IMO, the "whys" I've heard regarding 9/11 conspiracy theories have more holes than Swiss cheese.

To me the 9/11/Iraq correlation is weak. First of all, if Bush wanted to invade Iraq he didn't have to "stage" a terrorist attack. He could always claim they had uh .. WMD. Other possibilities? .. maybe stage a sort of "Gulf of Tonkin" incident with the no-fly zones. I can think of other "reasons" he could use to try to justify invading Iraq, but it all comes down to this - the need to kill our own people wasn't necessary for Bush to try to "sell" Iraq. If he was supposedly willing to go to such an extreme as to attack his own country to try then I think we ought to ask why we didn't "find" WMD over there. Planting them would be child's play compared to the sophistication needed to pull off a 9/11.

I actually feared martial law was a possibility in the days following 9/11, not for the reasons the CTers spout, but because of the uncertainty of followup attacks. It never happened. I won't go into the Patriot Act due to FAQ constraints but like it or no, it isn't martial law.