I am currently watching "V for Vendetta", a movie that I must admit I've pretty much loved since I first watched it, entirely in spite of its politics, not because of it. While we could get into the discussion of the politics of the movie, that's irrelevant to the subject I have chosen. I merely made mention of it to paint the backdrop for the discussion and to introduce you to the thought processes that inspired it.

I am a fairly rational mind and not prone to conspiracy theories. But every time a conspiracy theory has been brought to my attention, I have taken time to consider the merits of the argument. Most of the conspiracy theories I have long discarded as having no merit, but every once in awhile, there's enough meat to at least seriously consider the possibilities (the JFK assassination, to name one that readily comes to mind).

While administrations fear conspiracy theories, it's my contention that free thinking individuals embrace them. Conspiracy theories are often the end product of deductive reasoning, the Holmes-ian idea that once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

It is essential that a free society consider that no individual or entity, even its own government, is above suspicion when a horrible act is perpetrated. And conspiracy theories, however ludicrous, however inane, at least take the time to evaluate and examine the facts as they ARE, not as they are presented.

And sometimes conspiracy theories bring revelations to light through their dissection of the facts as we know them. Take the 9/11 conspiracy theory. The vast majority of it, I have written off as bunk. I witnessed the second plane hitting the tower via live television feed, as did millions of other Americans. And lest the government be accused of trick photography (unlikely, given the MSM's general DISlike of Bush, that they would cooperate so fully), there were still many New Yorkers for whom the government had no chance to edit. And given the number of conspirators necessary to maintain silence, I generally accept at least a portion of the government's story. But there are still questions about 9/11 that I have not fully resolved, questions that the conspiracy theorists, thankfully, brought to my attention. I won't go into them here (maybe in the comments section), but I'm grateful that questrions were at least asked.

Conspiracy theories are the best defense against a government run amok. As long as questions are asked, whatever the answer, we keep the government honest. A government that has to answer for its actions is a government that is hesitant to abuse its authority, at least in full view.

George W. Bush's most heinous action as a president has been to declare questioning him to be treasonous. According to the mindset of Bush, I am an enemy of the state, along with everyone who thinks as I do. He has as much as said so. Is it any stretch, then, to consider the possibility that his defense of the Patriot Act, which includes the right to usurp the Constitution for potential "terrorists", includes ANY dissident as a "terrorist"? Is it that improbable to conclude that he would not hesitate to wiretap the phones of those who simply dared to question?

I have heard the left demand that conservatives deserve to be jailed for "hate speech" because they express their views on homosexuality, Islam, etc. (not on this forum, but yes, I have heard this sentiment expressed quite seriously). And one doesn't have to search far to find Bush's proclamation that "he who is not for us is against us". Yet our founding fathers knew that the right to question, the right to speak out, was an essential component of a democracy.

Even if you disagree with conspiracy theories, you would do well to entertain them. Questioning authority is not only our right as citizens, it is our responsibility. And one we should never take lightly.