Here's the punch line - right up front: The major flaw in "truth" is that it is merely what someone - or a group of someones - believes to be true.

That is to say, whatever you believe to be 'thus and so' is the only acceptable truth in your mind and heart, regardless of what others (and the rest of the world, for that matter) may think.

This is why there are multiple religions, opposing political parties, myriad formulae for world peace and lively discussions at cocktail parties.

That the holocaust occurred in Europe a few short decades ago is indelibly written in history, but there are those - even in this enlightened day and age - to whom this is untrue. Ditto the participation of Arabs in the events of 9/11 and the demise of Elvis The Pelvis.

Call them blind, stupid, wacko, or all the above, but they do not believe, in the face of empirical evidence, that these events occurred. Thus, to them, that is incontrovertibly "the truth."

Well, you might say, they're just wrong about that, but we're not talking about correct vs. incorrect, but the essence of truth, which can only exist in conjunction with belief.

For example, it can't be "true" that a militant Islamist who blows himself and a bunch of innocent "infidels" to smithereens automatically buys himself a ticket to heaven and the favor of seventy-two hot-to-trot virgins, can it?

Ask the next suicide/homicide terrorist you meet, or the loving mother of the most recent "martyr."

If it's true that really obese people shouldn't appear at public beaches underclad in bikinis and super-skimpy Speedos, it is a veracity that escapes them, their mirrors and, if they're still living at home, their parents. To them, though, what you see is not what they 'get.'

Pathological liars, practicing politicos and opportunistic lovers practice a time-honored alchemy which transforms their falsehoods into accuracies to which they would swear on any Bible or pedestal within reach.

There are, though, notable exceptions to the link between belief and truth, two of them being diplomacy and law.

Diplomats have been fairly described as eloquent people who have been hired to lie for their countries, and the UN stands as evidentiary exhibits A (Afghanistan) through Z (Zimbabwe).

There's also this: Chiseled in stone on courthouses throughout the land is the lofty slogan, "We who labor here seek only the truth" - a pronouncement with all the genuineness of a used-car dealer's sales pitch. I tend to agree with Jake Lassiter, a fictional barrister in several of Paul Levine's excellent crime novels, who suggested adding, "subject to the truth being misstated by sleazy lawyers, overlooked by incompetent judges, and ignored by lazy jurors." The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth are (I believe) three early casualties at the bar of American justice.

In our government, truth is entrusted to the care, custody, control and interpretation of designated "leaders," whose dicta must be followed by all co-partisans unwilling to be shunned and denied elevation on the totem pole of power.

Ditto those trapped in mid-level bureaucracies, whether public, private or institutional. They may believe as they choose within the confines of their thoughts and confidential comments, but they must espouse only the "truths" pronounced from above, blowing whistles at great personal peril.

The bottom line of all this is that there are, with the exceptions noted herein, as many possible "truths" about a given subject as there are individual beliefs about it, making "the" truth as elusive as a greased pig or a teen-type at chore time.

Therefore, those among us who are respectful of real truth should defend our beliefs, but cut some slack for the differing "truths" that represent others' strongly-held beliefs, including religious as well as secular views.

It is an often-neglected process called understanding - a process that doesn't require abandonment of one's own beliefs, but only tolerance of the "truth" as seen by others.

The "ayes" may have it among those who agree with us, but those with other beliefs are no less entitled to feel as they do.

The world is big enough for the coexistence of conflicting beliefs, but not when one truth carries with it the condemnation and persecution of another.

A good rule to follow is to admire those who honestly pursue truth, but be wary of those who have found one for themselves and wish to deny others a similar satisfaction.