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.

 

Stargate Evidence?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   
I can neither confirm no denigh what I have stubled across this afternoon in the regards to the following document. I think however either way people need to see it in the event this document in any way jepordizes ats's ablity to continue or ats is contacted by a government agency to remove it.

starstreamresearch.com...

Discuss Real or Fake?

Falcon




posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 05:40 PM
link   
I'm no expert, but the dates are incorrect.
The military uses DD/MM/YY.
The doc has the year first.
Other than that...


Lex



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 05:47 PM
link   
It could be real. IU think it's important to point out that "project stargate" really in no way resembled the popular television show that I am watching right now because I freakin LOVE that show. From what I have read about from various sources, "Project Stargate" is a possibly ongoing project using remote viewrs to gather intellegence. There is a lot of speculation that remote viewers found Saddams hiding spot.

Wikipedia Article on Project Stargate

Another site with more info on Project Stargate

Yet Another Site With Information

I could post many, many more links but those ones about sum it up.

As to the date format, most people that participated as remote viewers were civilians, as were the higher ups overseeing the program. Joint CIA/Military thing. The document itself doesn't reference military at all. Defense Intellegence Agency.



[edit on 12-1-2007 by Tiloke]

[edit on 12-1-2007 by Tiloke]



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 05:51 PM
link   
This isn't Stargate like the TV program.

It was the old Gondola Wish/Grill Flame type Stargate, one of several Stubblebine projects.

So, yes, that is a real document, no, no one is going to come around and take it from you.

DIA used to run Star Gate, it was officially transferred to CIA and lives on under a new name, although the Army doesn't use it anymore AFAIK.

It's actually pretty interesting, but it's not super-useful due to a lack of data input prioritization. As someone once said, you're as likely to get a detailed description of the toilet-paper holder in the target facility as you are something useful.

There are any number of fairly accurate books on the subject, go to Amazon and nab something from Joe McMoneagle.

Ta,
Tom



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 05:57 AM
link   
IMHO this has been " cobbled together " from a variety of sources , by a hoaxer who did not understand that the various elements actually mean

the abbreviations

“S” = secret

“NF” = NOFOR or NOFORN [ not releasable to foreign nationals ]

“WN” = warning notice

“C” = confidential

“U” = unclassified

“ OADR “ = originating agency determination required [ in short – it can only be declassified by the agency that origionaly classified it ]

the mistakes

#1 “ psychoenergetics “ is [ according to this document ] unclassified .

In that case – why does no legitimate open source document I can find from a military agency refer to “ psychoenergetics “ ?

#2 “ WN “ , WARNING NOTICE

By itself WN is meaningless , a warning notice of WHAT ??? exactly

WNINTEL . makes sense – that is warning notice , intelligence methords or sources

There are numerous other WN***** `s

But they all must contain a suffix to explain what the warning notice actually is

#3 date format : already spotted , but I will address the claim that the date is not in error due to “ civilian involvement / oversight “

Firstly – the CIA is not a civilian agency – and its official documents use military format dates

Second – the bloody document is [ allegedly ] on DIA stationary ,

#4 header , despite the “fact “ that it is obsensibly a DIA document – the header contains a CIA header too – that IMHO is a clear sign of “ mix and match “ hoaxing

#5 truncated , the final paragraph :



a. (U) I understand that while there is no demonstrated risk of permanent or temporary injury (including physical,


is cutt off in mid sentence , WTF ???????

if it was part of a multi page document - there would be bloody page numbers

with the format :

PAGE 01 OF 02 , or page one of one

another howler from the hoaxer

general “feel “

Lastly , this is a gut reaction – it just smells wrong

There is too much waffle , and spurious information that “ looks neat “ – and IMHO is only there to add an ` aura `

Also – the terminology is too “ loose “ again just IMHO ,

A few examples :


b. (S/NF/WI’1) The aim of STAR GATE is to develop highly skilled personnel who are capable of conducting professional level jnte).iigence/counterifltelligence operations through the use of psychoenergeticS methodology. Development of STAR GATE will be accomplished with special training based on mission requirements.



That is more a job advert than a clause in a waiver

Paragraphs “ c “ and “ d “ are just more of the same

Waivers / sign ups – are generally short and to the point

Where nessecary they have a tick box to affirm that you have read [ b] another document which explains what you are doing

Again – all just my 0.02 groats – but it just does not smell right .







[edit on 13-1-2007 by ignorant_ape]



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 05:59 AM
link   
here is an OCR of the cocument - i have proof read the glaring errors in the main body of text - but caveat emptor :










DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

WASHINGTON. DC 20340-



STATEMENT OF CONSENT

DIA STAR GATE PROJECT PARTICIPANT
Date: _________________






1. (S/NF/WN) I, __________________________ voluntarily accept assignment to the DIA STAR GATE Project and fully understand that:

a. (S/NF/WN) The DIA and DoD General Counsels have determined that the STAR GATE Project constitutes experimentation on human subjects. As required by Procedure 13 o~ DoD Directive 5240.1-R, approval for project activities has been granted by the Deputy Secretary of Defense.

b. (S/NF/WI’1) The aim of STAR GATE is to develop highly skilled personnel who are capable of conducting professional level .intelligence /counterintelligence operations through the use of psychoenergeticS methodology. Development of STAR GATE will be accomplished with special training based on mission requirements.

c. (C/HF) Assignments in STAR GATE are governed by the sensitivity and degree of expertise required for the position. I will be assigned in accordance with my capabilities and experience, regardless of my rank or previous position. Due to the nature of training involved, the duration of my participation is indefinite. Records of my involvement will be available to project personnel, but otherwise protected under project security measures.

d. (C/NF) The primary consideration in any career development or assignment action will be STAR GATE mission and operational requirements. I understand that exemption, interruption, or delay in normal career development patterns--such as branch schooling and assignment opportunities--may prejudice future promotion and assignment potential. I have been assured, however, that every effort will be made to preclude the adverse effects listed above on my career.

2. (U) PSYCHOENERGETICS (PE) include various processes by which individuals psychically interact with objects, locations, and organisms.

a. (U) I understand that while there is no demonstrated risk of permanent or temporary injury (including physical,

WARNING NOTICE-INTELLIGENCE
SOURCES OR METHODS INVOLVED
CLASSIFIED BY MULTIPLE SOURCES
DECLASSIFY ON OADR
Approved For Release 2000IO8I0Q~J j~j~DP96-OO792R0006001 60004-1
NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS



[edit on 13-1-2007 by ignorant_ape]



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Although the Stargate Project, did in fact exist, it did have nothing to do with the Star Gate (like Tiloke mentioned) you were thinking about, falcon.

And ignorant_ape is absolutely correct. This document is clearly fake.



posted on Jan, 13 2007 @ 09:05 AM
link   
OADR also is short for "On or at Direct Request" which I know was changed sometime after 2002. Who knows




top topics



 
0

log in

join