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.
alexander the great said divide and conquer, I dont think I would party with him, maybe get um drunk and beat the heck out of him and film that!
Originally posted by Crakeur
Originally posted by timedrifter
if you accept a mission to do PR, than it is your place/right to release your footage, but clearance is needed by the community of volunteers.
in other words, you guys will go and party with Alexander the Great and come back with nothing more than your own stories as further proof.
I expected nothing less.
did you look at the very first post?? I asked him to post it for me, your really on the ball aren't you?
Originally posted by Crakeur
TD, you friend OTD set that thread up as a means of vetting ideas for your story here. That is how I see it. That is what it appeared to be. That is why he was always shooting down the valid suggestions as not viable. He wanted to establish that nothing would really work, this way, when people started asking him for proof on this story, his answers were all taken care of.
It was a clever plan. Others tried to do it after him.
Originally posted by timedrifter
]did you look at the very first post?? I asked him to post it for me, your really on the ball aren't you?
vetting ideas for what?? you know your really sending mixed vibes here, why are you here? to put on debunking muscles?? what is it, there is nothing wrong with questioning everything but come on already.
Originally posted by Crakeur
Originally posted by ChiliDog
So, uh - just me posting is enough, eh?
Once again, let me say that pointless, one line posts will not be tolerated. This thread deserves the to be treated just like any other thread, whether you believe the story or not, so please refrain from the unnecessary one liners.
thanks.
Originally posted by Crakeur
My apologies chili, I didn't see what you were getting at in your post. there were several posts prior to that centering on one liners and I thought you were being a wise....
thanks for adding me as a foe. It means a lot to me.
TD, you friend OTD set that thread up as a means of vetting ideas for your story here. That is how I see it.
That is why he was always shooting down the valid suggestions as not viable. He wanted to establish that nothing would really work, this way, when people started asking him for proof on this story, his answers were all taken care of.
It was a clever plan. Others tried to do it after him.
Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Crackeur, you seem hell bent on squeezing proof out here, but we are in the speculative section, which means we have a sort of dispensation with regard to proof here. If you feel that you and you alone justify proof, I'm afraid you are alone in that presumption.
I feel the need to clarify that none of this actually happened and you are speculating that it might have happened...
I feel the need to clarify that none of this actually happened and you are speculating that it might have happened, which is why you are in skunk works.
Of course, you will then be open to deeper inspection by the other members.
The issue I have is one day it is 100% real, the next it is speculation. make up your minds.
Did TD travel with Mel Gibson to see Jesus?
did he really get abducted outside the IRS office in Montauk?
Originally posted by OnTheDeck
did he really get abducted outside the IRS office in Montauk?
Yes.
Now, can we prove either of these things? No. So where are we now?
Originally posted by OnTheDeck
TD admitted that the building he traveled to, which was an IRS facility, at which he had an experience of missing time, was a location referred to as "Montauk" by his coworkers and supervisor.
Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Attacking someone in the speculative thread for making unbelievable statements
so now it's speculation and not fact?
make up your minds
and then TD tried to clarify the reality of the Montauk facility with driving directions which were wrong as well.
Now you're saying the IRS calls some other facility the Montauk Facility and that is downright silly.
When you tell a tall tale and a lie is exposed, the rest of the story becomes suspect.
Does this mean that the rest of story could be true? Sure.
But without any proof of anything, the one lie makes the whole story seem less stable.
Incidentally, if the IRS calls some other facility the Montauk Facility, can you please tell me which office it was? I already linked you to the various locations in New York. Can you pick one and claim that they call that one the Montauk Facility? Can you also explain why they would call an office in any other town something other than that town's name?