You know, the motive of making an excuse for war doesn't fit at all, anyway.
Why take such a risk? If evidence of this ever got out (and with a crime this large and comprehensive, that's almost inevitable), it would pretty well polarize the U.S. populace against the current government and end any thought of war. Even if the war went on, those who wanted to benefit would not. The risks are far too high, when there are other methods that could be used for war.
Besides, the primary result of this was war in Afganistan. If Iraq was the actual target, why didn't the government simply go after them first? Iraq was targetted because of Saddam's efforts to gain WMDs (which erroneous intelligence thought he already had). Not because of 9/11. Of course, I have my own thoughts about the Iraq situation, but this is not the forum for them (basically, I think we needed to be there...the idea was good, the execution of it was severely lacking at the higher levels).
The suggested motives are non-sensical, the methods are far too high-risk for the slight reward, and the actual mechanics of an attack of this nature are mind-boggling.
And why in the Ed-driven H3ll would WTC 7 have to be demolished? Although you seem to flop back and forth about whetherWTC 1 & 2 were demolished or just fell, you still insist 7 was demolished. Why? What motive?
Asinine. Absolute, breathtaking illogic.
As I have stated before, the ONLY way this makes sense is if you pre-suppose, before knowing anything about the event, that the government is lying.