Don > I can't help but wonder if while being critical of the official story, an almost religious willingness to believe anything that isn't official, as a matter of faith, isn't doing some very real damage in researchers capacity to remain objective
I can't speak for others but, for me, the official story doesn't work -- it doesn't do justice to the observable "facts", as I see them. It isn't a matter of non-belief, or principle, it's about not being able to intellectually satisfy myself with what I have been told.
I have always been a "free thinker" and I have an independent view on most subjects, ranging from politics to religion to investment, as I am sure you do. A great deal of what exists in life eg history, world affairs, astronomy, economics, psychology, one has to take on faith simply because one doesn't have enough "tools" to prove anything one way or another. I imagine it is how one feels about/understands these uncertain / immeasurable aspects which determines one's view on life itself. Put differently, it is one's subjectivity which determines one's objectivity.
For me, what happened on 9-11 is not a matter one can take on faith. It is too important and relevant to the world in which I live to simply accept what I have been told and be done with it. In fact, it is even more important than that because I don't believe what I have been told and I am therefore forced to mistrust the one who told me the story. Like a sore finger, my thoughts pain me. Indeed, the conclusion which I have come to, that the US government was involved in what occurred, upsets me. I wish I had not come to that conclusion and I could go on as before -- but I can't. The world has changed and I must change with it. |
