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.

 

Remote viewing the 911 attacks

page: 3
42
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons

On the dark guys: Chad (the bald guy) mentions first dark skin, but then says, sorry, meant dark hair.

The way he describes how they act proffessional, everyone knows what the others do, they feel above the law, have experience in the field, military background.

In my books that sound more like special ops than the usual islamic suspects.

I ve seen countless docus on all ME terror groups, all of them are dedicated, but professional...meh.

I ve seen people welding together iron tubes and gas-canisters (you know the metal ones, one uses in the kitchen or barbecues) for mortars, i ve seen some guys holding rpgs the wrong way around, throwing handgranates in the room they stand in and sills stuff like that.

very good on an Mc Giver improvisation level, but not 'military professional'




posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov




Also, he mentions the person having a crew-cut when he was younger because perhaps he had been in the military at some point.

I thought RV was seeing things as they are today.
Not a history lesson.
So how can you tell if what you are seeing happened in WW2 or 10 minutes ago?
Next they will be saying you can tell the future with RV.

It's all made up BS.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov

I am with you, pretty sure it s Rummie.
Member bandersnatch mentionend Cheney. Alone frome the looks (and position) that could be possible.

But Rumsfeld fullfills ALL the criterias:

- ex military haircut
- soft higher voice
- illinois accent
- distinguished
- the look which is not evil on first sight (not cheney...)
- pnac member (ok that would be cheney as well)
- the standing desk ( i checked that, several sources and pictures out there for Rummie, found none for cheney and standing desk)

The only point which we can t confirm so far is the smell...



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov




Also, he mentions the person having a crew-cut when he was younger because perhaps he had been in the military at some point.

I thought RV was seeing things as they are today.
Not a history lesson.
So how can you tell if what you are seeing happened in WW2 or 10 minutes ago?
Next they will be saying you can tell the future with RV.

It's all made up BS.


from what i understand with remote viewing you get impressions about people places and things. its not that hard to get the impression from looking at someone that they were former military. but, remote viewing isn't bound by space/time. you can view or remote view things from any period of time in any place. so no it's not that far-fetched to believe that the viewer would be able to discern that this person was former military and used to sport a crew-cut.

WeRpeons

as for the "dark haired" people. it's hard to say. it was a mixed impression for me and i'll probably go back and listen to it again to be honest because it's getting mixed in my head whether or not he was just talking about them having dark features or whether or not they were actually dark skinned...



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov

Anout the dark haired people:

Part 1 (second video in this thread) 1hr 14 min:
"wearing overalls, young, 30-40 one tanned dark skin...sorry dark hair"

Edit addition: "short (hair) no facial hair"
edit on 4-4-2016 by svetlana84 because: see edit in post



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

about RV being real or not:

I know, the first time one sees or hears about RV i might go against everything one believes in. I have been there myself.

But i kept an open mind, studied all info i could grab and ventured into the subject.
And i have personally witnessed several RV and related techniques sessions.
I have done some RV sessions/related techniques in which i was the viewer.
Already in the first sessions i got more results, than i could believe.

All double blinds. never met the person putting up the target, all written down and cross checked. And believe me i was a hardcore sceptic (check out my posts in religious subjects....)

The other problem with information about RV is, that the major players back in the 60/70ies have been the CIA and the KGB - no wonder that information is guarded secret.

If you are interested in the subject, search for: McMoneagle russian Typhoon submarine.
this is one of the cases which is well studied and quite a share of information is available.
His viewing have been proofed later with sattelite images.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
very interesting when the second guy in the bit about the pentagon mentions POPEYE, what's POPEYE he says. He gets that word popping up and doesnt realize why as he's mentioning other missiles such as Polaris.

Just goggling Popeye Missile real quick and it's interesting what wiki has to say about it....


Although Popeye is an air-to-surface missile. Experts postulate a submarine launched version exists. The Popeye naming convention is used by Israel. The US calls it Have Nap. It is stubbier than the standard cruise missile.

Because the submarine launched version is not publicly acknowledged, we have no video of it readily available. So we don't know if it launches in the manner he describes. But some submarine launched missiles do display those characteristics. So it might.
edit on 4-4-2016 by Moresby because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

I've read some controlled RV sessions that seem to prove it exists. As a psychology major, I have a good sense of how to set up a controlled experiment. So that is where I stand. I take remove viewing seriously.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

RV is used for all times: past, present and future.
Past is obviously the easiest for fact checking, as in this case we can agree that structures came down, that flying objects have been crashing into the towers etc.
It s used for the present, as it was used in the cold war to spy on each other (see the case where the CIA Remote Viewed the Sovjet Typhoon submarine, which got confirmed later by sattelite images).

RV is even used on extraterrestial subjects, there is an interesting thread on ATS about RV sessions about structures on mars.

Off course it s not an exact science (yet?) and it depends on the viewers ability and some viewers are better in special topics.
As well each viewer has his own approach and senses.
Some are good with visuals, some are good with audio, some are good with feeling emotions, etc.

Since the viewing can be vague most sessions are done with several viewers. Both CIA and KGB did it like that: using the same target with several viewers, then they compared the results, and interpreted them.

If several viewers mention same observations, it gets interesting.


On the question how they know which time period they see:
Time per se cannot be seen, heard, smelled or tasted.

Most often they deduct the time from observation: what kind of clothing, what kind of transport people are using. When everybody is using horses and carriages its the past.

When everybody is driving cars from the 60ies it's probably the 60ies.
If they see 60ies cars, but people are using mobile phones, then they would look into Cuba anywhere between the 90ies and now.

Hope that helped.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Moresby

Thanks for your input.

Interestingly Dick Allgire describes a launch from a submarine in one of the sessions.
Which is (at least for me) a first in the 9/11 research.

He describes it, as you, as 'stubby'.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: svetlana84
a reply to: Moresby

Thanks for your input.

Interestingly Dick Allgire describes a launch from a submarine in one of the sessions.
Which is (at least for me) a first in the 9/11 research.

He describes it, as you, as 'stubby'.


Yes, my comments were an an attempt to validate those observations during his session.

I've encountered some oblique references to a submarine launch from other 9/11 researchers. If the attack on the Pentagon was a missile rather than a plane, a sub launch makes sense. It's extremely covert and hard to track.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: svetlana84

as you all realised by now, i am really hooked on this.
And i realise i get into an information overload, just searched for the popey reference:

Part 2. at the 43 min mark Dick Allgire.


For keeping it easier to find and discuss details i advise everyone (including me) to post the

clip and the time mark plus the name of the viewer (like i have above).

The names of the viewers (which i messed up in a post before..)
Dick Allgire (glasses and iphone earpiece)
Daz Smith (the bald viewer)

Thanks in advance, keep up the good work.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Moresby

Good call with the popeye/nap/AGM 142!

Dick at part 1 46min mark has it as stubby, shorter than a crusie missile and paints it white in the (still blind) after session drawing.

Daz Smith, Part 1 , 6 min mark: curved front, shiny, white, speed thrust, feels like aimed, like a issile device, feels like manipulated on the pathway by people.

Here we see it being stubby, curved front, white, shiny (in the lower picture). so spot on, the only detail i am missing are these little winglets.
Wiki on popeye/amg 142


4-8 men controlling it (Daz part 1, 9min mark) - would that be correct for a popeye/nap/amg 142?

EDIT/addition the 78 mile range (according to wiki) would be enough as well for the route chesakega bay to the pentagon. Puzzles pieces falling into place.

edit on 4-4-2016 by svetlana84 because: see last lines



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Hmm, the launch crew of the popeye/nap described as dark skinned, dark hair, facial hair.
uniforms, but not regimented uniforms.

Part 1, 23 min mark by Daz.

Given that the popeye is an Israeli missile (which is also used by the US)

A hint for Israeli operation??

I guess AQ did not have access to submarines?



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Dick noted that the submarine had no diesel smell. That means it's a nuclear powered sub.

US, UK, Russia, France, China and India are only countries that officially acknowledge that they possess nuclear powered subs. Of course, Israel probably does as well. They possess "nuclear capable" subs. Pakistan may also possess nuclear powered subs.

Pakistan might be a good candidate. There's a lot evidence indicating their operational involvement in 9/11. And they could fit the dark-hair/dark skin. It might even explain the confusion. Since people from Pakistan have quite a range of complexions, but most have dark hair. So an RVer might become confused over the complexion of the people he's viewing if they were from Pakistan.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Moresby

Now that's an unexpected plot twist! Could indeed be Pakistan.

I ll have to take some time to think about that.

If we open this can of worms: What about Turkey?

According to Wiki (the trusted source in all kinds military lol)
Turkey got some Popeyes/AMG-142 as well. Dark skin/hair, facial hair would fit as well.

Submarines yes. (altough no official nuclear ones to my knowledge.)



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   
a reply to: svetlana84




RV is used for all times: past, present and future.

OK where's MH370 ?
What's the next Apple or Microsoft stock ?
Why do we have missing persons ?
Why is there unsolved crime ?

The American Indian believed in the same crap and called them their spirit gods.
Look where it got them.

Custer had Indian scouts.
Why didn't he stay home that day ?

Himmler believed in the occult too.
Why didn't he tell Hitler that Patton's army was fake?

RV is as fake as reading tea leaves.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Yesterday they only had 30 views on those video's after a month on UTube. Now they're going on 400.

I was looking on UTube for Major Ed Dames view on 911. Though I remember Dames refusing to answer many specific questions about the event. He was dead right about Fukushima. Other times he has been partially right.

Glad I stumbled onto these video's as they have generally confirmed what I thought was possible on 911. Remote viewing can be very accurate. Looks like the the vids have really taken off on this forum. Usually I get tar and feathered on this forum no matter what.



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: svetlana84
a reply to: Moresby

Now that's an unexpected plot twist! Could indeed be Pakistan.

I ll have to take some time to think about that.

If we open this can of worms: What about Turkey?

According to Wiki (the trusted source in all kinds military lol)
Turkey got some Popeyes/AMG-142 as well. Dark skin/hair, facial hair would fit as well.

Submarines yes. (altough no official nuclear ones to my knowledge.)


No rumors of nuclear ones either. All German diesel subs. None "nuclear capable".



posted on Apr, 4 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent

These are valuable and interesting questions.

But that s not how RV works: Let's take MH370 as an example: everyone on ATS or everyone not living under a rock has heard of the incident and has heard the different stories.

So everyone is compromised if you ask the questions like this.

The way it's done and how Farsight (the producer of the videos in this thread):
The viewers come in and get a letter/number combination.
like i posted before MYST-10D

That's all they get. it s called a target.

In this case someone from the Farsight institute sits down and writes down the target
Target 10D: "The target is the initial airborne launch or takeoff of whatever object caused of the damage shown to the Pentagon building as shown in the image below on 11 September 2001. The viewer should also perceive and describe the object's dimensions, shape, internal characteristics, and airborne activity."
Farsight targets (bottom of page)

This target text is put in a sealed envelope, the full target number is put on the envelope.

Then the viewers get the target number/letters, and nothing else.

Which makes it all so fascinating: When you give out a target. like MYST-10D to two guys and they both describe an object which is launched and desroys a structure you know there is something behind.

In this case 10D both described it as a missile, stumpy, white etc (see video and posts above)

For further info on RV, including manuals check out this website:
Remoteviewed


I ll have to add: these two viewers in the farsight videos are outstandingly skilled. Very detailed sessions.

More often you will see something like:

"I see houses next to the water." Which is so vague, it could be the usual Canadian fishing village with a couple of huts next to a lake, or a big city like NY at the sea.

As mentionend before with CIA/KGB they work with several viewers (each on his own in the session) then all the results are gathered, compared and interpreted and checked against information which is already available, like we do it in this thread.

Start reading on the subject, and you will find a very interesting new hobby.
There are online target practices available.



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join