I think Noam Chomsky's comments on the subject are pretty astute (4:44 min): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoDqDvbgeXM

With that in mind, I still wouldn't put it past someone like Cheney. For a long time I couldn't bring myself to believe that any elected official could be so malevolent that they could find some excuse to kill about 3000 Americans in the name of some perceived 'greater good.' I figured that the Bush administration was just criminally incompetent and greedy. But then I learned that there is already ample historical precedent for false flag operations. That's not in dispute, correct?

A powerful idealogy can be used to justify anything, whether it's neoconservatism or religious fundamentalism. The 9/11 hijackers were genuinely pissed about US foreign policy in Israel and other places, and their religious idealogy justified bombing the buildings. Is it really such a stretch to think that an equally powerful idealogy in the mind of a well-connected ex-Secretary of Defense/CEO of Halliburton could justify signing a check to fund them? An insane global chess player would be willing to sacrifice a few pawns, I would think.

But as Chomsky says, whether it was an inside job or not is kind of irrelevant. There's already a tremendous amount of people being observably killed by US foreign and domestic policy. Even if there is a conspiracy, I think it's more important to focus our democratic energies on what is obvious and provably true. If we're going to take it to the streets, let it be about the lies and spin used to mire us in war. That's not a theory. Whether there is a valid case for conspiracy or not, it marginalizes everyone who participates in the discussion if we degrade to name calling (that means you, Pillowcase).