My Main Page
My philosophy page


Sheeple and Underdog Psychology

Denial of the Obvious

What does it mean when somebody describes a friend as "being in denial" about their alcoholism, abusive spouse, or retarded baby?
"I do not have a drinking problem!!

I simply enjoy a few drinks once in a while!"

How does a person get in denial, and how does a person get out of it? Do all of us experience this denial phenomenon at some point in our lives? How can you and I determine if we are in denial right now?

Building 7 lets us study "denial"

Whoever decided to demolish Building 7 of the World Trade Center provided us with a great opportunity to understand this mysterious characteristic of the human mind. We don't need a government grant for a study of denial, and we don't need to ask for volunteers to be part of the study.

Instead, Building 7 allows us to closely observe this denial process with people we know intimately; namely, our friends and relatives. This can help us understand why so many problems are ignored.

Millions of Americans still do not know what Building 7 is or what happened to it since most people get their information from the television. These people are useful in a study of denial. All we have to do is expose them to information about Building 7 and then we can observe the issue of denial in a variety of people that we know intimately.

An example with my relatives

For an example that happened with me, in the summer of 2004 some of my relatives got together for dinner. At one point I was criticized for believing that our government was involved in the September 11th attack.

I waited for them to stop talking, and then I asked them something like, "So how did Osama cause Building 7 to collapse?" I then remained quiet and motionless because I wanted one of them to make the first move.

All of my relatives are above average intelligence, had an above average education, and make above average incomes. Since they had all seen my book or video, they knew about Building 7. However, everybody was completely motionless and silent. They all had a blank expression on their face.

After what seemed like several seconds of awkward silence, but which was probably only one or two seconds, somebody changed the subject, and the other people quickly began discussing that other subject. None of them brought up the issue of the September 11th attack again that evening.

Why did they change the subject? Why won't they discuss the issue of Building 7? Why is it that I and some other people can talk about it, but not the majority of people? What makes me different from my own relatives?


What was happening inside their minds?

All of my relatives are intelligent enough to understand that Building 7 was demolished with explosives. However, there seems to be something different between us emotionally.

My guess is that the collapse of Building 7 is so obviously a scam that it caused unpleasant images to appear in their minds. For example, perhaps they visualized the thousands of people trapped at the top of the towers, and occasionally jumping out of the windows, with government officials watching and laughing.

"There goes #54."

"Hey, above him! A couple just jumped while holding hands! Isn't that sweet?"

"That makes 56! Looks like you guys will owe me a beer!" 

Perhaps they also worried that government officials will send an assassin to kill them for knowing that the September 11th attack was a scam. An image of Oswald being silenced by Jack Ruby may have passed through their mind.

Perhaps they were so frightened by the thought of assassins that they wished they had never learned the truth about the September 11th attack.

Furthermore, as soon as a person realizes that the September 11th attack was a government operation, he will realize that the television news reporters that he respected have either been lying to him, or they are so incompetent that they don't know something that millions of other people not only know about, but are desperately trying to tell people about.

This can cause more frightening images to appear in their mind. They may visualize their TV heroes as monsters.

"Yes, my little darlings... Osama, the Wicked Arab from the East, attacked you on 9-11."
Or they may visualize their TV heroes as clueless nitwits who are easily manipulated.

 Building 7?

What's that?"

In order for my relatives to admit that the September 11th attack was a scam, they must be able to deal with the fact that our nation is corrupt beyond most people's wildest nightmares; that the media is lying to them; and that the criminals might try to kill them if they talk about it. Unfortunately, I don't think my relatives have the emotional strength to deal with such thoughts.

When I brought up the issue of Building 7, I think my relatives became frightened at the images that started appearing in their minds.

After a brief period of panic, one of my relatives could no longer handle it and so he changed the subject. The other people quickly switched to that other subject in an attempt to replace those unpleasant images with something less traumatic.

Dust caused Building 7 to collapse?

I am not alone in observing this inability to face reality. For example, a person gave my DVD to one of his relatives, who is a civil engineer. A few days later he asked the engineer if he agreed that the World Trade Center buildings were demolished with explosives. The engineer responded that my DVD was stupid.

When asked how Building 7 collapsed, the engineer responded that a lot of dust fell on top of Building 7 when the towers collapsed, and the building was probably not designed to handle all that dust. He then made a remark similar to: "I don't want to talk about it any more. I don't believe it was a conspiracy!

That engineer certainly had the intelligence to understand that Building 7 was demolished with explosives rather than dust, but I suppose he did not have the emotional qualities necessary to deal with the issue. Since he knew there was no way he could defend the official government story, and there was no way he could support his Dust Demolished a Skyscraper theory, his reaction was to demand that discussions about Building 7 be terminated immediately.

Ignore it and it disappears

Many people assume that if they ignore Building 7, the issue will vanish. It reminds me of how children assume that if they cover their eyes, nobody can see them. Small children are lousy at playing the game "Hide and go seek" because they assume: if I cannot see you, then you cannot see me.
Adults also assume that if they ignore a problem, the problem vanishes.
Of all events that happened during the September 11th attack, it seems that more people have trouble dealing with the collapse of Building 7 than any of the other events. Why is Building 7 so difficult for people to talk about?

I think it is because the collapse of Building 7 is so obviously a demolition by explosives that almost everybody can understand the government is lying to us. By comparison, the airplane crash in Pennsylvania is so mysterious that people can easily convince themselves that it crashed because Todd Beamer and other heroes bravely fought the Arab terrorists.

Building 7 makes people realize that the 9-11 attack was a scam, and that causes frightening images to pass through their minds. Most people react by trying to hide from the issue. The obviousness of the scam and the refusal of people to deal with it allows us to closely observe this characteristic of the human mind to deny the obvious.

My relatives reacted to Building 7 with panic and silence, and then one of them changed the subject. Other people have reacted by trying to justify the collapse, such as by claiming dust or stress caused the building to collapse. And some people react by trying to terminate discussions with remarks similar to:

  • Even if it was a scam, there is nothing we can do about it.
  • If this book is correct, that would be depressing.
  • Why are you bringing 9-11 up? That was years ago.
  • I don't want to talk about it.
  • I think people are tired of hearing about 9-11.
  • I don't believe in conspiracy theories.
  • A Door to Reality

    When I realized the September 11th attack was a scam, it felt as if I was opening a door to hell. Actually, it was a door to reality.
    to the
    However, I did not get frightened and run away. Instead, I started looking around in amazement at what a corrupt place this world is. I also started to meet people who had entered reality long before me. Some of them told me that September 11th was just one of many scams. I soon realized that there is a lot more lying and deception than I ever would have guessed.

    It occurred to me that the people who carried out the 9-11 attack might try to kill me for producing a book and video about the subject, but rather than get frightened, I decided it was worth the risk. The way I look at it, we risk our lives every time we drive a car, so why not take a risk for something much more important, such as making the world a better place?

    Besides, any of us could die soon from a brain tumor, a heart attack, or cancer. Or we might develop Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, or muscular dystrophy. I would be extremely upset with myself if I did nothing about this scam out of fear of being killed, and then a year later I develop cancer.

    Denial with Al Capone

    The denial of reality can be seen a hundred years ago when Americans were ignoring the corruption in Chicago, New York, Boston, and other cities.

    People such as Al Capone were committing crimes in front of everybody. The police knew the gangsters were committing crimes, the government officials knew it, the university professors knew it, and the common citizen knew it. However, most people ignored the gangsters.

    Capone talking to Police Chief John Stege about... what? Perhaps:

    "I'm going after Bugs Moran. I need police uniforms and squad cars. I got $50 for you if you don't screw up."

    One of the reasons people justified ignoring Capone was that Capone killed other gang members, not "normal" people, and that the only people he was making money from where the people who wanted alcohol, prostitution, and gambling.

    However, when you ignore crime and government corruption, you make life worse for everybody. A corrupt government will hurt society partly by doing a lousy job as government, and partly by hurting the morale of the citizens. 

    Actually, there is evidence that many of our city governments are corrupt even today, but most people ignore the issue, just as they did a hundred years ago.

    How are children affected by corruption?

    Why does my mother want to ignore the September 11th attack? Perhaps because of her personality. My mother has never been the type of person to wander away from the crowd and make her own decisions. However, part of the reason she wants to ignore corruption may be because of her childhood.

    Once I was complaining to her that a corrupt government is not a trivial issue, and she responded that when she was growing up in New Jersey, it was well known that there was corruption in the New Jersey government. Her attitude was essentially, "The government was corrupt when I was a child, so this is nothing new. We cannot defeat the criminals, anyway, since they control the government."

    Was this my mother's way to justify doing nothing? Or is it possible that one of the reasons millions of Americans ignore the September 11 attack is because they grew up in a society where corruption, shoplifting, burglaries, murder, and security devices are a common part of life?

    Are Americans becoming accustomed to crime and corruption? Are Americans developing the attitude that the criminals are invincible? Are Americans developing the attitude that their police, courts, lawyers, and FBI are incompetent and corrupt?

    Is it possible that when children are raised in a corrupt society that they become adults who are more likely to cheat their government and justify it with such remarks as, "I'm just getting back what this corrupt government took from me"?

    What happens to children who are raised among adults who condemn corporations for abuse, corruption, and greed? Would they be likely to develop the attitude that stealing a hotel towel is "taking a souvenir"? Or that stealing a laptop computer from a corporation or cheating an insurance company is "getting what I deserve from the corrupt and greedy corporations"? 

    Crime is OK if you pay your taxes

    Most government employees are just like most of the population. Specifically, they do not want to know about, or deal with, crime and corruption. If you doubt it, just visit your local government offices and talk to the employees about Building 7. You will find that they ignore Building 7 just like the employees of private businesses.

    Most government officials ignore crime, and many of them participate in it. This is why Al Capone could openly commit crimes for years.

    However, everybody worries about losing their job. When government officials discovered that Al Capone was cheating on his taxes, they panicked.

    If they allowed Capone to get away with cheating on his taxes, then other criminals might cheat, and then the customers of their gambling casinos and brothels might start cheating, and then some of the common citizens might decide to cheat.

    If tax revenue were to decrease, the government officials would have to cut their salaries and/or fire one another. Nothing strikes fear into the hearts of our government officials more than the thought of looking for real work. As a result, the most serious crime an American can commit is tax evasion.

    I want you
    to help me
    avoid a real job
    The government ignored Capone's crimes until they realized he was cheating on his taxes. He was then quickly put in jail. This sent a message to every criminal that they had better pay their taxes or they will go to jail, also.

    The government justifies arresting Capone on tax evasion rather than some other crime on the grounds that he was so incredibly clever that they could not figure out how to arrest him for any other crime. If you believe that, then I suppose you will believe the people who did the September 11 attack are also too clever to be caught.

    The enormous number of investigations that our government conducts each year of income tax returns, and the lack of action on serious crimes, is evidence that the primary concern of the US government is avoiding real work

    The lesson to learn from Al Capone is that if the people who committed the September 11th attack pay their taxes, the government will ignore them on the grounds that they are too clever to be arrested.

    The income tax issue becomes more interesting when you consider that the Federal Reserve system and the federal income tax is another of the many scams that Americans are denying.
    I have some information about themoney and banking scam.

    Denial With Unwanted Pets

    The denial of reality can also be seen in the refusal of people to deal with the issue of unwanted pets. Thousands of cats and dogs are abandoned every year in America. Most people justify this by saying they are letting the animals be "free".

    Most people are intelligent enough to understand that releasing unwanted pets into a city, or even releasing them into a forest, will cause the pet to suffer and die, but not many people have the emotional strength to deal with this issue. So they create a fantasy in which they are heroes for letting the animal be free. They ignore reality and tell themselves what they want to hear.

    These people could be described as "living in a dream world", or they could be described as "being in denial" about the cruelty they are inflicting on their unwanted pet.

    Very few people who release animals can be honest and say something like: "I no longer want this animal, so I am abandoning it, and I don't care what happens to it."

    We prefer to devise explanations for our actions that make us appear to be wonderful people with good intentions. The explanations are often idiotic, but that doesn't stop us from doing it.

    Our attitudes affect our society

    The people who release animals into the city on the grounds that they want the animal to be free are probably considered by most Americans to be foolish or naive.

    By comparison, the person who releases his unwanted pet on the grounds that he just doesn't want it any longer and doesn't care what happens to it would probably be regarded as cruel

    In both cases the end results are exactly the same. The only difference is in the attitudes of the people who released the animals. Is one attitude better than another? Is a person who creates a fantasy for himself better than a person who is honest?

    The attitudes of a society will affect life for all citizens, especially children, so what should our attitudes towards unwanted pets be? 

    To complicate the issue, consider a third person who kills his unwanted pet on the grounds that abandoning it in the city would bother other people and cause it to suffer a slow death.

    Should people be encouraged to kill their unwanted animals?
    How about a fourth person who roams the streets at his own expense to find stray animals, take them to his home, and then looks for people to adopt them? Assume he ends up like most of the people who do this; specifically, his home is full of animals in cages that he cannot find homes for. Should we encourage more people to behave like him in order to reduce the number of unwanted animals each person has to take care of?
    Should people be encouraged to search for unwanted animals, take them home, and then hope they can find homes for them?
    Next, consider a fifth person; a government employee whose full time job is to pick up the unwanted animals and kill them. Should our city governments hire more of these people so that they can pick up and kill more of the unwanted animals?

    Finally consider a sixth person; a person who considers dogs and cats to be food. A lot of South Vietnamese citizens came to America when the Vietnam War ended. Hundreds of them settled a couple miles from my home. Some of those immigrants picked up the unwanted dogs, took them home, and ate them.

    Should we encourage people to eat the unwanted pets?

    What if the butchering is done by shops?

    I described six different attitudes towards unwanted pets. Which, if any, should we be encouraging? How does selecting one attitude rather than another affect our nation? Can you discuss this issue?

    Most people are not capable of discussing this issue seriously, so most people have no idea of how significant the problem is. In Indianapolis about22,000 unwanted cats and dogs were killed by the city during the year 2000. The city of Indianapolis wastes millions of dollars a year catching and killing the unwanted animals.

    Most cities do not have as many unwanted pets as Indianapolis, but, even so, a lot of money is wasted nationwide because a lot of Americans are abandoning a lot of pets. This is not a trivial issue. Rather, most people ignore it because they cannot handle it and refuse to deal with it.

    Denial With Unwanted Humans

    The issue of unwanted humans is also difficult for most people to deal with. Just as pets are routinely abandoned, so are humans routinely abandoned in orphanages, convalescent hospitals, city streets, and mental institutions. These unwanted humans are ignored by the majority of people.

    Most people have no idea how many people are abandoned each year, and they don't want to know. Furthermore, most people have no idea what life is like in an orphanage, and they have no desire to find out. If the issue of orphanages or unwanted children is brought up, most people will change the subject.

    There are also terminally ill people dying a slow death every day.
    A few terminally ill people are selected for special attention by the media, such as Terri Schiavo in Florida, but the vast majority are ignored.

    Rather than discuss this issue seriously, most people prefer to focus on one person, such as Terri Schiavo, and fool themselves into believing that their concern about this one person is somehow making the world a better place.

    Most people ignore the issue of unwanted people, just as they ignore the issue of Building 7, unwanted pets, Al Capone, and other problems.

    Some orphans are the result of parents who abandon their children, and some are the result of their parents dying from war or natural disasters.

    Do you have any interest in dealing with this problem?

    Or are you feeling an urge right now to ignore it?

    Supposedly, more than one million babies are aborted in America each year. Therefore, if nobody performed abortions, that would result in a million unwanted children each year. The people who oppose abortions refuse to discuss the issue of what will happen to the additional million unwanted children each year.

    Many of the people who want to stop abortions have no concern over the fate of the unwanted child. They do not care if the child ends up in an orphanage or the city streets. They also don't care if the child is sent to Iraq, and then comes back home suffering from uranium exposure. There are very few Americans who care about the quality of life.

    Why are there so many abortions?

    An issue that both pro and anti abortion groups refuse to discuss is why so many women want to abort their babies. How can we solve a problem when we refuse to discuss all the underlying causes of the problem?

    Most people try to solve problems with little or no research into the cause of the problem. A simple example were the attempts centuries ago to stop children from being left-handed. Before you force a child to be right-handed, you should understand why he is trying to be left-handed.

    Once you understand why a child wants to be left-handed, you will realize that there is virtually nothing you can do to change it, at least not with the technology we have today.

    A more complex example is alcoholism. Prohibition was an attempt to stop alcohol problems, but we still have no understanding of why people abuse alcohol, or even why people like to get mildly intoxicated. Is it any wonder that we cannot stop alcohol problems?

    Future generations might discover that the abuse of alcohol, drugs, gambling, food, and sex is merely a symptom of other problems, such as chemical imbalances in the blood; a lousy social environment that creates awkwardness, stress, and loneliness; and disorders of the mind. Some of those problems may in turn be due to genetic disorders, industrial foods, radiation, and pollutants.

    The issue of crime is similar. We are trying to stop crime with laws and jails, but we have not done anything to stop crime yet. When are we going to discuss the causes of crime?

    Should adults exploit children?

    As of February 2005, Michael Jackson is on trial to determine whether he had improper contact with a young boy, and if so, what should his punishment be.

    I think the court should be discussing the issue of whether we should continue to allow adults to exploit children for profit and entertainment.

    Businesses make a lot of money when they use children for entertainment. The children themselves and their parents also make lots of money. But does the making of money justify denying a child a proper childhood?

    Thousands of American children are being pushed by their parents into becoming entertainers, beauty pageant Queens, athletes, and musicians. Are any of these children turning out to be happier, more productive adults compared to the children who are permitted to have a more "normal", more relaxed childhood? If not, these parents could be described as abusive.

    Why not prohibit businesses and other organizations from using children in any manner? If children want to play a game of baseball, or have a beauty contest, why not let them do it themselves? Why should adults dominate the activities of children to such an extent that their children become toys that the parents use for their own entertainment?

    Shouldn't adults have adult friends and adult activities? Why are American adults so deeply involved in the activities of children? Many people criticize Michael Jackson for his close relationships with children, but I think millions of Americans have unnatural relationships with children.

    It is normal for parents to play with their children once in a while, and it is normal for parents to arrange activities for young children. However, I think most Americans are using their children for entertainment, and I think the reason is because most American adults are lonely and unhappy.

    Why are Americans having children? Are they really interested in the responsibility of raising children? Is their true goal to raise children to become happy, healthy adults who enjoy life?

    Or do they consider children to be a potential source of happiness? Are they hoping that children will bring relief to their miserable, lonely lives?

    Many people accuse Michael Jackson as a pedophile, but it may be more accurate to describe him a victim of a sick society.

    If Michael Jackson had been allowed to have a normal childhood, he might have become a normal adult. Instead he has become a creature that future generations will probably use as an example of what happens when a society puts such extreme emphasis on money and entertainment that children are denied a proper childhood.

    Millions of Americans insult Michael Jackson, but I think that insulting Michael Jackson is insulting America. Michael Jackson is a product of America. He seems to be just one of millions of lonely, frustrated Americans.

    Michael Jackson has turned to children for friendship and love, while other Americans have turned to dogs, television, money, or drugs. Is a person who has a dog for a best friend better than Michael Jackson?

    We are not going to make this nation better by hating Michael Jackson. We must stop hating and pouting and start trying to understand what is wrong with our society.

    Has life really improved?

    Nobody knows exactly what life was like a thousand years ago, but it seems to me that we have more crime today. I suspect there is a lot more loneliness, also, and a lot more fighting between men and women. It also seems that dogs and television sets have become most people's best friends. And some people have relationships mainly through computers or cell phones.

    Not many people can have a serious discussion of any of these issues. How about you? Can you discuss these issues calmly? Or when someone brings these issues up, do you panic and change the subject? Or do you present your opinion, and then announce,
    "I don't want to talk about it any more"?

    If you think you are capable of dealing with reality, perhaps you'd like to consider the possibility that aborted fetuses are being eaten in China. There are photos on the Internet to support this accusation, such as a sequence of photos that show the man below washing the fetus, cutting it into pieces, cooking it, and eating it. There are also reports that the placenta is eaten in China.

    Are people really eating fetuses? Or have these photos been created to shock us? Assume these photos are real; can you have an intelligent conversation about this subject?

    Why would anybody eat a fetus? Are these people evil? Should we try to stop them from eating fetuses?

    Are Americans better because we eat pigs, chicken eggs, and cow's milk?

    What would you think if the population continues to rise in Asia, and some people decide to eat their grandparents after they die?