On September 11, 2001 I became a member of the "I shall no longer doubt anything outside of the mainstream so that I can better profit from the global domination programme" club. It was on that day that a guy on a dialysis machine (not really, but I don't ask questions, remember?) in the mountains of Afghanistan sent 10 of his friends to strike the World Trade Center, even though the government was vigilant and taking all possible measures to counter such things. Within hours I was aflame with wild fantasies of Bush and his staff, and the story they had put out.
I realised that to question the official story of 9/11 is an act of irresponsible citizenship and I realised that there were already too many people gaining money and fame off of that. Within hours, I fired my first salvo: I invented a phrase (well I borrowed it) called "conspiracy theory" to be applied to all those who believed in asking any form of questions about the One True Story.
I had begun my plunge down the fame hole. Within hours, my posts were spreading over the Internet and radio, in defence of the radical, passionate One True Story. I called everyone else "conspiracy theorists". Not long afterward, other prominent personalities (especially one dude named Hitchens) produced analysis similar to mine concluding that those with any sort of doubts are wackos, lunatic and so on. It was becoming clear that our enemies (the conspiracy theorists, not Osama) were a front for thinkers, who do not worship the one popular story.
I shouldn't have been surprised. In performing my rituals of faith I had spent enough time studying the "doubt movement" to get a feel for its style: its tone of scepticism, the range of questions, the thorough use of doubt. A common refrain in conspiracy circles is the claim that "We are just asking questions". One would think that at least some of those unwilling to believe the One True Story might welcome a mainstream'ing publication of the story, but one would be wrong. The fuckers reject the labels! Why is it that they do not see the lack of ideology in my referring in the same sentence to those who ask questions as conspiracy circles?