FACT: You have no clue as to where the rumours came from because the discjockey spreading them will not name his source.
FACT: You cannot prove his source is wrong, either.
Free Republic is kind of a unique place. Articles from news sources are posted, and people come along, read them, and when the mood strikes them, they comment on those articles. There are all kinds of comments, from the informative (someone who might know about the subject matter) to the humorous all the way to--please note--the speculative.
On almost every thread, assuming there are any comments at all, someone is speculating about different aspects of the originally posted article.
On the Elian threads, for instance, you and I and many others speculated that there were backroom deals being made by the Clinton crime family and their cohorts. I didn't notice you flinching from that particular bit of speculation, even though that's all it was at the time. It turned out we were right (graft is always a safe guess with the Clintons), but nevertheless, we could have just as easily been maligning innocent people who were just doing their jobs in a proper manner. We had no hard evidence of our own.
As it happens, you and some others are speculating that there is nothing wrong with the parents' lifestyle and that it had nothing whatever to do with the child's disappearance. Others of us are speculating just the opposite. We're all speculating, yes, even you.
I'm really starting to take offense at all this mudslinging, simply because we're doing what is always done on Free Republic: we're reading the originally posted article from news sources, pointing out discrepancies in "official" stories and timelines, and posting our speculations about these. If you want the speculation to stop, I suspect you'd best write to Jim Robinson and ask him to disallow commentary on posted articles. I doubt that he will, but hey, it's your call.
And Luis, I would like to add that Jim Robinson has asked us not to use this board for personal attacks. Liar is an ugly word, and not necessarily true in this instance, since most of us--including you--are speculating about what might have happened that night. Debate is one thing, but now it's getting personal, and it shouldn't.
You're not going to win this debate by being the ugliest, or with the "my font is bigger than your font" ploy. The people who will win this debate will be the ones who speculated most correctly about what really happened. Your side or ours, one will certainly eat crow, but let me say that it's going to taste most bitter for those who departed from mere debate and chose the personal attack route instead. Just a thought for all of us to ponder.