Frank's post on Flame about crop circles and political leanings contained no "assertion of fact." He clearly labelled his opinions and thoughts as such, yet you roasted not only him but also those who chose to participate--in good faith--in that discussion.

Well gosh, I'm sorry then. I never meant to upset anyone. It is kind of a pet peeve of mine that some folks think that if they get a number of people to agree with them, then it makes what they are saying true. Or if they find it posted on the internet in enough locations.

Also, in general, I think it is destructive to make associations like: "crop circle believers are typically lefties". How much discussion of a topic like that is warranted, without supporting proof? How different is it from a discussion of "blacks are typically criminals and love watermelon", or "Jews are moneygrubbers who like to manipulate from behind the scenes"? Even if you are only advancing the propositions as theory?

How is it the thoughts, speculations and suspicions of others are to be dismissed, yet your own are permissible?

I think speculation into Iraqis' feelings about foreign troops in their country is a politically relevant talking point. It is certainly something that I care very much about.