It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Fowl Play
What is it with you lot and demonizing our rescue services and personnel. What you suggest is total disinformation and seriously unhelpfull. You and your colleages are proving to be more than conspirators, you are posting out and out misinformation, bordering on traitorous lies..
Originally posted by Fowl Play
I have seen no evidence that really holds water that they have told traitorous lies..
All i have found through research is information withheld for the security and stability of national security, and unfortunately but inevitable it has added fuel to the fire for conspiracies.
Originally posted by Fowl Play
When certain information can cause civil unrest or be a threat to national security, sometimes it is required to not release all information.
You are entitled to your opinion, but where is your evidence the US government " let " 9/11 happen or even Pearl Harbour for that matter..
You are using one CT to corraborate another.. Great method of study pal!!!
Statement of Bogdan Dzakovic to the
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
May 22, 2003
Coupled with this; virtually every expert on terrorism for several years prior to 9-11 had been screaming about the ever growing threat to the United States by a new breed of terrorists willing to inflict mass casualties on civilians. The first major wake-up call occurred in 1994, when terrorists planned on blowing up a dozen US commercial aircraft over the Pacific Ocean. This was thwarted by an accidental fire in the apartment where the bombs were being constructed. The second major wake-up call occurred in 1995 when terrorists planned on crashing an airliner into the Eiffel Tower in Paris. Only quick and decisive action by French commandos prevented this disaster. There were also additional indicators.
Tokyo to Consul General, Honolulu, September 24, 1941 (#83):
"HENCEFORTH, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU MAKE REPORTS CONCERNING VESSELS ALONG THE FOLLOWING LINES IN SO FAR AS POSSIBLE:
"1. THE WATERS OF PEARL HARBOR ARE TO BE DIVIDED ROUGHLY INTO FIVE SUB-AREAS. WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO YOUR ABBREVIATING AS MUCH AS YOU LIKE.
"AREA A. WATERS BETWEEN FORD ISLAND ANT) THE ARSENAL.
"AREA B. WATERS ADJACENT TO THE ISLAND SOUTH AND WEST OF FORD ISLAND. THIS AREA IS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ISLAND FROM AREA A.
"AREA C. EAST LOCH.
"AREA D. MIDDLE LOCH.
"AREA E. WEST LOCH AND THE COMMUNICATING WATER ROUTES.
"2. WITH REGARD TO WARSHIPS AND AIRCRAFT CARRIERS WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU REPORT ON THOSE AT ANCHOR, (THESE ARE NOT SO IMPORTANT) TIED UP AT WHARVES, BUOYS, AND IN DOCK. DESIGNATE TYPES AND CLASSES BRIEFLY. IF POSSIBLE, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU MAKE MENTION OF THE FACT WHEN THERE ARE TWO OR MORE VESSELS ALONGSIDE THE SAME WHARF."
(Decoded in the War Department, October 9, 1941)
Consul General, Honolulu to Tokyo, September 29, 1941 (#178):
This message was in answer to Tokyo dispatch #83, and set up a two-letter code designation for each of the five prescribed Pearl Harbor areas.
(Decoded in the Navy Department, October 10, 1941)
Tokyo to Consul General, Honolulu, November 15, 1941 (#111):
"AS RELATIONS BETWEEN JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES ARE MOST CRITICAL, MAKE YOUR 'SHIP IN HARBOR REPORT' IRREGULAR, BUT AT A BATE OF TWICE A WEEK. ALTHOUGH YOU ALREADY ARE NO DOUBT AWARE, PLEASE TAKE EXTRA CARE TO MAINTAIN SECRECY."
(Decoded in the Navy Department, December 3, 1941)
Consul General, Honolulu to Tokyo, November 18, 1941 (#222):
This was a lengthy report of U.S. vessels in the different Pearl Harbor areas.
(Decoded in the War Department, December 6, 1941)
Tokyo to Consul General, Honolulu, November 18, 1941 (#113):
"PLEASE REPORT ON THE FOLLOWING AREAS AS TO VESSELS ANCHORED THEREIN: AREA 'N,' PEARL HARBOR, MAMALA BAY (HONOLULU) AND THE AREAS ADJACENT THERETO. MAKE YOUR INVESTIGATIONS WITH GREAT SECRECY."
(Decoded in the War Department, December 5, 1941)
Tokyo to Consul General, Honolulu, November 20, 1941 (#111): [1]
"PLEASE INVESTIGATE COMPREHENSIBLY THE FLEET . . . BASES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE HAWAIIAN MILITARY RESERVATION."
(Decoded in the War Department, December 4, 1941)
Tokyo to Consul General, Honolulu, November 29, 1941 (#122):
"WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING REPORTS FROM YOU ON SHIP MOVEMENTS, BUT IN TILE FUTURE WILL YOU ALSO REPORT EVEN WHEN THERE ARE NO MOVEMENTS."
(Decoded in the Navy Department, December 5, 1941)
Originally posted by Fowl Play
I find nothing that convinces me, your sources are suspect and therefore i cannot take them seriously.
And you are totally off topic. what has this got to do with the OP's disinformation.
Or is this a disinfo thread, and you are throwing more wood on the fire...
I use official reports, you use circumspect evidence taken from suspect sources.. Who is the adept student here?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by Fowl Play
I find nothing that convinces me, your sources are suspect and therefore i cannot take them seriously.
And you are totally off topic. what has this got to do with the OP's disinformation.
Or is this a disinfo thread, and you are throwing more wood on the fire...
I use official reports, you use circumspect evidence taken from suspect sources.. Who is the adept student here?
I use offial reports, or you do not consider the 911 commision report an official report ?
Let me give you my background.
Crew Chief, US. Air Force 4 years.
Federal Police officer, DoD 12 years
Data Analyst, DoD, 9 years
As you can se i have a background in aviation, crime scenes and emergency incident management. Also in governmnet reports and i have acess to government resources.
You can not debate anything i posted with facts so you say they are suspect and can ot take them seriously.
It is you and others that believe the official story that can come up with any actual reportsd or evidence to support the official story.
Originally posted by Fowl Play
A shame after what posts you have held, you hold your government in such contempt.. i suggest you have become a bitter person, and paranoid by the sounds of it, i am Ex-Marine.. im just glad a British one, and i would defend my country till the death and take a bullet for my head of state at any time.. It shows the difference why we are real winners.. we are loyal and not turncoats, damn i am even being loyal to your Govertnment because we are allies, unlike you sir, you should be thrown out in disgrace.
Originally posted by killtown
They brought an old engine scrap in, put it in the backhoe bucket, and simply lowered it in the crater and backed off the bucket for their quick little engine photo-op:
Originally posted by Fowl Play
That is why we can pick holes in the official story and which of course causes these CT's... i admit some theories are credible and i find them interesting, but some are a total disgrace and go too far without any evidence at all, the op of this thread for example...
Just because theres a digger in picture means it was used to plant evidence??
Give us a break Ultima1... you dont believe that, same as me??
[edit on 13-6-2007 by Fowl Play]
Originally posted by mister.old.school
I had hoped that the ATS staff would follow their previous examples and ban those who hoax,
Originally posted by elevatedone
this is probably the most absurd "theory" that I've heard thus far.
Couldn't be that thing was brought in to dig up the wreckage.... nah, that would be too simple and then you guys wouldn't have anything to talk about.