That's along the lines of how I am thinking. If the government MIHOP or LIHOP, of what benefit was it? To get us into a war? We've gone into war on lesser pretexts than that. Shoot, the USS Cole should have been enough to send us into take care of the bad guys. But, of course, we know that was never the priority of that presidency.
I think that some of the people pushing Conspiracy theories aren't necessarily greedy for money. Some are confused. Some have some legitimate points (i.e., 'Arkanicides'). Some take something a little too far from what may have been a legitimate point at first. And some are just naturally suspicious. Oh, and some just want to say the Bush is the anti-Christ so of course if something bad happens he had something to do with it.
Still, as long as these things are being discussed, I believe that it is important to continually spell out why things have merit and why they don't. Sticking our heads in the sand because we're tired of hearing the garbage doesn't make it go away. I got the stuff in my email TODAY. I may be able to take what I have learned from our discussions and at least get my conspiratorial friend to look at it a different way. He's a well meaning guy- and on some things, I think he's probably more right than wrong (just not on the Twin Towers).
Your first paragraph has my logic in it. Why would this specific event be needed either LIHOP or MIHOP? History will crucify the person(s) that did either with foreknowledge to stop it.
I think you're at the same place a lot of people are. Gather data, sort it, draw a conclusion and repeat the process. It's when you get a photo with a weird shadow on the bottom of an airliner and start yelling it's a missile and it's all Bush's Fault that someone needs to 8itch-$lap you and take away your internet connection for a while.
Just my humble rantings.
PS - FReepmail me if you want to swap a list of books. I'm thinking that we could be able to refer each other to a few good ones.
K4