Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Photo of a Flying Demon

page: 7
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
The only site I found that hosted that pic had a supposed statement from Moran. In that statement he said he did not see it that day but noticed it in the photo when DLing it on his PC.

The rest of his statement goes......



The way I intemperate the image is, it's either a guardian angel looking over the rescuers and those poor people still trapped beneath, or the Angel of Death hovering to collect the souls of the dying. I was using a Kodak DC4800 digital camera."


According to the site this is his statement, the sit seems very questionable though as does the site you list.


It is not the site's credibility, nor Mr. Moran's interpretations that are the essential thing, but the authenticity, or lack of it, of the photos. The photos must stand or fall on their own. As best as I can tell the photos are genuine.



I doubt nothing about the spiritual realm except the fact that there will ever be physical evidence of it until death. The reason being is if there were physical proof you would not need faith and every one would be following the same religion as we would have irrufutable proof of some sort of a higher being/after life.


If that is a matter of faith for you, then I respect it. But I do not agree that photographic evidence eliminates all need for faith, for even with such evidence there are cynics who will not accept the photos and will believe, on faith, that they are fake or photoshopped even if there is no evidence that they are fake or photoshopped. It is a cynical faith that DIS-believes instead of believing without proof of their DIS-belief. Let's face it, even if cynics witnessed with their own eyes some of the extraordinary things discussed on forums such as this one, they would not believe their own eyes and would go into denial and probably block the entire experience from their memory.


If he emails me and states exactly what is stated on that site. I'll dismiss it as his being blind to what was in the sky and falling for an optical illusion just like the demon/devil face in the smoke of 9/11. If he says yeah I seen it with my own eyes I will question him deeper.


Sounds as though you have already made up your mind. Just wish to add that police testimony is about as reliable testimony as you will ever find. If you do not accept the word of a cop, there probably are not many people who can convince you.


Ask any officer of the law there are more than one version of the truth, there is what each witness sees or thinks they see and then there is what realy happened.


And there is also what was photographed. When photos back up what witnesses say then the case is a pretty solid one.



But when he says he did not see it while taking the picture yet there are witness reports to seeing it that totaly contradicts the whole maybe it's one of those things that only shows up in photos. Either it's not some thing that you will only notice in a photo or that statement on that site is false it can not be both ways. There is no way he could have not seen that since it's practicly in the middle of the photo yet others did. I have yet to see these witeness accounts either.


Different people will notice different things. Some people are just more observant than others. But, there one other thing to considrer. Things that are supernatural will sometimes be visible to some people and not to others. This may be because some people have what is sometimes referred to as "second sight." They have some kind of "perceptual sixth sense."




posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Where did you find the image and are their more?



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by wolverine2099
Where did you find the image and are their more?


I found it at this location flying demon. There are other locations on the web where the photo appears and is discussed. You can probably find them on google.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Hey thanks for the link



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by wolverine2099
Hey thanks for the link


You're welcome. If you come across other sites where more indepth information on the flying creature is provided bring the links here. I'm pretty sure there must be more info about this incident around, but I suspect that evidence about something that is demonic will probably be even more suppressed than evidence about ufos.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Ok lets look at some of the things you said.




Just wish to add that police testimony is about as reliable testimony as you will ever find. If you do not accept the word of a cop, there probably are not many people who can convince you.


There are plenty of dirty cops out there so just because they are a cop does not mean they can not lie. Secoundly he is human humans are known to lie but this is not true of all humans though at some point in time every human has or will have lied even if it is a little white lie.
So just his being a cop no his word is no different from any one elses word as he is human, just a peice of advice don't just trust them because they wear a uniform investigate the person first.




It is not the site's credibility, nor Mr. Moran's interpretations that are the essential thing, but the authenticity, or lack of it, of the photos. The photos must stand or fall on their own. As best as I can tell the photos are genuine.


Actually the site credibility does play alot into this.
If I posted a pic of any thing or a document that would fit on this site from say the Sun or Enquierer or some other wack job paper such as those it would be dismissed right off the bat. The source does have large amounts of play in this. For instance lets look at the source you site and the site I posted both show the same pic both claim two differnet things and the "statement" from Moran on the site I posted is another claim altogether. So what makes one story any more true than the next? Still no witness statements have appeared either where are they at? How do we know the site you posted is right why can't the site I posted be right? Or why can't it be what Moran says he thinks it is? What makes this a demon/mothman and not some thing else?

Also the photographers interpritation does play a key here also. What is the mental state of the one making said claim what are their goals? Also where did you get info that he is a cop? Is he retired if not why was he not helping that day instead of taking pics? His site seems to protray him as a photographer only whats his real story? Cops don't make great money a photo of a mystery thing could pull in some big cash. Lots of things to look at here.



And there is also what was photographed. When photos back up what witnesses say then the case is a pretty solid one.

He says he never saw it and I've yet to read any witness statements other than his.



Different people will notice different things. Some people are just more observant than others. But, there one other thing to considrer. Things that are supernatural will sometimes be visible to some people and not to others. This may be because some people have what is sometimes referred to as "second sight." They have some kind of "perceptual sixth sense."


You say he is a cop he should be very observant if not I don't want him as a cop in my area. After all he may shoot the wrong guy or get shot him self because of carelessness of attention.
Electro magnetic fields often cause ppl to see/feel/ and hear things that are not there. Those that are normally sensitive to things like this and have the sixth sense are often prone to being sensitive to EMF. That being said I'ld say NY is full of EMF and with the excitement of buildings falling around ppl I'm sure some thought a great evil was hitting the world and their imaginations kicked in. Also for the right amount of money I'm sure some ppl would say they seen Elvis and JFK dancing on the roof of building 7 before it fell.

Now having said that I still have yet to see any witness accounts of this creature both sites said there were some but neither showed such evidence. Also with all the other camaras both still and video on that spot that day why is this the only one to pick it up?

One last thing this is more out of my own curiosity but here goes. Why would there be spiritual creatures and alien creatures be there at that time? And why at that time just to watch or were they both there to help?

Raist



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
There are plenty of dirty cops out there so just because they are a cop does not mean they can not lie. Secoundly he is human humans are known to lie but this is not true of all humans though at some point in time every human has or will have lied even if it is a little white lie.
So just his being a cop no his word is no different from any one elses word as he is human, just a peice of advice don't just trust them because they wear a uniform investigate the person first.


My point is that police officers are trained observers and so will be, on the whole, better witnesses than most people. When they describe an event it is probably a pretty reliable description. There are some bad cops but the majority are good devoted law enforcement officers.


Actually the site credibility does play alot into this.
If I posted a pic of any thing or a document that would fit on this site from say the Sun or Enquierer or some other wack job paper such as those it would be dismissed right off the bat.


Whether the site's credibility is high or low has no direct bearing on the validity of the photos. If it were just a story that the site presented without any evidence to back it up then the credibility would be an essential factor, but when there is evidence, it is the evidence which needs to be considered above the credibility of the website.

Photographic evidence provides us with something concrete that can be examined. If such evidence is determined to be genuine then the matter is pretty much settled isn't it?

Furthermore, simply because a website has no credibility doesn't mean that everything that is presented on their website is not true, for the material on their website may have been obtained from trustworthy sources. So, as I indicated, after the evidence is examined it will stand or fall on its own merits.


Also the photographers interpritation does play a key here also. What is the mental state of the one making said claim what are their goals? Also where did you get info that he is a cop? Is he retired if not why was he not helping that day instead of taking pics? His site seems to protray him as a photographer only whats his real story? Cops don't make great money a photo of a mystery thing could pull in some big cash. Lots of things to look at here.


All those things you listed are secondary considerations to the photos themselves. What Mr. Moran's interpretation, or state of mind, or motives may be, are secondary to the scrutiny of concrete evidence, such as the photos, especially when the main subject under consideration (the flying creature) is contained in the photos. If the photos are shown to be genuine, then the other considerations which you listed are only supplemental.


Electro magnetic fields often cause ppl to see/feel/ and hear things that are not there. Those that are normally sensitive to things like this and have the sixth sense are often prone to being sensitive to EMF. That being said I'ld say NY is full of EMF and with the excitement of buildings falling around ppl I'm sure some thought a great evil was hitting the world and their imaginations kicked in. Also for the right amount of money I'm sure some ppl would say they seen Elvis and JFK dancing on the roof of building 7 before it fell.


This is why I indicated the importance of the photos. You cannot photograph people's imaginations. When something is recorded in photos, it was NOT imagination.


Now having said that I still have yet to see any witness accounts of this creature both sites said there were some but neither showed such evidence. Also with all the other camaras both still and video on that spot that day why is this the only one to pick it up?


It could be that the witness testimonies, and other evidence such as photos, have been kept out of the press. There are many things that are edited out of the mainstream media...especially things dealing with "uncommon" subjects. So, on the rare occasions when we read about such subjects in the main media outlets, it is almost as surprising as the strange subjects themselves.


One last thing this is more out of my own curiosity but here goes. Why would there be spiritual creatures and alien creatures be there at that time? And why at that time just to watch or were they both there to help?


That's like asking why are criminals sometimes caught at the scene of their crimes. It's natural that evil beings, such as demons, would be present at the scene of exceedingly evil crimes. They are the instigators of such evil. Demonic influence is what leads some men to do much of the evil that they do.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:30 PM
link   
The site you listed is a blog it hosted no evidence what so ever it didn't even appear to have searched for eye witness accounts. The person running that blog did little to no factual material gathering what so ever they simply found a photo and called it a demon.

The site I listed at least supposedly found the photographer for comment but yet they labled the photo something else. Heck I've done more research into the photo on this thread than the site you listed.

Both of these sites are not main stream media there is no reason for either of them to not present the witness accounts. I admit main stream media is a sham and nothing more than a mouth peice for a corrupt government, but none of these are main stream they offer nothing in the way of evidence accept a photo which can easily be faked.

Seeing as only these two places are all I'm finding with the photo that makes it even less credible. Both sites are about as credible as asking a politician if they are telling the truth so if the only evidence they offer is a photo it's pretty much bunk.

If the statement by Moran is real on the site I posted then it is possibly nothing more than a stunt to try and pull ppl to his site and to hire him. Like I said there is something there possibly a fake or optical illusion, or it could be real but I'm not going to take the word of a blog that pastes a photo and calles it something. Just calling something a demon or what ever does not make it so, there is more than likely a simpler explination than some blogger makes it out to be.

Raist



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Like the blogger claiming it's a demon I'm from Missouri you know our state moto it "The Show Me State".

Well lets quit talking about nonexistant witness accounts until they appear.

Lets see more than just these two web sites with the photo and their explination of what it is.

Lets see if the photo experts that work in the UFO section here at ATS can look at this photo and see what they call it.

Until I see some proof that this is any thing more than a blurred bird or until Moran comes out with a better statement than the one site listed, I'll call it fake/nothing out of the ordinary seen later in photo and not recognized.

Raist



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
Seeing as only these two places are all I'm finding with the photo that makes it even less credible. Both sites are about as credible as asking a politician if they are telling the truth so if the only evidence they offer is a photo it's pretty much bunk.


Ouch! Don't hold back Raist! Say what you really mean!
True. These are only bloggers, not world reknowned authorities, but that does not automatically disqualify them from honesty or valuable information. We may learn something from everyone. By gathering little bits and pieces, here and there, sometimes we are able to assemble them like bits of a puzzle and discern the truth.


If the statement by Moran is real on the site I posted then it is possibly nothing more than a stunt to try and pull ppl to his site and to hire him. Like I said there is something there possibly a fake or optical illusion, or it could be real but I'm not going to take the word of a blog that pastes a photo and calles it something. Just calling something a demon or what ever does not make it so, there is more than likely a simpler explination than some blogger makes it out to be.


How true. But that is where we must apply our best judgement, and piece things together, and read between lines, and draw our conclusions. As I said in my first post, I present the pictures for people to examine and draw their own conclusions. But, it has always been about the photos, and not about bloggers nor anything else. The photo, as far as I can tell, is genuine, and that makes its content genuine.


Be back tomorrow!



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Looked like a flying bird to me. WHO WOULDVE IMAGINED THAT?!

If only demons existed!!!

Then I would play my records backwards, well first I'd have to get a record player and some records, and then I could worship the devil.





TBH, I am more concerned about these Giant Felines invading our cities!



[edit on 15-2-2007 by Lysergic]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay

Originally posted by Raist
Seeing as only these two places are all I'm finding with the photo that makes it even less credible. Both sites are about as credible as asking a politician if they are telling the truth so if the only evidence they offer is a photo it's pretty much bunk.


Ouch! Don't hold back Raist! Say what you really mean!
True. These are only bloggers, not world reknowned authorities, but that does not automatically disqualify them from honesty or valuable information. We may learn something from everyone. By gathering little bits and pieces, here and there, sometimes we are able to assemble them like bits of a puzzle and discern the truth.


If the statement by Moran is real on the site I posted then it is possibly nothing more than a stunt to try and pull ppl to his site and to hire him. Like I said there is something there possibly a fake or optical illusion, or it could be real but I'm not going to take the word of a blog that pastes a photo and calles it something. Just calling something a demon or what ever does not make it so, there is more than likely a simpler explination than some blogger makes it out to be.


How true. But that is where we must apply our best judgement, and piece things together, and read between lines, and draw our conclusions. As I said in my first post, I present the pictures for people to examine and draw their own conclusions. But, it has always been about the photos, and not about bloggers nor anything else. The photo, as far as I can tell, is genuine, and that makes its content genuine.


Be back tomorrow!


OK so the photo is "real" why is it a demon and nothing else?

As for the bloggers thing, well anyone with access to the internet can have a blog. That means any idiot out there.
A web site tends to cost some cash and thus will have a better chance of some one acctualy investigating some thing. Now some idiots have web sites but like the site I posted they don't investigate either.

I'm not asking for world famus names that seemed pretty obvious considering I was asking for info. I want info as much as I can get, if you say there are witness accounts I want to read them. I want a story behind a photo some thing to go by not just a this is what the pic is thing.

I have yet to see any thing other than what some one claims it's a pic of I claim it's a blurred bird. If you seen the pic on my blog with me calling it a bird it would be no different than what has been presented thus far. Some blogger that lives two hours from where I do calls it a demon and it must be so? Doubtful I call it a bird does that make it so ? Not a chance.

I want witness accounts and more statement from the Moran guy. I want accounts telling me how this thing acted, was it flying fast as it would be to be a blured bird or was it gliding as it would have to be to be a hughe wigned demon as the blogger calls it. Did the thing fly in loops, circles or just straight across. Tell me what you saw.

Heck for all I know it's your blog that you posted a link to (which would be why your siding so much with the blogger lol). But one more reason I don't fall into the believing a blogger that it's a demon photo. How long has this person been around the web, most other things he/she posted was about movies and other "spooky stuff" (the bloggers words), I want hard hitting stories with evidence that has backing. That is what makes a source credible or not in my eyes give me stories that not every one knows but can be proven just a few even will some what win me over. Pretty much I want some facts not just a photo with a this is a demon beside it.

If you want to gab about movies and humor then through in a serious story about a demon at 9/11 and expect me to take your word for it sorry it's not gonna happen. If you want to chat about movies stars and other meaningless garbage don't try to be serious with another story.



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
OK so the photo is "real" why is it a demon and nothing else?


It's a demon because its form is the same as the descriptions of demons. I can see in the photo that the creature has webbed bat-like wings, like demons have. I can see that the creature's legs bend backward at the knees like the hind legs of animals, which is another characteristic of the appearance of demons. It is dark, and with supernatural beings, darkness indicates evil which also fits the description of demons. It is at the scene of a very evil event which is the sort of thing that demons delight in. These are some of the reasons I conclude that it is a demon and not a bird or a plane.


As for the bloggers thing, well anyone with access to the internet can have a blog. That means any idiot out there.
A web site tends to cost some cash and thus will have a better chance of some one acctualy investigating some thing. Now some idiots have web sites but like the site I posted they don't investigate either.


Some people don't have the time nor the resources to conduct their own indepth investigations. It takes time and money to travel to places such as New York, and pay for accomodations and try to locate witnesses, and even then the witnesses may not wish to talk about what they saw. They may be trying to forget that they ever saw such a horrifying creature.


I have yet to see any thing other than what some one claims it's a pic of I claim it's a blurred bird. If you seen the pic on my blog with me calling it a bird it would be no different than what has been presented thus far. Some blogger that lives two hours from where I do calls it a demon and it must be so? Doubtful I call it a bird does that make it so ? Not a chance.


Don't go by what other people say. Look closely at the picture and decide for yourself what you see.


I want witness accounts and more statement from the Moran guy. I want accounts telling me how this thing acted, was it flying fast as it would be to be a blured bird or was it gliding as it would have to be to be a hughe wigned demon as the blogger calls it. Did the thing fly in loops, circles or just straight across. Tell me what you saw.


I too would love to read the witness accounts of what they saw.
I too wish we had the answers to those questions.


Heck for all I know it's your blog that you posted a link to (which would be why your siding so much with the blogger lol).


It is not my blog, but I can see why you may think that. This is after all a CONSPIRACY site. Watch out for conspirators Raist!



But one more reason I don't fall into the believing a blogger that it's a demon photo. How long has this person been around the web, most other things he/she posted was about movies and other "spooky stuff" (the bloggers words), I want hard hitting stories with evidence that has backing. That is what makes a source credible or not in my eyes give me stories that not every one knows but can be proven just a few even will some what win me over. Pretty much I want some facts not just a photo with a this is a demon beside it.

If you want to gab about movies and humor then through in a serious story about a demon at 9/11 and expect me to take your word for it sorry it's not gonna happen. If you want to chat about movies stars and other meaningless garbage don't try to be serious with another story.


I suppose it's his blog so he can post whatever he wants to post on it. Whatever anyone's opinion of the blogger may be, he is not the one who took the photograph anyway. He merely posted it on his blog.

On the web we will come upon sites that have mixtures of relevant and irrelevant material. We have to learn to sift out the nuggets of truth.



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by IronMan
I've seen the full image of this and I thought
that the argument was over. This pic arose
a couple of months ago and I thought it was
agreed that it was a pigeon in the foreground,
in the street a little away from the burning towers.



I knew I'd seen it before! Wasn't it ATS a while back? I didn't wanna say anything in case everyone thought the demon had got to me, but I do remember seeing it before... and I am sure it was debunked...

*jumps to the search bar*



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Interesting. I remember seeing this photo in 2005 or 2006 on a website called wingkidsarereal.com. They were saying it was a photo of a man with wings. But in the closeup on this thread, it does look inhuman, IMO.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 07:40 AM
link   
Well it seems the Steven Moran whos web site I listed is not the same Steven Moran who took the pic. But he did offer his professional opinion on the photo.




Dear ,


Thank you for contacting me, unfortunately I'm sorry to inform you that I am not the same photographer as the Steven Moran who shot that photo.


However, I've been reading your discussion and am willing to offer my opinion as a photographer if you'd like? Perhaps to shed some technical light on the issue?


From what I can see in the photo, it is likely a bird. The reason I get this impression is that there's a bit of lens flare in the shot, this implies he was shooting into the sun (at least slightly) which would account for the reason the object is mostly in shadows and most detail has been lost. Now it looks as though it's a bird somewhere near the street lamp to it's right, it's a big bird, I'll give you that, but I don't think it's anything spiritual or something planted there via photoshop. Your peers claim that it was likely photoshopped due to the meta data saying it was edited in Adobe gives no proof one way or the other on the matter. The fact is most digital photographers shoot in RAW mode, when importing the photo onto your computer, you must almost immediately bring the photo into photoshop to change the mode to PSD so that you can edit the photo. Also, the photo obviously was not taken at 72 ppi (web size) so one would have to bring the photo into photoshop to resize it for the web in the first place, not to mention the person who drew on the photo likely did that in photoshop as well.


Regardless, the background is blown out and there's a lot of spill on the buildings making it easy to see why the object in question might be darker than usual losing detail, it looks as though it was part of the original shot. I don't think it's any sort of supernatural item because it simply looks like a bird fleeing all the mayhem seeking a more relaxed area to reside. He looks like he might have been flying out of one of the trees to the right of the photograph.


Anyhow, I think this argument could continue forever with you guys because there's no way to prove or disprove any arguments for or against this being some supernatural being. All I can do is tell you that it doesn't look superimposed.


Sorry that I'm not the Steven you seek, but I hope you find the answers you're looking for.


Regards,




Steven Moran


It seem he thinks it's likely a bird also. But as he stated we will most likely not find out. He does not believe it to be a photoshop job either.

Since he has been following this thread I thank him publicly here for taking time out of his schedual to inspect the photo and read our comments and recommend that others visit his web site. Thank you Steven Moran.

Well Sky I may not have gotten a statement from the photographer who took the photo but I did get a photographer


Any way I still say out of focus bird.

Raist



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
It seem he thinks it's likely a bird also. But as he stated we will most likely not find out. He does not believe it to be a photoshop job either.

Since he has been following this thread I thank him publicly here for taking time out of his schedual to inspect the photo and read our comments and recommend that others visit his web site. Thank you Steven Moran.

Well Sky I may not have gotten a statement from the photographer who took the photo but I did get a photographer


Any way I still say out of focus bird.

Raist


I too would like to thank Mr. Moran for supplying us with his expert analysis and opinion. He stated it so impartially also, which is a refreshing change from some of the people who blast at any suggestions that an object seen or photographed or videotaped is anything other than what they are familiar with.

Thanks to you too, Raist, for digging into this with such determined pursuit after more details and information on the origin of the photo. You may not have found the Steve Moran who took the photo but you found another photographer who is just as good and knowledgeable concerning the subject. Good work.

If you still think the creature is a bird then you certainly have earned the right to your opinion. I still have to go with what my own eyes reveal to me, and that is what I described in previous posts. When I examine the photo I see more indications in the form of the creature that it is a demon than that it is a bird. Of course, many, if not most people, do not believe such creatures even exist so they will not even consider the possibility that it can be a demon no matter how much the image in the photo fits the description. Such people won't even believe their own eyes if they actually encounter, in real life, anything that does not fit into their very narrow presumptions about what life is.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lysergic
Looked like a flying bird to me. WHO WOULDVE IMAGINED THAT?!

If only demons existed!!!

Then I would play my records backwards, well first I'd have to get a record player and some records, and then I could worship the devil.





TBH, I am more concerned about these Giant Felines invading our cities!





ZOMG GIANT KITTYS!!


why is it so hard to believe that this is something that could have been misconstrued as a photographic anomaly? how can you just explain around the evidence that the photo was tampered with? id love to believe that this was a genuine photo of a demon in flight, but i cant see anything other than a photo that was altered to excite the imagination of the feeble minded.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 07:01 AM
link   
looks like a dragon to me...kinda serpantine....neck and tail with wings in the middle



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkyWay
Though some people may consider the photo to be fake, no one has proven it to be fake. The truth may be difficult for some people to accept, but there it is -- a photo of a flying demon! They're REAL!


I'm not denying flying demons are not real, yet I'm claming this photo to be a hoax.

Using AgainstSecrecy's picture:



I put a rectangle around the pixels which represent a perfect rectangle around the 'flying demon' which is apparently photoshopped in:



Notice at the head of this flying demon there is a gap between it and the outer edge of the rectangle. The only reason I can see this is here is because it is photoshopped in. Could someone with photoshop experience please verify this?

To me this is conclusive enough in itself. Doesn't anyone else think so? Please SkyWay could you provide some pictures of what you see around these streetlights? Is it a perfect rectangle like this? (notice the demon itself is not a rectangular in shape). Looks DEFINATELY fishy enough for me to call this a Hoax.

Peace out,
- Naz






top topics



 
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join