I believe 9/11 was an inside job now

[Fidel_Castronaut]

The argument that a lot of people bring up to refute the 9//11 conspiracy theories seems to be mostly related to the "Ha, no way ... the government can't possibly pull off such a crazy stunt without anyone else having any evidence that they did it ... the government is way too stupid and messed up already to be able to keep something so big like this still completely a secret from us" kind of reasoning. But that only demonstrates a lack in their own knowledge if anything.

Well, apart from that being very true, there are a lot of other reasons that truthers completely ignore in their assessment of the situation.

Including, of course, the massive resentment towards the US built up in several Islamic states by people who aspired (or followed) an ideological premise that sought to utilise their frustrations in a beneficial way to their cause(s). Atta, being one such key and obvious example through his gradual radicalization in Egypt and Germany.

Also, the fact that the 'gains' for the US from 9/11 are spurious if non-existent. Such as:

"Many of them, in fact, have appeared at conferences, filed formal appeals, joined whistleblower organizations, and made themselves available for interviews throughout the past 12 years, but they have been scrupulously shunned by the so-called fourth estate whose monetary interests rely on the 9/11 terror paradigm to justify the ever-expanding warfare/surveillance state"

Why would 9/11 result in this? No doubt it has, but there's literally thousands of other ways that could result in the same. I mean, bracketing out the fact you've quoted what appears to be a foregone conclusion (that an expanding surveillance op was the ultimate aim, which of course, has nothing to back it up), why would crashing the planes be viewed as the best way to achieve such a thing? Why not just crash the plane into the White House? A lot less damage, just as much (if not more!) impact. The WTC are/were no way near as sacred to the US image than the White house itself, so it seems crashing something into the WTC was a bit superfluous.

Or, alternatively, they could have just detonated lots of bombs around NY. Same effect, maybe even the same casualties, but arguably a lot less planning required. There are countless scenarios which could have resulted in the same thing. I just question why it's always a given that the US authorities, if they did indeed commit the 9/11 atrocities , automatically did so with a gain in mind and these gains were (usually) get oil, increase surveillance, or whatever.

None of what you've provided, whilst very compelling in some instances, and anecdotal in others, constitutes anything towards what I would regard as hard evidence that seriously creates a dent in the 'official story'.

In effect, the claims of 9/11 truthers don't hold up to scrutiny and make a mockery of the real chain of events that led up to 4 planes being set on a collision course with 4 different buildings.

Do you believe 7/7 in London was an inside job too? A lot of people who believe 9/11 was an inside job also believe it was, despite none of their claims holding up to investigation.