2Timothy, you posted this right as I was trying to get my post typed--we came to a similar conclusion on the writer's motivation for the article. You have concluded, though, that the writer has the false assumption that the 9/11 conspiracy theory IS a fact, and I realize that you may know more about this particular individual than I have read so far.
And that brings me to a question that Rufus' other post brought to mind: Out of the admittedly ONLY FOUR anti-mainstream-theory pages I've read so far on 9/11, ALL of them (sorry I don't have the page names with me) proffered the argument that -- at the very least --the Pentagon was NOT hit by the plane the government claims hit it. But you're saying that "There is no commonly held "conspiracy theory" that suggests that two airplanes did not strike the two towers." So, I'm assuming this means that the 9/11 Truth movement's general consensus, then, revolves around the belief that the PERPETRATORS are not who the govt says, and/or that the govt was actually involved in the execution of the attacks. Does that sum it up accurately?