posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 09:04 PM
This year, Russian Pres. Putin is named Time mag's man of the year, which is, to me, an odd choice. My tv, radio, and newpapers hardly mentioned
him, and I can see many better picks, Al Gore, J. K. Rowling, to name two people who made a difference and also made headlines far more often last
Conspiracies range from the plausible, yet not officially accepted, version of events, to the highly speculative, poorly supported, and thinly
connected ones which almost everyone but the proponent finds ludicrous. Maybe connecting Putin's man of the year award to Putin's decision to clear
the US of any blame in the Kursk sinking is one of the latter. But, the proposition that the official story of what sank that submarine on Aug. 12,
2000 is not correct, that is one of the former.
There has been some interest shown on ATS on this topic, but I found nothing less than a year old, and overall, very little about it. Considering the
importance of the event, and the wealth of evidence discrediting the official version, I found that it was worthy of a new thread.
Here is a brief summary of the questions about the tragedy:
What made the hole in the hull of the Kursk, which many asked about and none were given answers?
Is it true the hole is the right size, and in the right spot for where a US MK 48 torpedo would have hit?
What were the USS Memphis and the USS Toledo doing at that moment?
Is it true they were there, and that at least one of them was damaged, and then repaired in a covered drydock back in the US?
Why have many of the letters written by the dying men aboard the Kursk been kept secret?
Why were US submarines blamed for sinking the Kursk by top Russian military leaders immdiately following the event?
Why was the area of seafloor where it sank later set with explosives and demolished?
Why was the sub itself cut up and melted down considering that at the time, so many people wanted more investigation done on it?
Last, why is such a big conspiracy so little represented here at ATS?