Seems like a strong argument.
And looking at the pictures of the top part of a tower falling past the bottom part of the tower certainly seems to indicate that the towers collapsed from where the buildings were struck. See Free Fall
The biggest difficulty for me regarding this issue is the meeting that would have to be held to plan such an event. I just can't see how any government could pull this off (no matter how powerful the government was). See the meeting. But I could be wrong. This meeting could have been the first of its kind. There were many things that happened on 9/11 that happened for the first time in history.
The only way for anyone to really get to the bottom of this is to look at both sides of the evidence; including all the arguments for and against a government conspiracy. (Which would also involve looking at possible motives. What motive did the American government have to kill so many of its own people? What motive could Islamic terrorists have?) Asking these questions and looking for answers is not easy, it can make us feel uncomfortable. We often prefer not to know what lurks in the dark. But the wise are not afraid of what they might discover. They listen closely to what their opposition has to say; for only then are they able to defeat their opponents arguments (or admit they've been wrong).
"... the sincere controversialist is above all things a good listener. The really burning enthusiast never interrupts; he listens to the enemy’s arguments as eagerly as a spy would listen to the enemy’s arrangements. But if you attempt an actual argument with a modern paper of opposite politics, you will find that no medium is admitted between violence and evasion. You will have no answer except slanging or silence. A modern editor must not have that eager ear that goes with the honest tongue. He may be deaf and silent; and that is called dignity. Or he may be deaf and noisy; and that is called slashing journalism. In neither case is there any controversy; for the whole object of modern party combatants is to charge out of earshot” (G.K. Chesterton, What’s Wrong with the World, 1910).
Whether or not it was a government conspiracy, I know this much, some people have made a lot of money from making videos and books about 9/11. And groups hostile to the west (such as Hezbollah) have spread videos like Fahrenheit 911. If the U.S. government was not to blame for 9/11, isn't it in the best interests of their enemies to make it look as though they were? That does not mean the government was not involved, but it is certainly worth considering.*
*I’ve yet to see any footage of suspicious activity near or in the World Trade Centre in the weeks and months prior to 911.
“...how exactly did they get explosives on every floor without dismantling walls and having people see what was going on?
In a building much smaller than the twin towers, (examples, old Vegas hotels), it takes stripping the interiors of the building and about a year's work with a crew of hundreds to blow up a building... [months work, but still]
So, again, how did someone pull off hundreds of workers planting explosives with no one noticing the construction debris, the hundreds of workers, the torn up walls, the dust, the mess, the drills, the explosives, charges and cord being brought into the building, etc?” - Laura Wilson
Special Report - The World Trade Centre