Bill, how can you suggest even the remotest possibility that the alleged airline plot, uncovered by the British, might be phoney; an example of provocateuring? The next thing you know, you’ll be telling us that the rationale for the war in Iraq was grounded in lies, forgeries, and other deceits, and then what will become of our trust in government?!

Whenever something like the current airline “plot” occurs, I recall the question uttered by ancient Romans following the assassination of any prominent political figure: “cui bono,” or “who benefitted?” Rothbard was instrumental in reviving this question as it relates to modern politics. That X might have benefitted from Y’s murder doesn’t establish X’s guilt in the matter, but it’s a very rational place from which to begin an investigation.

I have long believed that the most important question human beings ever face is the epistemological one: how do we know what we know? Upon what basis do we form our values and opinions about the nature of the world? This is an inquiry most people are unwilling to make, particularly if it involves a questioning of our own beliefs.

Coming on the day following Joe Lieberman’s upset loss in the Connecticut Democratic primary – to a heretofore unknown but antiwar opponent; and Israel’s stepped-up invasion of Lebanon – which has received a great deal of worldwide criticism; is it possible that the arrest of over twenty persons in an alleged plot to blow up airliners might – just might – have been concocted to deflect public attention from events that have proven embarrassing to the political establishment? The none-too-swift cable television purveyor of balloon-juice, Glenn Beck, may have given away more than he knew when, in commenting upon the alleged airline plot and the post-Lieberman fallout, declared that “this may not be the time to be antiwar.” Really? Might it have been to anyone else’s interests to get that message out to candidates and voters before it becomes popular to take an anti-Bush stance?

At times such as these, even the raising of such questions to pursue will be met with charges of “conspiracy theorizing.” In the words of my late friend, Chris Tame, I am not interested in conspiracy theories; I am interested in the facts of conspiracies. One thing is very clear: the alleged airline plot represents a conspiracy. The only question relates to WHOSE conspiracy? Either some non-governmental “terrorist” group has plotted to carry out such an atrocity – a very distinct possibility – or someone else has found it to their “benefit” to create the impression that such a conspiracy exists. How would we find out which answer is the correct one?

And so, for purposes of the Epistemology 101 exam, the two-part question is this: (1) “cui bono?” Who would benefit from the revelation of such an alleged plot at this time?, and (2) is there any evidence – other than just governmental and media assertions – as to who, in fact, conspired either to blow up airliners, or to create the impression that such a plot existed?

This is an open-book exam and, unlike traditional exams, you may look at your neighbor’s work for insights!

The Best of Butler Shaffer