We wish wrh.com would come clean, and FINALLY update (ie, un-compromise) its insidious page regarding Bush's self-incriminating 1st-WTC-impact 9/11 witness statements.

With ZERO evidence, wrh.com promotes -- or should we say "spins" -- (in the title bar, the URL, and the headline, not to mention the body of the article, except for a slick little "If Bush really did see an airplane on TV" caveat at the bottom of the page) the notion that Bush somehow 'must' have been lying.

How much do people have to hate Bush before they fail to recognize how backwards it is to give Bush the benefit of the doubt of the doubt and to present his incriminating statement in the only way that it can't incriminate him?

Just because wrh.com (supposedly) can't fathom how the incriminating statement(s) could have been true doesn't mean it 'must' not be...

Unless/until wrh.com stops devaluing/dismissing/spinning Bush's self-incriminating statements as yet more mere Bush lies, we consider whatreallyhappened.com to be a disinfo site (one that has ducked repeated emails regarding this issue).