[inquest]

But some folks try to post stuff that claims the aircraft used in 9/11 were remoted controlled, or that Bush knew about the attacks beforehand, stuff like that.

I still don't see what's wrong with that. The moment we say that we won't even consider the possibility that government would do X, then we're providing government with the perfect cover to do X.

And even if somebody is posting something truly ludicrous, there's nothing harmful in that, unless he starts making nasty personal comments to those posters who might disagree with them. Attitudes towards other posters should be curtailed, but not ideas for discussion.

[dirtboy]

I still don't see what's wrong with that. The moment we say that we won't even consider the possibility that government would do X, then we're providing government with the perfect cover to do X.

The posts in question are completely ludicrous. We have radio and cell-phone communications from the planes that detail what was going on. But some folks claim the aircraft were under remote control. Any tinfoil stuff that is so blatantly against the facts does not belong here, because our opponents will use it against us as we pursue stuff with far more credibility, such as the Vince Foster matter or TWA 800. I've seen, on too many occasions, that the conservative anti-Clinton movement was derailed because we were too eager to lap up a conspiracy without sufficient evidence - the Danny Ferguson case is the classic example of that.

[habs4ever]

Nonsense.As if those thoughts don't cross our minds unless we see a trash article.You take the majority of conservatives for dummies? And its a necessary thing for us to read tin foil stuff to sharpen our minds??

Not ALL ideas are worthy of open discussion, unless the objective is to sow rancor.

After reading your Chesterton quote on your page, I think you know what I mean.Particulary about anarchists.