I was talking to someone the other day who believes that 9-11 was a cooperative effort between the Bush administration, CIA, oil buddies etc... and Osama et al.
There is a documentary out there that alleges that the buildings were cleared out and timed explosives were put in place. There are theories about the impossibility of melting steel causing the collapse of the buildings. There is apparently a CNN reporter on film stating that building #7 had collapsed, though it was pictured behind her at the time, only to collapse later. Someone who owns one of the buildings apparently has ties to the Bush family. And on and on.
In order for this conspiracy to be true, one has to believe that Bush, his family, and no doubt hundreds of others would be willing to incinerate a few thousand Americans in the hopes of cashing in later with war and oil profits. I simply can't believe (given the evidence that I have seen thus far) that hundreds of the wealthiest and most powerful individuals in the world would take the risk of getting caught, disgracing themselves, their family and their country to get rich. They are already rich.
Anyway, my question. Do you think that, given the exact same set of facts and theories, the 9-11 conspiracy believers would still be believers if you substituted Clinton for Bush as the main villian?