Well Chuck, it's understandable that you have to censor things and I'm glad you're taking the time to explain your actions to people. It's more efficient to educate people on what you're doing than to simply try to eradicate them.

I hope that you don't let the extremists in the 9/11 truth movement push you past a point where you start to censor everything that is about questioning 9/11, as NYC Indymedia has recently done. The purpose of a significant percentage of people pushing missiles, pods, holograms and 'no planes' on 9/11 are likely trying to wear you down so you won't consider anything in that whole area worth your time NOT to censor. I, for one, do support 9/11 censorship of extremist positions such as pods under the planes, missiles fired from the pods, holograms or fake planes, and no planes, to some extent. I do, however, think the theory of demolition of the WTC towers collapses has merit because it is being scientifically analyzed with a massive amount of visual data. All of the disinfo theories around missiles and pods have only fuzzy single frames as 'evidence' or literally nothing at all except 'hypotheses.'

While the concept of demolition may seem extreme to some, it was not to people like Van Romero, Vice President of New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted as stating that the collapses of the Twin Towers were the result of explosive devices.

911review.com/coverup/romero.html

Naturally, he retracted it several days later. But the record is clear - even an expert automatically assumed it was demolition.