I found it interesting to recieve a response to a post that was over a year old, and had nothing to do with anything the reply is related to...

URGENT!
Even as the administration exploited this Official Story (or "Official Conspiracy Theory") as the pretext to launch new wars long in the making, independent researchers began to accumulate a vast body of evidence suggesting a different narrative for 9/11: that of the Inside Job.
The 9/11 events and the anomalies in the official story raised Unanswered Questions about:
- the unprecedented failure of the US air defense system on the morning of the attacks;
- the AWOL military chain of command during the actual attacks, including the inexplicable behavior of the presidential entourage;
- the seeming impossibility of official claims with regard to Flight 77;
- the evidence that Flight 93 was shot down;
- contradictions and dubious evidence in the official claims about the alleged hijackers and masterminds, and doubts about their real identities;
- signs that the alleged hijackers enjoyed high-level protection against discovery by honest investigators;
- evidence that the alleged hijackers were financed by states allied with US intelligence;
- suspicious and massive international financial trades suggesting foreknowledge of the attacks;
- widespread signs of official foreknowledge and, in fact, advance preparation for the 9/11 attack scenario;
- the long-running links between Islamist fundamentalist terror cells and US covert operations, dating back to CIA support for the anti-Soviet mujahedeen and Osama Bin Ladin himself;
- the demolition-like collapse of the Twin Towers and of a third skyscraper, WTC 7;
- and questions concerning who could have logically expected to derive benefit in the aftermath of a massive attack on the United States.
The suspicions received further confirmation a few weeks after September 11th, with the arrival of anthrax letters targeted only at opposition politicians and media figures, and timed to coincide with the introduction of the USA PATRIOT Act.
Google: 9/11 inside job

I saw a recent poll on a site I visit that again showed a majority beleiving this, but again the crowed that visits this site are in the camp more likley to believe this type of thing. I kinda wanted to break a few of these down to give my views. Just the way I see it...

The unprecedented failure of the US air defense system on the morning of the attacks.
To be fully honest, I don't think the failure was unprecedented. I'm one who actually believes not only was this possible in the manner it happened, but that the same thing still could verly well happen today... It would be more difficult to pull it off today, but I believe under the right circumstances it's still possible.

The AWOL military chain of command during the actual attacks, including the inexplicable behavior of the presidential entourage
What was so inexplicable? And was the military really AWOL? It's not often I see the military fully prepaired for an invisible attack. It's not like we were already at defcon 4 or something.

The seeming impossibility of official claims with regard to Flight 77
What impossability? That an overlay of a not so necicarily properly scaled plane taken from a not so accurate webcam with a not so clear picture didn't seem to match up 100%??? In fact the site I mentioned when talking about the poll above has this article explaining that it was indeed a 757... Not to mention I disproved an argument as well a long time ago with 5 minutes of research...

The evidence that Flight 93 was shot down
What evidence? Witnesses seeing a low flying plane shortly after it crashed? That was aready said to be a small private jet that was requested to fly low to get a better look at the crash. Besides, the phone calls from people on that plane indicated they were going to do something to stop the plane. And the flight voice recorder seemed to indicate the terrorists were the ones to crash the plane since everybody all of a sudden started rushing them...

Contradictions and dubious evidence in the official claims about the alleged hijackers and masterminds, and doubts about their real identities
We know the people were real as they were fully documented both by flight teaching schools as well as witnesses who saw them shortly before the crash. So the people physically existed, and seemed to be doing exaclty what the government has claimed they were doing...

the long-running links between Islamist fundamentalist terror cells and US covert operations, dating back to CIA support for the anti-Soviet mujahedeen and Osama Bin Ladin himself
And guess what? Durring WWII we were allied with Russia & China, and we were against Japan. We were also allied with Iraq. There's an old saying: Allies make strange bedfellows...

the demolition-like collapse of the Twin Towers and of a third skyscraper, WTC 7
I saw a WTC7 clip somewhere before, and I was certain it was fake. As the effect I saw in this clip could not have been produced regardless if it was demolition...
The whole reason, I believe, the twin towers fell the way they did was due solely to the construction of it. People say the temperature of the jet fuel wouldn't have been hot enough to melt steel. Well, first off there was a whole lot more than jet fuel burning in that place. Also keep in mind that besides the heat, the structure was weakend by the plane crash itself, as well as all the weight baring down on it from the top half of the building. With all these things combined, I would have been surprised not to see it give way.
But the collapse occured in a manner of 1 floor at a time, because it was so strong, It was the direct pancaking force & the strenght that kept the towers from tipping over durring the collapse.
I also recently read a clam that a scientist found proof of thermite in the towers, & would soon be releasing the evidence. I belive we are still waiting on the evidence...
The one thing that makes no sence to me, however, is with the fact that there are more theories as to how the demolition was done than there were floors in the tower. These people seem to agree something was done, but they cannot agree on how. They can't all be right...

Welp, that's my view. There are also things to take into account like the Popular Mechanics article. I saw an article trying to refute the PM article, but there was too many peronsal attacks in the article for me to take it seriously. Using a personal attack teciquine usually means you can't fight the message so you kill the messanger. And nearly half the article focused on things that had nothing to do with the actual facts presented items in the PM article, but rather focused on "numbers of search results" and "non-scientific poles"... As if the number of search results in Google can be used to scientifically prove a theory having nothing to do with the internet... And as if the number of people who respond to a particular pole has anything to do with weather or not the beleif is factual... Keep in mind there was a time when everybody believed the world was flat....