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.

 

Potential A51 user on a game forum?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 06:32 PM
link   
Shadowhawk, you state you have the address in a previous post in this thread. Would you please forward me the address in that case?




posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 09:31 PM
link   
For OPSEC reasons, I'd rather not spread it around. Just because it was part of an unclassified message, doesn't mean it's a good idea to share it. The only point of my original message was to prevent people buying into the idea of a "area51.nellis.af.mil" address.

Lots of this kind of information (email, phone, FAX, address, etc.) is available to anyone sufficiently motivated to search for it. It's all unclassified and you would be surprised where it turns up. Ten years ago, I might have posted all of it, but I am now in a position where I need to be more circumspect.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 05:16 AM
link   
I would love one day to get together a few fellow volunteer engineers and set up a listening post near groom lake, somewhere civillian, but not outside comm range. We could sweep a huge range of frequencies and if anything turns up encrypted, decrypt it. It would be fun to do...

oh and dont just sweep radio frequencies, theres microwave, infrared, and basic EM to think of too...

I remember I used to tune into the airbases comm chatter back at my old home for fun... nothing exciting, it was allways just chatter about which runway to land at, and dispatches to military police... stuff like teens getting drunk just outside the perimeter, or idiots trying to sneak in.

Though there was one person who tried to sneak in at 1 am, and I cant think for the life of me how they detected him. That area is not lit up at all, and is covered by brush. I've been there myself during the day and they didnt see me... did someone just happen to be messing around with a thermal camera at that time?!



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
did someone just happen to be messing around with a thermal camera at that time?!


It is possible they were flying aircraft with thermal vision, and when they saw someone that shouldn't have been there... reported him.

So many possibilities.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
Just because it was part of an unclassified message, doesn't mean it's a good idea to share it.


Your a laugh, if you want to make serious statements and shirk providing proof, even privately to Simon, this is the wrong place to be.


Originally posted by Shadowhawk
It's all unclassified and you would be surprised where it turns up. Ten years ago, I might have posted all of it, but I am now in a position where I need to be more circumspect.


Yeah, ofcourse. And where were you looking?



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 11:56 PM
link   
It wasn't my intention to provide a new piece of information, but merely to prevent misinformation. There is more than enough of that on the Internet.

We have to be careful of the information we post. This isn't a game. People's livelihoods (and perhaps lives) are at stake. I have already been warned, by a high-level Pentagon official, about the depth of my research. Also, someone at the Air Force Flight Test Center has let me know that there are people paying attention, in official circles, to what is posted on the various Internet discussion groups.

I walk a fine line. Certain people talk to me because they count on my discretion. Subscribers to this forum benefit from my relationships and my research. I derive no benefit whatsoever. I share what I can because I hate misinformation so much.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 12:04 AM
link   
There is no possible way you can proove you are telling the truth on anything you say, no more than anyone else can proove anything without walking up with open documents in hand and the entire US Military shooting at them. Until that occures, no one can be 100% sure that anything said or shown online is true...

Therefor, I do not believe your story, no more than you can believe anything I might say. I do however believe there are emails from that base and others, however, wether you have seen them or not is unknown to anyone. Even if you provided them, there would be no way to be sure if you fabricated them. I doubt, I highly doubt anyone would hack an email account to find out if it was goverment or not.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by Foxe]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
Your a laugh, if you want to make serious statements and shirk providing proof, even privately to Simon, this is the wrong place to be.


The suggestion that shadowhawk should have to prove himself to this forum is a laugh. The simplest of research will explain who Shadowhawk is and his long standing and respected history in the field of A-51. A history that preceedes this forum by many, many years. A history that is well known for it's responsible, proven, adult investigative research.

This site is pretty famous for allowing copyrighted photos to be posted. That in itself would make me wary of disclosing anything confidential to the sysops and admins of this site.

If you're looking for serious statements and proof, THIS is the wrong place to be.


Sarge



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 04:50 AM
link   
SgtCamo, if this is the case, would you please provide us with information about who this Shadowhawk user is? It's not that i can't be bothered to do a bit of research, its that you took the effort to type that message (attempting to force respect of this user upon us) without providing us with the information we apparently should be aware of.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by GeniusSage
SgtCamo, if this is the case, would you please provide us with information about who this Shadowhawk user is? It's not that i can't be bothered to do a bit of research, its that you took the effort to type that message (attempting to force respect of this user upon us) without providing us with the information we apparently should be aware of.


That was my point. Also my point was there is no way to proove it no matter how many years one has been in it. My point was, no one should be saying "THIS IS A FACT" until they can proove it is a fact. Regardless of reputation... reputation has been built out of other peoples lies, and one not know it...

[edit on 22-3-2006 by Foxe]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Shadowhawk, like you said, if it was part of an unclassified message, than why you are trying to "classified" it again?



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   
SgtCamo, as usual, gets my respect. He knows the score.

Some of the readers on this forum can't seem to understand the concept of Operations Security (OPSEC). I won't post anything that can disrupt the abilities of personnel to do their jobs. I won't compromise anyone's livelihood.

I'm not making any wild claims here and I don't need to prove anything. I share a lot of good information on ATS. It is the product of many years of research. Don't whine to me if I don't give you everything you want.

If you want the information so badly, do a little research. If I found it, maybe you can, too. As former Area 51 commander Col. James W. Tilley II once told me: "Good luck."



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 12:24 PM
link   
I know Shadowhawk and he deserves the respect for the research he has done. I can understand why people want proof but with the the situation he his in it can be very difficult to post everthing.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Shadowhawk,

You state you have details from an unclassified message. If it unclassified, then it is searchable and therefore obtainable through some means. I find the scenario of you not wanting to forward the info to me due to OPSEC reasoning rather weak to be honest.

I very much understand the premise of OPSEC, and judging from your style of posting, you are likely aware that by giving short and abrupt pieces of idealistic pro-OPSEC fundamentalism without providing any actual data or detail (to back up your claim you have seen such message details from an Area 51 source) is going to fuel drama from other posters.

In this instance I will give you the benefit of the doubt, but in future I must recommend not making such claims if you can't support it, it will only give the impression that you are attempting some method of misinformation/disinformation. (I've seen it happen, and I certainly don't want it to happen to you.)


Originally stated by SgtCamo

The suggestion that shadowhawk should have to prove himself to this forum is a laugh.


Why is it that someone has to prove themselves a joke? I do not know who "shadowhawk" is and therefore I am dis-inclined to believe his statement regarding having viewed material originating from "Area 51".

Background knowledge of a person will make them much more representable as a trustworthy source.


Originally stated by SgtCamo

If you're looking for serious statements and proof, THIS is the wrong place to be.


If you are not here to have an interesting fact-based reasoning discussion, then may I ask why you are here? If this is the wrong place to discuss stories/theories/concepts which are of a serious nature, what is your impression of ATS and it's goals/origins?

For the time being, I have to agree with GeniusSage; I don't know who ShadowHawk is and would appreciate it if either yourself ShadowHawk and/or some of the posters who obviously have gained your trust could bring you "into the open".

For future reference, please don't make statements you ascertain to be truthful if you can not or will not verify them.




posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeniusSage
SgtCamo, if this is the case, would you please provide us with information about who this Shadowhawk user is? It's not that i can't be bothered to do a bit of research, its that you took the effort to type that message (attempting to force respect of this user upon us) without providing us with the information we apparently should be aware of.


The research that you would have to be "bothered to do" might
cost you all of 5 minutes.

If you don't want to do the research about the actual topic, and
you don't want to do the research about the players, then how
would my telling you what I know help you to make an informed,
adult, responsible choice as to what to believe?

We see way too much bad research done here on this forum.
You see me constantly harping to "do your own research". You're
not allowed to "copy off someone else's paper". That's not good
research. Go find the verifiable sources. They are all out there.
They are all quite simple to find.

Consider, as an example, an airplane crash. If you were a news reporter
and you were told by the Air Force that "An F-16 plane crashed in
the area of Mojave hills today" would you write -

"An F-16 plane crashed in the area of Mojave hills today"

or would you write

"Air Force Colonel Mel Peters claimed an F-16 plane crashed
in the area of Mojave hills today"

Which of the above is more accurate, responsible and adult research?


Sarge



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   
SgtCamo,

You responded with exactly the comment I anticipated, arrogance.

I shall await Shadowhawk's response as he is the person I am interested in, and want to get the information directly from the person.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Shadow, why not censor. Censor the first part and leave the @____ on the email address. Censor out the names. Censor out any touchy content.

It is not hard to censor things, I'm a proffesionalistic writer and developer... it is not hard to censor things and leave it believable.

Before today, I've never heard of you Shadow... and I am one of the people who use search engines and look at tens of hundreds of sites weekly. I havn't read past things on this forum, only things that interest me and my organization. I do however look at most of the websites centered around this subject and never heard your name.

Like the other poster said, if you would provide some background to yourself, perhapse it would be more believable in your statements... but to be honest, I'm not after an Area 51 email. If I wanted it I could get it, but I don't want it.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimonGray
Why is it that someone has to prove themselves a joke?


It's pretty much a joke on this board, Simon.
With all due respect, you haven't proven that you or
this board is interested in honest facts and responsible
research. You continue to allow stolen, copyrighted
material and don't question the genesis of that,
even when advised otherwise.

Show some responsiblilty as the leader of this board
and those with the inside scoop may be more likely
to trust you with information.

Show that you aren't interested in copyright or
plagiarism and you won't exactly attract
good research.


Sarge



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by SgtCamo
Show that you aren't interested in copyright or
plagiarism and you won't exactly attract
good research.


Sarge


You've got to be joking? Have you not noticed the Creative Commons Deed attached to every single page whereby a user can edit the content? Have you not noticed the Creative Commons Deed attached to every single post!?

If you seriously think this place is a joke, I will kindly ask you to go find somewhere which you feel more suited to.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by SimonGray]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Thanks to SgtCamo and ajsr71 for their support. Their statements about me are accurate.

Apologies to Simon for stirring up a ****storm.

It was all unecessary, as I was not making a claim that the email address was a particular thing. I was just trying to stop misinformation from getting onto the board. It is a losing battle.

After some consideration, I will give you the first part of the email address: DET3

This fact should come as no surprise to anyone who has managed to separate the genuine facts from the Area 51 mythos.

That's all the information I am prepared to share on this topic. I have to protect my sources.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join