Maybe you would care to explain the un-explainable....
That would require proof by logical deduction and observance and could be refuted by the same logical deduction and observance. Lacking any facts or empirical evidence at best, it could only be philosophy and argued by logical deduction. A argument that is not supported by logical deduction and observance is then but a opinion by a opinionest who would seek to impose views asserting that if something is not known then it must be what the opinionest thinks. Most conspiracies are more opinion than fact and yours is no different.
"Lacking any facts or empirical evidence at best, it could only be philosophy and argued by logical deduction.Ok, Professor, try "logical deduction"...
For instance, would you care to "logically deduce" why President Bush will NOT enforce the Mexican Border after 9/11?
Why millions of illegal invaders have been allowed to cross the border unimpeded?
Now let's go backwards...
Why was the Warren Commission report on Kennedy buried for 75 years?
Why are hundreds of witnesses' testimony of Flight 800 ignored?
Why have investigations and evidence been repressed or ignored regarding Waco, OKC, and recently Able Danger?