What is the motive in the theory that 9-11 was an inside job?

The best answer chosen by the voters to this question on Yahoo Answers states:

People say 9/11 was planned to get us into a war so military suppliers could make money. This idea is incorrect because we don't need an attack to get us into a war. For example, the direct result of 9-11 was the attack on Afghanistan, a relatively small operation.

On the other hand, look at the big operation, the attack on Iraq. We didn't need 9/11 for that. Iraq was simply justified by Bush saying Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. He explicitly stated it was not due to 9/11 or terrorism.

Wrong; the George Washington blog explains:

Why are we in Iraq? WMDs, you say!

Actually, President Bush's March 18, 2003 letter to Congress authorizing the use of force against Iraq, includes the following paragraph.

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

White House's false linkage of Iraq and 9/11 which allowed the Bush administration to claim that Congress had voted for the Iraq war. So looking at who was actually behind 9/11 (not Saddam Hussein) is important in connection with the Iraq war.

The answer then goes on to state that:

People say that insiders bought securities that would generate profit after the 9/11 attacks.
Unusual stock and option transactions have already been investigated and were found to be ordinary transactions resulting from well-known business expectations. This was done by the 9-11 Commission & others.

Furthermore, financial transactions are completely transparent: We know exactly who did them. Only a fool would simply buy 10s of millions of put options (anything less would not be worth it) and then go blow up the WTC--we would know immediately who did it.

Moreover, insider-trading is a crime and the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) routinely monitors all trades for excess profits. There’s no way to cover it up.

Also, many of the people who died in WTC 1 & 2 are in the financial industry and many of their close friends would be in finance also. Surely, these friends & colleagues of the deceased would all have complete access to trading data. They would go crazy with anger if they could find anything fishy in the deaths of their friends. But, the thousands of people who work on wall street are quiet indicating no unusual activity.

If these transactions are real, then (1) who is the biggest profit-maker, (2) how much did they make & when, and (4) how does this activity compare to historical transaction volume that ordinarily occurs? It's specifics that make a claim plausible and verifiable. It's vagueness that suggests it's all made-up.

Until there is an intelligent answer for the above, we can safely be assured that all these "millions of transactions" are a myth.

I'm actually going to accept this part of the answer, and get this, agree with the Screw Loose Change blog.

This was what the person who answered the question considered the "two main motives that are given to 'prove' 9-11 was an inside job." Motives by themselves don't prove anything. The forensic evidence, NORAD stand-down, and whistleblowers, prove the case. They also forgot a few other main motives that flesh themselves out when looking at how the world would be different without 9/11.

From Steve Watson of the website PrisonPlanet.com :

Without 9/11 there would be no "war on terror".

Without 9/11 there would be no "clash of civilizations"

Without 9/11 there would be no war in Afghanistan.

Without 9/11 there would be no war in Iraq.

Without 9/11 there would be no war in… (insert any country classified as part of the "axis of evil" or defined as being 'with the terrorists')

Without 9/11 thousands of U.S. troops would not have been sent to their deaths.

Without 9/11 hundreds of thousands of citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan would not have been sentenced to their deaths.

Without 9/11 there would be no inaction on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

Without 9/11 there would be no civilian contractors in Iraq and the scandal that has followed them would have been averted.

Without 9/11 there would be no false military reporting (Pat Tillman, Jessica Lynch), and no crack down on the freedom of the press (banning photographing the returning coffins).

Without 9/11 there would be no Patriot Act.

Without 9/11 there would be no NSA warrantless wiretapping program.

Without 9/11 there would be no Camp Delta and no Camp X-ray at Guantanamo Bay.

Without 9/11 there would be no Military Commissions Act and no coordinated program of extraordinary rendition, indefinite detention and torture of those defined as “enemy combatants”.

Without 9/11 there would be no vast increase in secrecy and complete militarization of intelligence under the newly created office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Without 9/11 there would not be thousands of dead and dying emergency workers who are suffering crippling and fatal respiratory illnesses.

Without 9/11 there would be no vast increase in military and security spending that goes arm in arm with huge cutbacks in other key social programs (such as levees in New Orleans).

Without 9/11 there would have been no total abandonment of fiscal restraint, which has contributed to plunging the nation into an abyss of debt and looks likely to tip the world into a deep recession if not a complete depression.

And on and on and on.

Perhaps most importantly, without 9/11 there would be no "post 9/11 society/mentality".

Related Info:

SEC Found No Sign 9/11 Conspirators Traded on Plot

But if 9/11 was a "conspiracy", people would have talked!

AdamS
politically-confused.blogspot.com
September 10, 2009

Whistleblowers are numerous, whether they be Bush administration officials, military officers, or FBI agents. The argument that people would have spoken out if 9/11 was an inside job, is fair - but ignores the fact that people have spoken out. And risked a lot in the process.

Comprehensive list of 9/11 whistleblowers

It should be noted that the term 'conspiracy theory' accurately describes both the official account and any alternative explanations, since all describe a covert, illegal action between multiple people, which is all 'conspiracy' means. Hate to ruin good propaganda with facts, but it doesn't mean 'woo woooo' crazy owl noises...
___________________________________________________________

A Guide to the 9/11 Whistleblowers

Global Research, March 5, 2010
The Corbett Report

When losing a discussion on the facts of 9/11, a so-called 9/11 "debunker" will often rely on an old canard to "prove" that 9/11 could not have been an inside job: "So many people want their quarter hour of fame that even the Men in Black couldn't squelch the squealers from spilling the beans," write self-satisfied defenders of the government story. According to the logic of this argument, if there are no 9/11 whistleblowers then 9/11 was not an inside job.

So what if there are 9/11 whistleblowers? What if these whistleblowers come from every level of government and private industry, individuals who have even had their cases vindicated by internal government reports? As you are about to see, there are numerous such whistleblowers and each one is a thorn in the side of those who want to pretend that the 9/11 Commission represents the sum total of knowledge on the 9/11 attacks. Click here to read the entire article.
___________________________________________________________

9/11 Family Member Patty Casazza: Government Knew Exact Date and Exact Targets

November 05, 2007
GeorgeWashington.blogspot.com

9/11 family member and "Jersey Girl" Patty Casazza has just revealed that whistleblowers told her that -- before 9/11 -- the government knew the exact day, the type of attack, and the targets.

Why is this important? Because, previously, some of the best-known whistleblowers have been willing to give only vague information about the government's foreknowledge. For example, they said only that the government knew of the general timeframe for the attacks, or that the government had a list of potential targets, on which the World Trade Center was one of many potential targets (of course, other whistleblowers have been more specific)...

Casazza further stated that these whistleblowers saw how Sibel Edmonds was being harrassed and gagged, and were fearful that the same thing would happen to them. So they approached the Jersey Girls to ask them to demand the 9/11 Commission subpoena the whistleblowers. The Jersey Girls tried to bring the whistleblowers before the 9/11 Commission, and the Commissioners agreed, but then never let the whistleblowers testify, let alone subpoena them.

Why is this important? Because defenders of the official government story have argued that 9/11 couldn't have been an inside job or else whistleblowers would have come forward. Ms. Cassaza confirms what many have said: there are a lot of 9/11 whistleblowers who are afraid to come forward -- especially without a supboena -- for fear of being attacked and harassed.

A video of Ms. Cassaza's statement has just been released:



Ms. Cassaza's statements were made at the 9/11: Families, First Responders & Experts Speak conference.

Many whistleblowers have, in fact, already come forward. See for example this video. And for a more comprehensive refutation of the argument about a lack of whistleblowers, see this.

Thanks to Jon Gold for his key participation in the conference, and for the tip.
___________________________________________________________

Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers - as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the "Phoenix Memo," David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration's order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the "Bojinka" plot, and John O'Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in The 9/11 Commission Report.)

Source:

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2008/08/top-40-reasons-official-911-story-is.html

Operation Gladio was a false-flag terror program set up by the CIA and NATO. Although Gladio was eventually exposed, it was not just a single event, but an ongoing operation that remained secret for decades, in which hundreds of innocent people were killed and injured in terrorist attacks that were blamed on other groups.
___________________________________________________________

How is it that none of the conspirators have changed their minds and come forward?

Operatives would be carefully screened to assure their loyalty to the attack's planners and to each other. Given the magnitude of the crime, admission of involvement would expose a conspirator to swift silencing by co-conspirators, vigilante justice by an outraged public, or harsh judgment by a court of law. It is also possible that many of the operatives could have been killed before or during the attack.

Source:

http://911research.wtc7.net/faq/conspiracy.html#whistleblowers