From the BBC:

Al-Qaeda's deputy leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has blamed Iran for spreading the theory that Israel was behind the 11 September 2001 attacks.

Gee, I guess this kind of undermines McCain's belief in an Al-Qaeda/Iran connection.

It also kind of undermines my belief that people in the middle east don't wear tinfoil hats.

I've said it before about conspiracy theories..if they can get you to ask the wrong questions they don't have to worry about the answers. The word conspiracy is a pejorative and once it's uttered people are supposed to stop thinking and questioning. If one applies this theory to Al-Qaeda...one can just as easily ask or choose not to ask whether Al-Qaeda is a contrivance..it's plausible just as much as Zawahiri's accusation or maybe even McCain's. It's all part of plausible deniability ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability

Plausible deniability is the term given to the creation of loose and informal chains of command in governments and other large organizations. In the case that assassinations, false flag or black ops or any other illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any connection to or awareness of such act, or the agents used to carry out such act.

In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a "powerful player" or actor to avoid "blowback" by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party—ostensibly unconnected with the major player.

More generally, "plausible deniability" can also apply to any act that leaves little or no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse. Examples of this are the use of electricity or pain-compliance holds as a means of torture or punishment, leaving little or no tangible signs that the abuse ever took place.

Another example of plausible deniability is someone who actively avoids gaining certain knowledge of facts because it benefits that person not to know.

As an example, an attorney may suspect that facts exist which would hurt his case, but decide not to investigate the issue because if the attorney had actual knowledge, the rules of ethics might require him to reveal those facts to the opposing side. Thus his failure to investigate maintains plausible deniability.

I'll preemptively throw out....