we can't really know that until we find out, but as with any such event, finding out who the perpetrators are is a no-brainer, especially for the friends and families of the deceased --- and it is looking increasingly as though the Bush administration knew more about the pending attacks than they have been willing to admit and could and should have done more to stop them - if this can be shown, and the behaviour of the Bush adminsitration is increasingly suggesting that they have a lot to hide, then it might provide the grounds for the impeachment of George Bush - fancy that?!
Clearly the 'refusal to know' shoe is on the foot of the 'anti-conspiracists' as you have amply demonstrated with your 'what does it matter attitude'. 9-11 didn't just 'happen' as you suggest, like a natural disaster, it was planned.
As to the rest, your understanding of the significance of Iran Contra leaves a lot to be desired.
>From: Stephen Philion <philion at hawaii.edu>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
>Subject: [lbo-talk] re Fisk avoiding facts? really?
>Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:26:55 -0600
>
>Iran-Contra Scandal, also discussed in
>Parenti's article, was a conspiracy - certainly it was a secret one, and
>might have remained so if Eugene Hasenfus hadn't fortuitously fallen from
>the sky.
>
>--that's really reaching. surely before the 'scandal' the 'covert' war was
>well known. again, the counterfactual, was it the scandal or the policy
>that
>was a problem? was the scandal necessary to explain US foreign policy in
>Latin America at the time?
>-------------------------
>As to 9-11, I would encourage you naysayers to offer your own theories
>about
>what happened.
>
>--9-11 happened and the administration took advantage of the moment to
>expand american influence militarily and to consolidate neo-liberal
>privatization globally. what else need we know to decide what position to
>take on the matter of the war on terror?
>----------------------------------
>What I don't understand is why
>so-called progressives would rather attack people challenging the
>government's conpiracy theory rather than challenge the governments
>patently
>counterfiet version of events.
>
>--perhaps because they distract attention from issues of how power operates
>in capitalism and what needs to be done to overthrow capitalism? well, of
>course the bulk of conspiracy theorists like Messers Moorer, Singlaub, Ms
>Oliver, Stevenson, etc. out there aren't anti-capitalist, but that's
>another story...
>---------------------------------------------------
>Mueller made this claim despite the fact that in the immediate wake of the
>Sept. 11 attacks, a variety of U.S. officials and media sources speciously
>announced, almost instantaneously, that there was firm evidence not only
>that these 19 Muslim men were agents of Osama bin Laden? al Qaeda ?etwork?
>but that they were indeed the individuals who hijacked the doomed flights
>on
>Sept. 11."
>
>--so? and what would finding out who the 'real' culprits were, if they
>weren't al qaeda accomplish?
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
_________________________________________________________________ Say “goodbye” to busy signals and slow downloads with a high-speed Internet connection! Prices start at less than $1 a day average. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)