oh, it's satire.. you really had me going there for a minute. :)

Yea SBG, I think you should take this down dude, because if this is fake the headline looks real and it might damage the reputation of the site.

Below is real satire. It's a real gem. It gets to the heart of the matter of the boot-lickers who charge "conspiracy theorist" in order to shut down inquiry, by turning their own charge against them.

#####################################

http://www.shout.net/~bigred/vastcon

Pres. Bush Sees "Vast Conspiracy"

(Conspiracy Nation, 10/20/01) -- U.S. president George W. Bush is calling the Sept. 11th terror attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon a "vast, global conspiracy." But less paranoid observers scoff at the notion.

"This is a common American reaction to what are in reality merely random events," stated professor G. Steadfast of Oberlin college. "President Bush is exhibiting paranoid symptoms, part of what I call 'the paranoid style' in American politics."

Author Gerald Poser concurs: "What you have on September 11th is just three, random, lone nuts, who simultaneously hijacked planes. Because of the chance synchronicity of the events, which according to Chaos Theory, *can* happen, president Bush has jumped to paranoid conclusions. Case closed."

But conspiracy theorists throughout the world, drinking gallons of coffee and with tired eyes glued to the Internet late at night, aren't so sure. Some even venture beyond what president Bush has said. "I see an evil man with a towel wrapped around his head, sitting in a cave, as being the ultimate mastermind of the plot," said one of these caffeinated theorists.

Chirp Ballet, noted writer, laughs at the multiplying theories born from president Bush's original theory. "Of course, there are no conspiracies," he chuckled. "But beware of the crypto-fascists," he added, as an afterthought.

Also dismissing notions of a "conspiracy" behind the Sept. 11 terror attacks is Umberto Eco, author of "Foucault's Pendulum." Eco offered his own scholarly perspective on the Bush conspiracy theory: "Ever since Nietzche dethroned God, with his statement 'God is dead,' there has been a 'God vacuum.' People such as president Bush seek to fill that void by creating a new 'God,' in the form of a vast conspiracy," he proselytized. "Hence, Mr. Bush *needs* to see a 'vast conspiracy,' as a security blanket against God's demise."

But president Bush is adamant. "The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were the acts of crazed assassins, coordinated by the Devil," he insisted.

And, Bush adds, "What about that fourth plane that crashed in Pennsylvania?"

"Merely a random event, allowable in the framework of Chaos Theory," responded Poser.

As the guy who wrote this, I didn't mean to imply that the same company did both demolitions. Just that "Professional Demolition Company", which did 9/11, wasn't happy being compared with the "inferior" job at Landmark tower.

That was excellent GW, hopefully someone will see it.

However, press releases stating Charlie Sheen is questioning 9/11 does not have to be satire and doesn't have to fly under any radar. It is a fact, maybe some member of the press will pick up on it.

OK, stop laughing, it could happen.

cant even find charlie sheen in the old headlines section on drudge

http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/dsp/links_recap.htm

so much for a free press, drudge has done this before

israel shot down syrian migs 3 days after 9-11, and it wasnt reported until november 2004, after bushes second win

try finding that one on drudge

i got harrassed over that one, big time

Psychology teaches that many people screen information which conflicts with their already-formed beliefs.

I am all for pushing the facts straightforwardly and openly.

But satire -- and fiction -- can sometimes work on people who don't want to hear ANY facts that 9-11 was an inside job.

GeorgeWashington, people do indeed often mentally block out the truth.

My objection is in crafting satiracal press-releases, etc., in such a way that they pass for attempts at factual articles. Doing that will hurt the cause of truth more than it could help, as then people will be even more weary of taking seriously such topics as we deal with.

The best way to deal with people in denial is to give them what I call intellectual shock-therapy (not to be confused with so-called "shock therapy," which involves electrical shocks). That is, simply state the facts in a matter-of-fact way without being mealy-mouthed or wishy-washy.

Most people don't really know how to speak properly when it comes to winning over others, since we've all been indoctrinated into epistemological relativism--which is a great benefit to governments, since 2+2=4 may be true for Sally, whereas 2+2=5 is true for Johnny. The point is to not leave people in denial an "out"--since if you leave them an "out" via muddled thinking or muddled statements, people will take it.

People pick up on your leadership cues. If you act like you have a deep and dark dirty secret when you speak about the truth, or you crouch your staments with things like "I know this may sound crazy, but ..." then people will pick up on that. You give them ammunition because they can sense your fear of their rejection. It's like a wolf smelling blood.

But if you're bold and proud, and simply speak matter-of-factly without fear, then people will pick up on that, and sense that they can't shame you into conformity.

You've got to talk about the hated truth as if you were making a statement on the sky being blue. You've got to shame the people in denial for their attempts to believe the fallacies they cling on to.

You may not convert them on the spot, but you will have sown a seed.