@[deleted]
When we talk about conspiracy we move from the structuring tendencies of society and the state to the analytics of risk and reward for individuals or for small cadres within the "deep state" …
In the case of prejudiced, heavy-handed policing in a racially polarised community there is little or no risk, which is why these behaviours become systematic, and why Darren Wilson becomes a millionaire cause célèbre rather than a pariah after shooting Mike Brown to death.
(Can I just say though, what you relate about your own experiences is a disgrace to the authorities.)
By contrast, if preparations for the horrific attacks in Paris were in any way known of, and allowed to progress by any French official it would be enough to tear careers apart and generate long jail terms and enormous public fear and loathing. The risks are very high.
Given what was in the balance for anyone in the position to enact such a criminal conspiracy, unless there's more substantial evidence, I think we'd be better off accepting in this case that jet fuel can melt steel beams.
Another example of this was how immediately after the Bataclan murders there were reports of the attackers screaming Allahuakbar and "This is for Syria", which were shortly afterwards refuted by every single witness of the attacks.
This sort of critique I agree with—along with the instant skepticism about claims the attackers had entered France posing as refugees—but this is a case of embellishment by sociopathically racist journalists, rather than anything to do with plans made before the fact. In any case, as it turns out, if the attackers did not truly yell "God is great!" they might as well have done, since they were religious fanatics.
