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.

 

They could have had BIN LADEN.....so WHY didnt they..hmmm

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 01:09 PM
link   
EDITED to ADD....so yer dont get bored......

Th is is the story im talking about...


This is just a very quick and vauge thread im afraid, mainly because my wbe connection is being STUPID at the moment and is hissering my research, but i wanted to get it down now before i forget, as i only JUST heard it on ITV LONDON NEWS UK (




posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
You could have at least given the news station / network you heard it on. How do you expect people to comment based on what you claim you heard with little info such as you just gave? :shk:



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Dont shake your head at me little blue man


I did mention in the first pargraph of my post......Keh! i dont know...some people eh?

Here it is again,....

ITV, LONDON TONIGHT, LONDON UK.

What more can i give you


Edit to add..... it was the 6'O CLOCK NEWS.

If its on their news site, you'll find it. I WILL have a look myself later, but i have to waight for my connection to stop jerking about.
I think im costing Tiscali more than im making them, with the trouble iv had the last 6mnths, i honestly think they're trying to make me leave the contract.

Anyway, good luck with hunting for info, it WILL be there on the ITN website, i can barely get a page up at the mo, let alone, post these replies


[edit on 7-2-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism

Here it is again,....

ITV, LONDON TONIGHT, LONDON UK.

What more can i give you




Which section of the news would have been good for starters however I think it is a lost cause.

I did a site search and it came up negative, so I can only assume you misunderstood what they were saying.

[edit on 2/7/2007 by shots]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   
ABSOLUTELY NOT.

for me...thats like you looking at a loaf of bread and asking you if you know what you're looking at


I didnt mis-hear or misunderstand a single thing, i heard and understood everything word for word.

But its ok, dont bother with it, ill find it later or tomorrow. Keep an eye out for when this thread jumps up....Because you are obviously not impressed (i sound offended but im honestly not, just the way i type) by the way in which i presented this thread, i perticularly want YOU to see it now...nothing personal





posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Right....
My internet is working now, ive had a look and found it.

Apparently it s part of a documentary that will be airing soon (in the UK, not sure where else.)

The news report was a little more informative than this, but its the best ive found so far.

Anyway, if this turns out to be true, it just adds yet MORE questions as to the U.S. agenda with regards to the war on terror.

Who or WHAT are we REALLY after if anyone/thing.

this whole war on terror, that we're s'posed to be supportive for, is turning into a torrent of isolated embarresments. Perticularly embarrising is the fact that these people REALLY expect us to support their cause (them being the ones that decide which "lives" to send to fight THIER war), and swollow thier doo-doo about whats happening......when they do things like this.

Even though the story is not coroberated by the french military, I dont doubt that this happened.

And im sure you might have heard about the cockpit footage that was leaked out of the pentagon pertaining to a "freindly fire "incident, where a british soldier was killed.

The pentagon said it DIDNT EXIST.....what FILTHY DIRTY LIERS. The WIDOW who can now greive easier have seen the truth, says that the footage is going to be used to GET TO THE TRUTH, and really dosnt want her husbands death to become some kind of political tool.

Any way, heres the link to the original topic........

Fr ench had Bin Ladin in thier sights!



PS..... SHOTS, i only went to Reuters and typed, "FRENCH" and "BIN LADIN"......and yer saying you didnt have enough info to go on.....ah well, may be i just got lucky huh

(not meant to offend, just making a joke
)

[edit on 7-2-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   
I wasnt aware there were any french soldiers in afghanistan?



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Niether did i.......

UNTILL....

Reading your reply, made ME question that...... and then found this...


Afghanistan: with 1,900 French troops, France is one of the major partners of the United States in Afghanistan. French contributions include troops deployed to the International Security Assistance Force (13% of ISAF), training of the Afghan National Army, Operation Enduring Freedom on the ground (Special Forces), at sea (3 frigates and 1 Maritime Patrol Aircraft), and in the air (6 fighter aircraft, 1 tanker and 2 transport aircraft). Periodically, fighter aircraft are also deployed in the region, with an air tanker, to offer close air support to ISAF and OEF ground troops. Mirage 200D strike aircraft, and Mirage F1CR reconnaissance and bomber aircraft, are presently based in Tajikistan until autumn 2006, in order to support both the NATO Troops, who are gradually expanding the area of operations into southern Afghanistan, as well as US-led coalition forces, including French special forces, who have been hunting the Taliban and Al Qaida remnants since 2001.


From here...
THIS SITE




posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:13 PM
link   
How about looking at the rest of the article?


The French military, however, said that the incidents never happened and the report was "erroneous information".



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   
How about you assume i DID read the rest of the article, and have my own views on weather i fully believed that statement.

Come on dude, no smoke without fire, the pentagon TOTALLY denied the existance of a Cockpit vid regarding freindly fire in which a british soldier was killed, leaving a widow not knowing what really happened.

The video was leaked....100%, FULL, IN YOUR FACE (not yours personally) B*ll ***T.

100%, no going back, they lied, PERIOD.

So ..


The French military, however, said that the incidents never happened and the report was "erroneous information".


Swamp gas, nothing to see here type senario.
dont be TOO quick to assume someone didnt READ something just because they aren't voising THAT side of the view.

I told it how I saw it, and but the article for all to see.

Hope my post doesnt sound rude, just that i think that was a bit presumptuous to assume i didnt read SUCH a SHORT article......seriously, my attention span isnt THAT short


[edit on 7-2-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
How about looking at the rest of the article?


The French military, however, said that the incidents never happened and the report was "erroneous information".



Yeah in fact that was paragraph two. Alsothe story three years old and a none issue.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Ok, so thats ONE "opinion".....

Anymore....

I meen, fair do's if you think its a none issue...

But couldn't one assume that this war has killed ENOUGH OF OUR MEN.. SOME AS YOUNG AS 21, maybe younger.

If Osama had been captured, could we not have got vital information that may have saved lives.....
..We're talking about LIVES, like yours and mine and the people close to you.

Id say if a BAD decision was made that day, its HARDLY a none issue....ESPECIALLY if we are feeling the repercussions today.

If people let issues "go" JUST becuase they're a few years old, ALOT of people would be getting away with ALOT of things.
Because of that, i dont think thats a great attitude to adopt, certainly doesnt help the situation.

Just my views anyway


[edit on 7-2-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism

Come on dude, no smoke without fire, the pentagon TOTALLY denied the existance of a Cockpit vid regarding freindly fire in which a british soldier was killed, leaving a widow not knowing what really happened.


The Pentagon denied its existence? Or they meant its classified secret which means you can't see it?


The video was leaked....100%, FULL, IN YOUR FACE (not yours personally) B*ll ***T.

100%, no going back, they lied, PERIOD.



Wrong!! They released it after the British govt. requested it.



Swamp gas, nothing to see here type senario.
dont be TOO quick to assume someone didnt READ something just because they aren't voising THAT side of the view.

I told it how I saw it, and but the article for all to see.

Hope my post doesnt sound rude, just that i think that was a bit presumptuous to assume i didnt read SUCH a SHORT article......seriously, my attention span isnt THAT short



Since when does the Frenchies listen to us?



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 04:54 PM
link   
It was stated catagorically on the news, that it was "Leeked" and that they "Origionally DENIED its existence".

thats word for word on the MAIN NEWS, ITN, NEWS AT 6.

I am not one of those people that will stick to his views just because thats what he's got into his head, if i am mis-informed i would like to know about it. DENY IGNORENCE..in the full sence of the phrase.

Could you possibley provide a link to this statement of yours....



Wrong!! They released it after the British govt. requested it


I would like to validate this against what the news said, because if this is known information, then im very disapointed my news network.

cheers


PS you can go and read the "British Soldier, friendly fire" article at the ITN main web site, which i havent done and am just about to now....

May be there i will find that i "misunderstood" or something



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   
news.yahoo.com...;_ylt=Ap8VwCvEraTpWDnevk5FlnJX6GMA


Coroner Andrew Walker suspended his probe last week after he learned that there was a cockpit video which he had not been allowed to use or to show the family.

Washington had given the video to British authorities but refused to allow it to be shown to the coroner, saying it might contain security secrets. The British government denied hiding it but said it could not release it without U.S. permission.

After the video was shown all day on UK television, a U.S. defense official said it could now form part of the inquest.

"We have authorized the UK Ministry of Defense to display the full video in camera to the coroner and the family in the presence of a Ministry of Defense authority," a Pentagon official said on condition of anonymity.

Washington said its own investigation exonerated the pilots.

"The investigators determined that the pilots followed the procedures and processes for engaging targets," Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman said.


Here it is.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 05:09 PM
link   
The article


Well thats the article, pretty poor really.

The video of the report didnt work either


It didnt mention the "origionally denied existence" part, but mention that it was "leeked". But i assure you that they did mention the former, as they reiterated a second time in the news cast that it was denied at first, and then released.....IN FACT, the damn things on now, BBC2 NEWSNIGHT THIS TIME, she just mention that at first they said there was NO footage available, and that she is glad that it has been released, because the corona can use it to find the truth about what happened.

So, yeah, thats what i think at the moment...
LIED through thier grubby teeth at first...
Video got leeked....."oh dear, how embarrising"
couldnt deny it anymore, so after they were asked, they released it...couldnt be seen to pour salt in the wound anymore.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Yeah, it says leaked, but does not included denying its existence as you mentioned. But then you pretty much just agree with denying access as same thing as hiding. You just stick to your view.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Hmmm confusing.

she clearly said they denied its existance.....


Maybe the "they" she was refering to was the British Govenment?

Hmm, well i think i stand corrected, but i aint soOOo sure. Im gonna have to look it to that one myself.

i need to find the video of the ITN news cast, its not working at the moment so ill try later.

Thanx for your setting my facts straight, sort of. For my own satisfaction, i need to compair the origional report i saw with the article you showed me.

Im certain they were talking about the pentagon, but hey, i could be wrong, or maybe it them who were wrong



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 05:25 PM
link   


You just stick to your view


Oh and by the way, its not a view. it is an unsubstanciated fact based on information i MAY or may NOT have heard.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
www.cnn.com...

Well here is something...


(CNN) -- The U.S. Central Command judge advocate general has authorized the release of the cockpit video from a U.S. fighter jet involved in a friendly fire incident in Iraq nearly four years ago, Pentagon officials told CNN.

The tape will be released to the British coroner who requested it and to the family of the British soldier who was killed in the incident.

Earlier, Pentagon sources told CNN the video would not be released, contradicting an announcement by the UK prime minister's office that the video would be released to the British coroner investigating the death of a British soldier killed in the 2003 incident.

A British tabloid newspaper Tuesday released what it says is a cockpit video from a U.S. fighter jet being used in the investigation of a "friendly-fire" incident in Iraq in which a British soldier was killed.

The Sun posted the 15-minute video, along with a transcript, on its Web site under the headline: "The tape they wanted to hide."

The coroner had demanded the video be released and presented as evidence in an inquest, but until now U.S. authorities refused.



In a statement, Britain's Ministry of Defense (MOD) said the video was classified and should not have been released.

"A copy of the video was used as evidence by the Board of Inquiry's investigation into the incident," the ministry statement said.

"This recording is the property of the United States government and the MOD does not have the right to release it without their permission"



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join