I don't understand how a person can honestly assert a conspiracy theory. I'll use 9/11 conspiracy for an example. The numerous documentaries that are floating around the internet assert that the President of the United States pulled off the most flawlessly executed mass murder and international crime without so much as a hickup in his plans. The evidence they produce is circumstancial, and can in many cases make you wonder; but when you dig deeper you can usually explain away just about everything when you look for the context. You see that the conspiracy is only visible when you turn on your tunnel vision and only follow the events as laid out by the theorist. My question is whether or not a theorist can do this without actually knowing it. Can he or she construct the thoery in such a way that the story is appears viable without knowing that they are trying to form the facts to fit their theory? I'm not so much asking about the theories as much as the people who generate them.