of people like the 4 I mentioned that can't be "laughed off" (along with Sibel Edmonds), the poor job the 9/11 Commission did with the investigation in general (according to 6/10 panel members themselves, omitting key witness testimony and not going far enough with their subpoena powers), allowing the head of the Pakistani ISI to leave the country when he was in DC on 9/11 despite him being involved with wiring $100K to the terrorists, and other topics like this. There are many. Far too many and this is why I still think the topic is valid. It just needs to be looked at more objectively by people on all sides.
---------- Post added at 05:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 AM ----------
BTW, reading some of the replies here I am reminded why I don't frequent the forums much anymore. A bunch of arrogant, hubris filled know-it-alls give their typical replies on this topic. Maybe if you actually did your homework on this topic instead of spotpicking every single strawman that comes down the road on this topic you would learn something? Nah, it's better showing how "intelligent" you are "debunking" important topics based on misrepresentations, strawmen, and flat out wrong info that most people who are "skeptical" of the offical story don't even suggest. I bet all of you who do that have actually read the 9/11 Commission Report. Right guys? That won't stop the debates being about controlled demolitions and Jewish conspiracies. Who cares about facts from real people directly involved with the events of 9/11 when you feel the need to look cool to others?
*rolls eyes*
