I admit there are serious issues in that article that are ignored, like as Lordathestrings suggests, the fact that the attack seems to have been years in the making. However, it's like the debate about whether Bush knew anyhting about the S11 attacks before they happened. It's not so much whether he did, as I honestly believe that he would have done anything he could to stop it happening, and it's not whether the pipeline deal actually sparked off S11, but instead just the information on the deal. It's the kind of pressure that the American government puts on other countries to further their own economic interests, without thought for the possible consequences. I don't believe that there is a "right wing conspiracy", just as I don't believe there is a left-wing one, but I do think that there are passages in that article worth thinking about.
What was all the rhetoric about dealing with terrorists, etc, that Bush came up with after the attacks? Seeing as his government seems to have had a lot to do with regimes supporting terrorism, it's an interesting call to make.