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.

 

Reporter sues NASA, alleges UFO cover-up

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 07:41 PM
link   
heres a link to the article not sure how legit it is but take a look.

www.azcentral.com...




posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   
But this is up there. Sueing NASA is hard enough, especially on the topic of space and science, as they've got some of the best scientists working for them, or in tow. Now, through in the idea of UFOs, which aren't exactly a mainstream idea, and you're toast.

Here's NASA's argument:

Witnesses saw a UFO? We say it didn't happen, and that UFOs have never been sighted. So, we ask you, your honor, to decide. Have aliens visited Earth or not? If the ship does not exist, you must acquit!


Once he rules that they haven't, then NASA wins.



posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 08:55 PM
link   
This is an interesting statement.


NASA officials say there are no documents to release and what the witnesses saw was debris from a falling Soviet satellite.


If they have no records of the event, why do they affirm that what came down in Kecksberg 40 years ago was a Soviet satellite?

curious...

EDIT: Just editing to add that I think the lawsuit is a publicity stunt to get viewers to watch the Kecksberg specials. Even so, I believe that something must have happened there.

[edit on 12-11-2005 by William One Sac]



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 01:46 PM
link   
NASA getting sued? That should be a hoot !!!
I dont think a Cosmic Watergate will occur as a result of this, but i think how this case pans out will be interesting, even though the result is a foregone conclusion, NASA wins !!
But who knows, maybe someone will be brave enough to stand up and be counted!! You never can tell


[edit on 12/12/05 by Wirral Bagpuss]



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Kecksburg was not a satellite but rather a warhead. Dummy or live I am not sure, but satellites are not designed to re-enter the atmosphere intact. A ballistic warhead on the other hand is. As its the only way to get it to the target.

It requires a pretty heavy heat shield or at least an outer "dumb bell" which is exactly what is described as coming down. Add the Cylic (spelling?) writing on the mounting / boost flange and you have yourself a Soviet era warhead falling on US soil.

No wonder its been covered up

edit and it did come down near a miitary target remember.



[edit on 12-12-2005 by robertfenix]



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I live about 45 minutes away from where this happened. I plan on taking a drive out there sometime soon to chat with some locals about it



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
NASA has enough problems right now, can't we just leave them alone long enough for them to regroup?



posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 04:01 AM
link   
Maybe NASA should counter sue for getting their time wasted? Is that possible?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join