What do you KNOW?

Ask yourself this. How much do you really know? The first thing a person who sincerely seeks an answer to this question would do is secure a working definition of what it means "to know”. The dictionary gives one of many definitions that asserts that to "Know" is to observe facts and or truth. This, of course, begs the question of what is "fact" and what is "truth". However, when it comes down to it, for all intents and purposes, "to know" is to bare direct witness. Things that we cannot or have not bared direct witness to is “belief” or acceptance of what others assert. Hence, Bearing direct witness is the objective demarcation that separates knowledge from belief.

In this world, what we believe and or think we know is conditioned and programmed by who we trust. In the end those who we trust the most are those that we think have brought us the most benefit and least harm. This is because everything that everyone does is ultimately for a selfish reason and therefore whom and what we choose to trust is also an act of selfishness. All motives are selfish, the only distinction and difference between the various “self’s” in existence is what each places value in. For me, I may receive great personal satisfaction in giving to others, while another receives great personal satisfaction in having things that others don’t have. Both realities are selfish.

Initially, we learn to trust our parents and then other authority figures and institution that we believe demonstrate benefit to us. When a child is born unable to take care of itself, it learns to trust those who love, feed and nurture it the most. Eventually the programming and beliefs of the parents imprints a tremendous influence on what the child believes, from religion to politics. However, eventually, through personal experience and independence the child may drift away from the programming of the parents at it matures into adulthood. Consquently, through experience and or via socialization, people learn to trust the systems, institutions and ideologies based upon which brings them the most benefit.

In light of this, what we know is often simply what we believe and what we believe is the product of who we trust and who we trust is the product of who brings us benefit. Therefore, given that everything that everyone does is for a selfish reason, humans are reluctant to question those that we trust due to a fear of losing the benefits that those we trust provide or faciliate for us. If the benefit is unconditional there is little risk in questioning or challenging those we trust. However, if the benefit is perceived as conditional, then we are reluctant to question or challenge the authority figure or institution that brings the benefit.

That said, now ask the question of what do we KNOW about 911 and what do we believe and why? Certainly when the objective standards of crime solving are applied --(Motive, Means and Opportunity)-- there are entities in the US that meet all three criteria, yet, the vast majority of Americans will not entertain the notion of 911 being an “Inside Job”. Moreover, there is compelling evidence that refutes the “official” explanation from the US government, yet, people still refuse to entertain this notion of an “inside job”. Why? The answer to that question comes from the paragraphs above. It is because most Americans do not want to bite that hand that feeds it. They do not want to have an epiphany that forces them to make a moral choice that could threaten all the benefits provided or facilitated from the entity in question.

If 911 were indeed proven to be an inside job, the ramifications of it would tear the nation apart without question. This nation would go into political and economic upheaval, the likes of which have not been seen since the civil war. The international community would be in an outrage and loose even more faith and confidence in our system. Truth be told, confidence and trust is what is keeping our system afloat and if that is lost, the system will collapse. Hence, people fear the loss of their way of life, as they know it, and so they don’t want the moral dilemma of having to bite the hand that feeds it. Americans will thus simply look the other way and attack all those who dare question and threaten the system and their way of life.

The American people essentially do not care for "truth" when that truth potentially threatens their way of life. Truth may be a virtue but truth is not always a benefit. When truth is potentially harmful to the interest of millions of selves living in the USA, Americans we neither seek nor demand truth. In fact, not only will Americans not seek or demand such truths, they will attack anyone who does because such people pose a threat to their interest. Anyone who is willing to entertain America as a suspect is condemened and ostracized as unpatriotic and on the side of terrorist.