9/11 Uncovered
I just looked over the 9/11 Uncovered site. The person running the site has a good in your face attitude, and must be a web whiz, becuase there are so many movies on the main page with several running. The oddest thing about the site is that they have an ad for CNN at the top. It's hard to believe CNN helps sponsor the site, so it must be generic to the hosting service.
In any case, the site promotes fully the bombing of the WTC as well as missiles coming from the planes. I am quite skeptical of the missile theory, though they have one movie that (assuming it is not altered) shows very clearly something shooting out of flight 175 causing an explosion-- just before the planes hits.
I don't know how much to believe this or not. Although I am leaning towards the idea that neither flight 11 not flight 175 hit the WTC-- rather some drones hit the WTC and these flights were blown up elsewhere.
In any case, the site promotes fully the bombing of the WTC as well as missiles coming from the planes. I am quite skeptical of the missile theory, though they have one movie that (assuming it is not altered) shows very clearly something shooting out of flight 175 causing an explosion-- just before the planes hits.
I don't know how much to believe this or not. Although I am leaning towards the idea that neither flight 11 not flight 175 hit the WTC-- rather some drones hit the WTC and these flights were blown up elsewhere.
posted by spooked at 1:07 PM
1 Comments:
fun with photoshop!
how nice that as the 9/11 "movement" has consolidated and is working on the best evidence (ie. "Crossing the Rubicon"), some blurry photos based on really illogical claims magically appear to try to grab peoples' attentions
the "missile theory" is one of the more ridiculous pieces of nonsense promoted to "muddy the waters"
does anyone REALLY believe this shit?
why would the inside job perpetrators (1) NEED a missile when a large plane going 500 mph would make a big impact on the WTC and (2) risk using a missile when thousands of cameras were taking pictures of the WTC after the first plane hit. are we really expected to believe that none of the pictures and movies taken that day were examined to see what really hit the south tower?
This is a very similar tactic to that used to discredit the independent investigations into the coup against President Kennedy.
see http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html for a detailed examination of these bogus claims.
As for plane substitution (ie. no flight 11 or 175), it is possible, but there is ZERO evidence publicly available for it.
Post a Comment
<< Home