And intellectually dishonest if it does not honestly address issues such as those raised by Mr. Salvorhardin. I disagree with him when he seemingly implies the whole of 9/11 skepticism is bigoted. (Correct me if I've read incorrectly).
The lack of self-honesty and consistant application of standards is extremely appalling. The comment in the DU rules about speculative theories specifically addresses the fact of these shortcomings and how they are viewed by the majority of membership. From my understanding and observation, the rule was a case of Vox Populi. It also is a matter of consistency. If people here object to threads about "Chemtrails" and "Weather Manipulation" constantly being thrown down here, then why do they also not object to using sources which are usually no more than one recommended link away from sites which espouse such things?
Also, do I think people here are bigots? For the vast majority, no. What I see for the most part are people who are genuinely disaffected with government and people who disagree as to the nature of the story the government is not telling. Oh yes, it has been definitely shown the government has lied about 9/11 to further it's agenda and the personal fortunes of several of it's membership. There is definitely a story not being told. The issue of course here in the forum is if it is theft after the fact, gross incompetence (either criminal or negligent), LIHOP or MIHOP.
That said, it is also a fact there are groups of people who are preying upon the 9/11 issue with "easy" answers, consisting mostly of rehashed memes of one sort or another repurposed to take advantage of 9/11, in order to further their agendas and/or enrich their pocket books. Many of these groups are bigoted. I can guarantee you that this is not the story and due diligence must be taken to avoid enriching or legitimatizing these people who are definitely not progressive and are not our allies. The real story lies elsewhere.
As for the deletion, it was honest. I had hoped to re-focus and salvage the original thread from being strongly unilateral and accusatory to bilateral and open in its questioning, but it was deleted before I could do that.