He must have been debate club president

This morning I found myself in a strange discussion that I thought was worth sharing. I was quietly working and minding my own business when two male co-workers sat down next to me at the desk. Both of these workers are around my age and are clearly curious to talk to me. We were making small talk about my work and their work, when one of them said very seriously, “Can I ask you some questions about the US?” He then asked “Do you have information about the 911 World trade center attacks?” I was a little confused at first as to exactly what he meant, but he clarified he just wanted my thoughts on it and to talk to someone from the US b/c he has had some questions that he is curious about and does not the know the answers to. So of course I agreed to answer any questions he had. Well, I didn’t realize that when he said ‘questions’ he meant he had theories and ideas about what happened that he wanted me to listen to. When I would try to correct him about blatant inaccuracies about the facts, he would argue with me. For instance he kept insisting that he did not understand how the US, being so powerful, could let a foreign airplane fly into US airspace and circle the building for 5 min without reacting. Why had the military not protected the building? Since it is one of the most important buildings in the world, he didn’t understand why the military did not shoot down the plane, b/c clearly they had plenty of time and knew what was going to happen. His line of questioning all had this similar accusatory tone with large misconceptions. He also said that he had read that the building was built to last thousands of years, so why hadn’t it been able to withstand two airplanes crashing into it?! And how could one airplane take down the whole building, why didn’t the top just break off? There had to be another bomb involved! All of these questions, if asked in a different tone, would not have surprised me as much, but they were all asked as if I had to defend myself and the entire US defense system. When I would try to explain things to him and correct some misconceptions (which there were a lot of), my responses were almost completely disregarded. I quickly realized he didn’t really want my thoughts and to discuss what I knew, but wanted to make accusations and point out what he thought were lies, cover ups, or weaknesses in the US, that I was supposed to defend. Now Im not one to shy away from a political discussion or entertain conspiracy theories, but his were so off the mark and clearly misinformed that they weren’t debatable. The worst part of the situation was after every comment I made contrary to what he wanted to believe, he would comment in Maharati to the other guy. I don’t understand Maharati, but I do understand male cockiness and the international language of snide side comments that were surely saying I was wrong. I think in the end I was able to get some misconceptions straitened out, but who knows what he will choose to believe. I was just shocked at the strange information he had about the subject and his aggressive way discussing the subject. As the discussion continued I tried to get across the point that it is not possible to predict every possible scenario and protecting airplanes doesn’t safeguard against attacks in other areas. The other man, who was significantly less confrontational, casually suggested that clearly the answer was a national curfew. Hmm…maybe. That’s when I realized that it wasn’t just incorrect facts that were creating the divide in this conversation but a much larger difference in the interpretation and way of viewing the situation. A conversation I was not willing to take on this morning.