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.

 

The Top Secret US Military Space Program. Is The Future Already Here?

page: 5
105
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 06:55 AM
link   
This may come as a surprise to some of my logical minded friends, but I 100% believe and 70% know there is a massive "secret" space program going on worldwide.

However, to bring my absurd proclamation down to reality just a bit, I do not know or believe that any of it are manned programs nor involving some of the wilder and most ridiculous speculations about secret manned space stations and people living on the Moon and Venus etc.

Unless you subscribe to some sort of unfounded ET theory, there is no reason to have a secret manned space program if you sit down and use logic, reason and common sense.




posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 07:06 AM
link   
I'll skip the first part of your post and get right the point...


Originally posted by Critical_Mass
Why did this recent spy satellite suddenly "lose power"? Could it have been an example from China or Russia? We won't know until it jumps out in our faces.


But 'we' ( or rather 'they') do know what's going on...


U.S. Fears Satellites Damaged
Peter G. Neumann
Sun 24 Jan 88 14:10:34-PST

Subtitle -- Soviets used lasers to cripple equipment, sources contend.

Washington, by Richard Sale (UPI, 24 January 1988).

U.S. intelligence agencies are convinced Soviet laser attacks have damaged
supersophisticated U.S. spy satellites deployed to monitor missile and
spacecraft launches, administration sources said. These sources said they
believe the Soviets fired ground-based lasers to cripple optical equipment
attempting to scan launches at Tyuratam, the major Soviet space center, to
obtain a variety of sensitive military information. Administration
intelligence sources said they fear that other vital U.S. reconnaissance
satellites will soon be endangered because six new Soviet laser battle stations
are under construction... "There is no way you can protect the optical sensors
on satellites" from laser attacks, an Air Force official said. ...

Intelligence sources acknowledged that the Pentagon also has trained
ground-based lasers on Soviet spacecraft, sometimes in attempts to disrupt
their sensors. ...

catless.ncl.ac.uk...




One effect of the panic was the strengthening of U.S. satellites against
radiation that in the end would help shield them from ground-based laser
attacks. According to U.S. intelligence sources, who asked not to be named,
such attacks damaged super-sophisticated American spy satellites deployed to
monitor missile and spacecraft launches at the major Russian space center.

In 1976, a KH-11 or Code 1010 satellite was "painted" by a Soviet laser
and sustained "permanent damage," according to a senior Air Force official.
This source said that such paintings continued into the late 1980s.

Air Force officials told UPI that for years the Soviets had a
"battle-ready" ground-based laser at Saryshagan that they said they believed
had been involved in past blindings of U.S. spacecraft.

But the result of the "hosings" of U.S. equipment was positive. The United
States moved quickly to install laser warning receivers on its newest
generation of low-orbit spacecraft, U.S. intelligence sources said. The
receivers have allowed time for evasive action and have assisted ground
controllers seeking to prove the Soviets had inflicted the damage.

One State Dept. analyst said that the whole Star Wars system of the Reagan
presidency was the result of Soviets "messing around with our satellites."

www.g2mil.com...




Kornilov points out a laser reflector but gives no information on any scientific experiments using it. He also states that personnel on ships, aircraft and the ground were to take part in experiments with Polyus. It appears they were to attempt to target the platform by radar, infra-red and visible light, and when the platform was detected they were to fire at it with lasers. If the laser hit the platform, the mirror would reflect it back to Earth, and thus the platform's stealthiness could be tested without making radio transmissions. Earlier launch pad photos showed that the Polyus was covered by an optically black shroud and it is suspected that this may have been radar absorptive as well.

www.astronautix.com...



The Soviet response was immediate. Yuri Andropov ordered additional funding and implementation of Fon-2. At the same time Soviet diplomatic initiatives were undertaken. A proposal was made to the Unite States to ban all space-based weapons. Andropov declared a unilateral moratorium on testing of the improved IS-MU ASAT. As a 'warning shot' the Terra-3 complex was used to track the STS-41-G space shuttle Challenger with a low power laser on 10 October 1984. This caused malfunction of on-board equipment and temporary blinding of the crew, leading to a US diplomatic protest.

www.astronautix.com...



China has successfully developed a laser cannon with a range of over 100km and might have already deployed it in Fujian Province facing Taiwan, defense sources said yesterday.

"One version goes that the weapon is still under development. Another is that the weapon has already been deployed across the Taiwan Strait and that there are around 20 units in service," the official said.

Chang Li-teh (???), a senior editor with Defense Technology Monthly magazine, said it is possible that China had successfully developed a laser cannon with Taiwan in its range.

"The US' airborne laser was designed to have a range of between 200 and 300km. If the system could strike that far from an aircraft, it should be able to reach much further launched from land," Chang said.

"Such laser weapons depend on power supply for effectiveness. A land-based laser cannon has a much greater power supply than airborne one," he said.

www.taipeitimes.com...



One approach is "parasite satellites"--orbiting limpet bombs that attach themselves to enemy craft for detonation at a later date. The Chinese say they can do this already, though the claim is hard to verify. A simpler method is to disable your enemy with a high-speed projectile. In other words, shoot at it. This was tried in 1974 when the Soviet Union launched Salyut 3, the first crewed military reconnaissance outpost in orbit. In anticipation of an attack by the US, the Soviets mounted a modified machine gun on the satellite so they could greet any hostile approach with a hail of bullets. The attack never came. Salyut 3 proved to be a white elephant and was quickly decommissioned, although not without a shot being fired. After the two-man crew had left, the ground crew fired a few rounds by remote control. It must have been quite a sight.

Particle-beam weapons inflict damage in a similar way. They emit beams of particles, perhaps hydrogen or deuterium ions, at near-light speed. Details remain sketchy, but the principle is essentially the same as in an ion-propulsion system (New Scientist, 21 November 1998, p 22). A working particle beam is believed to have been on board the mysterious Soviet "battlestar" Polyus-Skif, which was launched in May 1987 but crashed during take-off. Polyus-Skif also carried a prototype laser for destroying satellites. In the US, research on particle-beam weapons continues at the High Energy Research and Technology Facility on Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico.

www.jamesoberg.com...



In 1983 flight trials of the approximately 60t laser device commenced on an Ilyushin Il-76MD heavylift transport. At the same time research was being carried out on the propagation of laser beams in the atmosphere.

Starting at the end of the 1960s, the Russians also developed ground-based nuclear laser systems for combating spacecraft. Unlike the American x-ray lasers, they could be used several times over. The programme was terminated after the USSR announced a unilateral moratorium on trials of the space defence system and the puzzling deaths of the two project managers in the mid-1980s.

The mobile Pamir-SU electro-generator, with an output of 15MW and a mass of around 20t, could supply power to long-range lasers and ultra-high-frequency weapon systems. It could be used both on the Earth and also in space. In 1994/1995 this equipment was sold to the USA.

www.flug-revue.rotor.com...



We have right now, I believe, one weapons-grade laser operating in the United States. The Soviets have at least ten we have identified and there may be more. At Los Alamos right now our scientists are working on developing a very compact particle accelerator. This is vital work toward the development of something you have all heard about, a particle beam weapon of some kind. At the heart of that system is a Soviet invention dating back to the 1960s called a radio frequency quadrapole. Years ago, the Soviets mys@eriously decided that there would be no more literature, open or semi-open, on this or any similar development. Such information suddenly disappeared from these vaunted scientific exchanges that we hear are so important. Of course, the Soviets exchange very little information that is vital to them in these so-called exchanges, anyway.

www.heritage.org...



I am pretty convinced though that space is already well weaponized on the part of the US.


And my research so far indicates that the US completely lost that race somewhere back in 1977.... I know few can believe such a thing but that's my opinion.



Look at some of the satellite images that make it to youtube, google earth, and all of the other resources.


But yet they we saw Chernobyl on French sat pictures, the US military authorities employed French satellite data in both gulf wars and they supposedly had no terrain maps for Yugoslavia. When they start finding the 'terrorist' by watching them in real time or actually read number plates i will start believing but until then i am not scared that the US government is watching my every move from space.



With sophisticated imagery like that, it's safe to say if they wanted to they could easily use that tech in conjunction with a laser weapon, or even some form of re-entry vehicles.


And yet both the wars in Iraq and Yugoslavia showed that the US armed forces were almost entirely incapable of convention strategic decapitation strikes or of true 'smart' bombing.

Stellar



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by daniel_g
reply to post by mikesingh
 


lol and what exactly do you think NACA & Co. accomplished in regards of space exploration? They put 1 satellite in space, just one, so much for the extra 40 years in space exploration research that you are adding..

Now it's easy to come here and say things like 'back then they put many man on the moon, now we have to wait 20 years...'
I repeat, know your facts before you say anything with no fundaments:

In 1966 NASA had a budget of 5.933 billion dollars.
In 2007 NASA had a budget of 16.25 billion dollars.

Sure you can argue that right now they have 3 times as more as they had back then. However, lets not forget something very basic: The value of money doesn't stay constant over time. One dollar in 1966 was worth 3 times as much as it's worth today, meaning a $5 billion budget would be equivalent to the $16 billion budget that they are getting today. So in reality there has not been a real budget increase.

However, back then they didn't have 1000 satellites to worry about, they also didn't have Space Shuttles or ongoing Mars exploration programs. The money for those programs didn't grow in trees, and I don't think that the fact that the apollo era stopped just years before the space shuttle program was a coincidence.

I'll repeat it to you: If you are going to say that there is something fishy with NASA's budget, at least try to provide proof of what you are saying.
Here, why don't you have fun with the 2007 budget?
www.nasa.gov...
Do the math, look up the projects. If you find large amounts of money missing, or non-existing programs, then say so, I'm open minded.

[edit on 28-1-2008 by daniel_g]


I knew it! it's the long lost prodical disciple of NASA! :p

You think a program like NASA doesnt have a very good book-keeper to balance the sheets ? please, even self-employed workers have those. No point playing with the figures, who likes doing that anyway ?

And to add another thing, the satellites that are in the sky that were created and put in orbit using your money, are actually for commercial gain, we pay them to put em up, we pay them to use them. Not to mention, satellites calibrated correctly are a weapon in more ways than one.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by daniel_g
I saw the post by goosdawg, I'm not blind, no need to repost it.
However, I'll repeat it to you for a third time: Do research before using information you learned from other people.


Ditto!


I'll quote the exact words of Mr. Donald Rumsfeld that led to this 'controversy':
1- Not anywhere in that quote did I see "$2.3 trillion missing".


Sure he didn't say it was missing but how much help do you need to figure that out for yourself? Why are they still , or rather not, looking for that money? Why on Earth would you believe Rumsfeld when he tells you that proper wiring and access space were not installed when the construction of the pentagon started in the 40's? As i remember electricity and telephones existed back then ?


2- Assuming a DoD budget of $300 billion per year before 2001(the year the claim was made). It would take 7 years for the DoD to lose 2.3 trillion if they had lost every single penny, 14 years if they lost half their budget, etc, etc


Obviously this IS about very bad accounting over a number of years but your suggesting that it's nothing but a accounting error is based on the presumption that fraud and the Pentagon is not synonymous.


While the committee staffers are neither elected nor open to public input, they remain accessible to program contractors. "The contractors who stand to benefit from the funding decisions," Aftergood says, "are free to lobby the staffers."

According to the Sept-Oct 1995 issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, published by the Educational Foundation of Nuclear Science, all of the top ten defense contractors in the U.S. were convicted of or admitted to fraud during the period from 1980 to 1992.

www.metroactive.com...



"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions," Rumsfeld admitted.$2.3 trillion — that's $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America. To understand how the Pentagon can lose track of trillions, consider the case of one military accountant who tried to find out what happened to a mere $300 million.

"We know it's gone. But we don't know what they spent it on," said Jim Minnery, Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

benfrank.net...


So we know fraud is a common event and we know that 300 million simply goes missing with no one being the wiser as to who had the money. We also know that people who do accounting and ask too many questions gets fired or reassigned.


The problem is not that the money is missing, the problem is that if you try to find info about a specific transaction, you won't be able to find it because it may be buried between millions of other documents.


Sure, but!


For instance, in June 2002 the GAO reviewed the history of a proposed Corporate Information Management system, or CIM. The initiative began in 1989 as an attempt to unify more than 2,000 overlapping systems then being used for billing, inventory, personnel and similar functions. But after "spending about $20 billion, the CIM initiative was eventually abandoned," the GAO said.Gregory Kutz, director of GAO's financial management division and co-author of that report, likened Defense to a dysfunctional corporation, with the Pentagon cast as a holding company exercising only weak fiscal control over its subsidiaries -- the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Today, DOD has about 2,200 overlapping financial systems, Kutz said, and just running them costs taxpayers $18 billion a year."The (Pentagon's) inability to even complete an audit shows just how far they have to go," he said.
Kutz contrasted the department's loose inventory controls to state-of-the- art systems at private corporations.

"I've been to Wal-Mart," Kutz said. "They were able to tell me how many tubes of toothpaste were in

Fairfax, Va., at that given moment. And DOD can't find its chem-bio suits."

www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2003/05/18/MN251738.DTL


So Walmart can do it but the US government can't? Do you think Walmart spent 20 billion dollars to get their accounting system to work and do you think Walmart's shareholders would have found such a massive expenditure on a uncompleted project acceptable? Do you think the American public would by happy to know that they spent 20 billion dollars on a accounting/physical structure that is still failing to turn up the 'lost' money?


In fact, all Mr. Rumsfeld was trying to accomplish with that speech was to create a better model to avoid the bureaucracy offered by the system they had back then. 9/11 came shortly afterwards, and it proved fatal for Rumsfeld proposal. Consequences: $10000 screws(the short way of saying contractors are now having the time of their lives).


That speech took place on the tenth, one day before 9-11. (EDIT I think that was the original disclosour and that invalidates the time frame and at least some some of Mckinney's involvement) Talk about a conspiracy theory.... Rumsfeld was not trying to create a better model and were forced to respond to questions from the house of representatives floor. If Cynthia McKinney didn't ask about the accounting problems and why Dyncorp Sex slave trading rings we may not have heard about it... To continue and show that this is not just a problem from the 90's or 80's...


The Pentagon has no accurate knowledge of the cost of military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan or the fight against terrorism, limiting Congress's ability to oversee spending, the Government Accountability Office concluded in a report released yesterday.

The Defense Department has reported spending $191 billion to fight terrorism from the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks through May 2005, with the annual sum ballooning from $11 billion in fiscal 2002 to a projected $71 billion in fiscal 2005. But the GAO investigation found many inaccuracies totaling billions of dollars.

"Neither DOD nor Congress can reliably know how much the war is costing and details of how appropriated funds are being spent," the report to Congress stated. The GAO said the problem is rooted in long-standing weaknesses in the Pentagon's outmoded financial management system, which is designed to handle small-scale contingencies.The probe also found "inadvertent double accounting" by the Navy and Marine Corps from November 2004 to April 2005 amounting to almost $1.8 billion.

www.washingtonpost.com...



Some news agency missinterpreted that information, and the missunderstanding spread like a virus. Hence the importance of at least trying to dig more information before offering personal opinions.

Link to the speech here:
www.defenselink.mil...


They didn't misrepresent the issue nearly as badly as you did and until that money trail is found and investigated you will be the one claiming that the money isn't lost ( meaning into corporate pockets )when that's what the evidence indicates


Note I'm still not disputing the existance of black projects.


Which would be a very strange thing to do !


However, if there is such thing, then I personally believe that it's budget is not going to come from the budget of other institutions, all I'm saying is that if the government is covering something up, they are going to do a good job, and the money allocated towards whatever they are covering is not going to show on a paper that everyone has access to, even if it's not obvious.


Why do you believe that the governments cover up's always works? Do you think governments are so monolithic and ingeniously clever that mistakes are never made and corruption never exposed? Why presume that this is not one of those instances? In fact how much do you really need to take from the pentagon budget when the shuttle budget invested in the more efficient Saturn V could have resulted in some of the following:


å Second, to paraphrase Dr. George Mueller at a NASA history conference held in Washington in recent years, we “got the shuttle we have today from the ‘Bureau of the Budget Design Bureau’” that NASA did not want and that was not cheaper than Saturn 5.

www.space.com...


Could have had Walmarts on the Moon i tell you!


Griffin puts the marginal cost at $100M in 1970 dollars or about $500M today. That would give us $2000/lb to LEO. If we had continued to put $15B/year in current dollars into Lunar development, that would be about 87.5 million to LEO in the last 35 years if 1/3 of the money was spent on launches or over 15 million pounds to the Moon assuming no improvement over 1960s technology (and to be fair no bureaucratic price inflation beyond the consumer price index). That is about 75 international space stations worth of mass.

www.transterrestrial.com...



Why do I think that? Well, one would think that they learned from the errors that led to the disclosure of Area 51, don't you think?


Anyone who thinks that the government learnt anything useful about what happened ( or rather didn't happen) at area 51 should probably not debate pentagon finances; in fact anyone who STILL considers area 51 worthy of conspiratorial rambling is in my opinion pretty dull. It's like ATS does not exist and there isn't obvious and far more damning crimes to expose!

Stellar

[edit on 29-1-2008 by StellarX]



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


This is just a reply from Cool Hand's remarks on page 1, haven't read the rest of the pages yet. Just one question, that may be off topic but still on topic: How many spys died today? I ask this question becuase the likely hood of you knowing the answer to this is equal to you knowing a single thing about a black ops space program. I know by your comments to Mike's post would say I'm in for a sarcastic comeback. Support the black list of dead spys and then we'll talk about a faux black ops program.

In regards to Mike I enjoy your post, not that I always agree with the subject but your threads are always pretty interesting. I do agree with these programs as being factual, with what is constantly unexplained there has to be something else. Keep up the good work, I do think however if this technology is possibly it sure as hell better be adapted to the Mars Mission.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by spitefulgod
 


I think it's important to worry about both, since both seem to be supported by "Black" funding:

Funding Echelon

The proposed U.S.-only "Total Information Awareness" program relied on technology similar to that supposedly used by ECHELON, and is believed to have been intended to integrate the extensive sources it is legally permitted to survey domestically with the "taps" already supposedly compiled by ECHELON. It was canceled by the U.S. Congress in 2004. It was later discovered in 2005 that the CIA had not dismantled the program, but had simply blacklisted it as classified and funded it using CIA money allocated for such top secret operations, thereby defying Congress.[citation needed]

It has been alleged that in 2002 the Bush Administration extended the ECHELON program to domestic surveillance.[14][15][16][17]



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
I love people like Cool Hand who believes everything the government spouts out at them. Its a fact that there is a black budget even the government doesnt deny that anymore. So where does that money go? I think this is totally believable I dont see anyone who can prove it wrong without a doubt. I dont see anyone who can prove it right without a doubt either but Ill go a. and choose to think outside the box. There sure are a lot of UFO sightings these days and I know they are not F16s like the government says they are.

Cool you just keep believing everything your told oh and btw I have a bridge in brooklyn for sale you interested?



I do believe in black programs, I know they exsist. However, they are not used to fund something useless like a secret space station?

What would be the point of one? What can you only do with a secret space station that you could not do with an unmanned platform?



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
For God's sake, another one of these topics? Are you kidding me?

Let's ask the same simple questions that have been asked in all the OTHER FORUMS here about the same subject and see if you can shed any more light on them.

1. Where do these ships launch from?
2. Where are the eyewitness accounts of these launches? Where are the reports from other countries of launches that weren't predisclosed?
3. Where are they recruiting these secret astronauts from?
4. Where are the pictures of these secret stations in orbit? Why aren't other countries asking about unkown objects in orbit?
5. Why haven't any other countries attempted to put their own secret stations up there to monitor ours?

Start with those, if you can answer them we can hit you with the others that no one else here can answer.

Deny Ignorance, don't embrace it.

[edit on 28/1/08 by COOL HAND]


oh oh i wanna try!
ok :
1)Where do these ships launch from?
Well, there are so many remote locations that we can't see even in the US. Just think of restricted airspace. and many people do see the take offs, then they call the police and say they saw a UFO.
2) Where are the eyewitness accounts of these launches? Where are the reports from other countries of launches that weren't predisclosed?
refer to my previous answer.
3) Where are they recruiting these secret astronauts from?
PLEASE! how many people wouldnt want to do this? going onto space is like the ultimate dream for many. You think they dont recruit people out of the military? They see a good candidate, they train him and swear him to secrecy, its pretty simple man. people do anything for their country.
these questions are pretty easy so far. lets try the next one!
4)Where are the pictures of these secret stations in orbit? Why aren't other countries asking about unkown objects in orbit?
have you seen interstellar? thats one possibility. Others are the simple math that people dont have that poweful of telescopes. Most of the best UFO shots are taken from the shuttles themselves, why cant we see those from here? I think the atmosphere and cloud coverage prob have something to do with it aswell.
5)Why haven't any other countries attempted to put their own secret stations up there to monitor ours?
well mate, same as why has no other country ever landed on the moon?
The US has an unlimited supply of resources used from our tax payer dollars. Can we assume we have the lead in Space technology? Well, with all the cover ups on anti gravity technology and related black ops... i would tend to say yes...
and, whos to say other govts dont have there own secret space shiz up there? hell, we dont even know that we do! maybe their all working together!

sheesh, that was easy.
ill take the next set of questions now... just dont ask anything too hard





MIKE! buddy! another top notch thread!



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 


Hey, I am asking you to provide your own evidence to back up your support of the existence of this program.

If this is too hard for you to do (and not rely on somenone else's "work") then let me know and I will stop wasting my time on you.


come on now buddy, this is ATS! things get reposted all the time! AND THEY SHOULD!
I would have never read the past threads about this subject.
Thanks to Mike, I actually have somewhere to start from now.

When things get reiterated, thats not a bad thing... it sheds more light on the topic and leads to further discussion...
isnt that denying ignorance?



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
sheesh, that was easy.
ill take the next set of questions now... just dont ask anything too hard



Fine,

1. Who built them? Where are the disgruntled former employees selling their stories to C2C about how they built the things?

2. Why can't we get a decent picture of one of these things in orbit? With a commerical telescope it should be easy, but no one has pulled it off yet.
Heck, Buddasystem offered to start a collection to buy John Lear one to take a photo of one of these stations and JL turned him down.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
1. Who built them? Where are the disgruntled former employees selling their stories to C2C about how they built the things?

2. Why can't we get a decent picture of one of these things in orbit? With a commerical telescope it should be easy, but no one has pulled it off yet.


ok, ill give it a shot...

1) WE built them... do you have clearance to top secret military bases? neither do I, so I'm going to assume that they build them there... perhaps even area 51, who knows!
Maybe an underground base! point is, the govt controls so many secret bases that only a select few can enter that anything is possible.
Where do you think the govt build the latest top secret combat plane? They kept the stealth bomber secret even when they were using it!

Many disgruntled employees do in fact come out and disclose information. If you watch almost any UFO documentary there are always the blacked out faces of former employees telling secrets.
NASA has had many employees quit and come forth...
Many people are so brainwashed with the news they see on TV (which is controlled by the media.. which in turn is controlled by the govt.) that they write these individuals off as crazy...
Thats why most of these conspiracy sites dont make front page news...

2)Perhaps... I'm sure the govt also puts restrictions on airspace, and we dont know where these commercial telescopes are...
Remember the movie Armeggedon? well, they said in that movie (which i know is just a movie) that they controlled something like 6 of the 7 telescopes that could spot the asteroid.
Why couldnt that be true? The govt does know where all the commercial telescopes are located and what they can see... Im sure there are some places out there that only those comercial telescopes cant observe. And many times those telescopes, as i mentioned before, are probably restricted. I;ve never seen a good picture of the space station or a shuttle from one of those telescopes, they are always taken from a satellite or a camera attached to the shuttle...



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
ok, ill give it a shot...

1) WE built them... do you have clearance to top secret military bases? neither do I, so I'm going to assume that they build them there... perhaps even area 51, who knows!
Maybe an underground base! point is, the govt controls so many secret bases that only a select few can enter that anything is possible.
Where do you think the govt build the latest top secret combat plane? They kept the stealth bomber secret even when they were using it!

Yep, I sure do.

The bases do not have manufacturing abilities of the scale that would be need to build an entire space station (in sections) and then launch them into space.



Many disgruntled employees do in fact come out and disclose information. If you watch almost any UFO documentary there are always the blacked out faces of former employees telling secrets.
NASA has had many employees quit and come forth...
Many people are so brainwashed with the news they see on TV (which is controlled by the media.. which in turn is controlled by the govt.) that they write these individuals off as crazy...
Thats why most of these conspiracy sites dont make front page news...

Then perhaps you can point out the videos with interviews from folks who built thses space stations? I am still waiting for them.



2)Perhaps... I'm sure the govt also puts restrictions on airspace, and we dont know where these commercial telescopes are...
Remember the movie Armeggedon? well, they said in that movie (which i know is just a movie) that they controlled something like 6 of the 7 telescopes that could spot the asteroid.
Why couldnt that be true? The govt does know where all the commercial telescopes are located and what they can see... Im sure there are some places out there that only those comercial telescopes cant observe. And many times those telescopes, as i mentioned before, are probably restricted. I;ve never seen a good picture of the space station or a shuttle from one of those telescopes, they are always taken from a satellite or a camera attached to the shuttle...


What? You should be able to spot these with a backyard telescope. Why aren't people trying to get folks with big backyard telescopes involved?



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Mikesing,
>>Black budgets? BlackProjects? Black programs? What the heck's going on? What are they doing in these black organisations? Peeling potatoes?

Yes, you called..ho ho.. you are close very close..



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


well, like i mentioned earlier, you should check out the Interstellar movie. That shows what you can see with back yard telescopes...

I will search for some movies or files of disgruntled nasa employees later as i know i have browsed them before, unfortunatly i have a deadline on a project im working on and have already wasted too much time on ATS today


as for the top secret clearance, thats great, but Ill bet you all my money you dont have top secret clearance into everything... ie: black projects stuff that we know actually goes on.
and im not saying they launch from those bases, just that they are built there, or at least parts are.
They can transport anything anywhere without the general public knowing about it.

But ill post back a little later, hopefully with some videos.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by goosdawg
 



I feel your pain goos. Maybe you should think about 'why' we are avoiding the moon. You will hear some say that it is indeed so yesterday or that it makes no sense to go back. However, it makes perfect sense to go back and establish a 'launching' base for deeper exploration. So why is it we all think that they (the US government) has decided that it is so yesterday? Because they are already there or something is already there.

What we see is probably centuries behind what the black ops are using technology wise. I too would not be shocked to find out that we have manned Mars for decades now.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


I guess Im thinking more in lines of the aircraft more so than the space station. The space station to me seems far fetched also but the aircraft for sure does not.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
well, like i mentioned earlier, you should check out the Interstellar movie. That shows what you can see with back yard telescopes...


I used to have one and I tracked the space shuttle with it all of the time. You can search the internet and find all kinds of pictures that folks took with their backyard telescopes, and see the kind of detail they can make out.

But, that doesn't fit with your premise.



I will search for some movies or files of disgruntled nasa employees later as i know i have browsed them before, unfortunatly i have a deadline on a project im working on and have already wasted too much time on ATS today


All that time wasted and nothing to show for it?



as for the top secret clearance, thats great, but Ill bet you all my money you dont have top secret clearance into everything... ie: black projects stuff that we know actually goes on.


What black project stuff do you know that actually goes on?



and im not saying they launch from those bases, just that they are built there, or at least parts are.
They can transport anything anywhere without the general public knowing about it.


Then show some proof of that going on. Take a camera and go to these places and take all kinds of pictures of these components moving about.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Earlier i spoke of several reasons for coverup and now have had time to reflect on a few thoughts of mine.

A few different conspiracies can be tied into this and i believe i can come up with a perfectly good explanation for this.

I think alot of us are familier with the Elites and their supposed slow takeover of the world and NWO. While i don't support these claims in full (such as depopulating Earth) i do however agree that there are definately a small group of people on this planet who have been controlling the direction of society.

After watching the Endgame video i tried to think of any reason why someone with such power anyways would go further to gain more, especially if they had to share it anyways with the other elites. It makes no sense to want to control everything when you pretty much already do. Kind of like continuing the game of poker once you have won all the chips and your opponents are naked and broke.

If indeed a group of elites do control the planet, they would remain doing so in private. The reasoning for this i believe lie in space exploration.

Mars Mineral Rights secured by Dr. Joseph Resnick, Lt. Col. Timothy R. O'Neill, Ph.D. (U.S. Army, Ret.), and Guy Cramer

Moon's mineral rights owned by ROC

This is scary indeed.

So the truth is, if the elite are involved in the space coverup, it is for this reason. Nothing would propel them to Superman status like owning the mineral right on the moon and mars when the space boom begins (or maybe it already has).

Take other theories into consideration such as Mars being able to support life and bases on the Moon and you could potentially create a society parallel to our own that is "offworld". Using a select few hundred or possibly thousand(s) people you would be able to create a utopia of sorts. All on the backs of your massive unwitting slave labour force on planet Earth to supply you with food, minerals, and of course any other things needed to live and for entertainment.

He who controls the solar system would have little concern over who rules Earth itself especially if the Earthbound have no means of mounting a retaliation, let alone find out about it. An operation such as this would require an operation as elaborate such as the Elite theory. Combine a few theoriea and it can be done.

This makes perfect sense especially if ancient tech were found in space or alien deals were made. The people who control it would be at the top nomatter what. And if it were to hit the fan on Earth they would have a safe location to hide out at.

Remember if everyone were to gain access to space right now, regardless of what we think goes on up there, we would fight over it. Perhaps there are people who believe they are the only ones who are priviledged enough to traverse it or habitate it. Either way we are not being let in the circle on this one and there are probably no plans of it ever happening.

The show Stargate is a perfect example of this. Even though they have saved the day, there are still no plans of telling the public, they allow aliens to live on Earth, they trade with other species, they even eliminated the threat in which they used as a reason for not disclosing to the public and yet still no disclosure, i thought a disclosure episode would make for a good watch.
And then the episode in which a show is fabricated called Wormhole Extreme, which they use as disinformation to the public in case info on the program gets leaked to the public.

That show is a classic scenario and can be used as an example of what is going on now in our society.

I know a few things i mentioned may seem far fetched and are probably not true but who knows what their motives are. There are too many coincidences going on to just rule them all out.

Remember next time there is a war that war has done more to create technological advances in society than anything else. WWII created most of the technology that was used in the early days of the space program. Im also sure that the huge war budget for Iraq and Afghanistan is not 100% accounted for and was probably an excuse for a big cash grab to fund secret programs. Who cares if we all suffer, they get their money. Plus things like war take our attention away from anything else that is going on.



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by COOL HAND
 


look duuuuuuuude....

im not going to find where they are launching...
Im not going to even get near a restricted area....
Im not going to be able to film any of it...
Im not going to find proof of any of this...

So STOP asking for the impossible, or ill be a baby also and ask you, "well prove that its not going on!"
YOU CANT! NEITHER CAN I!

All i am doing is giving an opinion to the possibilities that this could happen.
I didnt answer all your questions "matter of factly."
Isnt this what this site is for? denying ignorance?
correct me if I'm wrong...
Your saying its impossible, I'm saying its not...

So no, I dont have anything to show for it... but i did give a possible answer to your silly questions...

You really think the govt cant do any of this?
You really think there are no black operations, at all, for anything period?
Really?

Then your just one of those poor saps out there thatyll believe anything a higher power tells them.

Well, i guess if the govt says there not stealing tax payer's dollars, then their not!
Well, I guess since the govt tells us there are WMDs in Iraq then there are.

... see the drift?

The FACT is... we don't know.
We dont know if they can or cant do this.
What we can do is put the pictures together and try and find a glimpse to whats really going on around us...

and as I was trying to be polite, I think you should shrug off this grudge on your shoulder to people who believe this stuff is remotely possible and try and have a more open mind...



posted on Jan, 29 2008 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
im not going to find where they are launching...
Im not going to even get near a restricted area....
Im not going to be able to film any of it...
Im not going to find proof of any of this...


So you concede that it does not exist? How can something exist if there is no proof of it? Even the blackest of programs leaves a trail IF you know where to look.



So STOP asking for the impossible, or ill be a baby also and ask you, "well prove that its not going on!"
YOU CANT! NEITHER CAN I!


I can prove it is not going on. I (and the vast majority of the planet) have not seen these things in action.

Ever hear of Occums Razor?



All i am doing is giving an opinion to the possibilities that this could happen.
I didnt answer all your questions "matter of factly."
Isnt this what this site is for? denying ignorance?
correct me if I'm wrong...
Your saying its impossible, I'm saying its not...

How can you say that without proof? How much more ignrorant can you get?



So no, I dont have anything to show for it... but i did give a possible answer to your silly questions...

Where? You told me to look at something I know is incorrect.



You really think the govt cant do any of this?

Not without leaving evidence behind that someone could have come up with.



You really think there are no black operations, at all, for anything period?
Really?

Where did I say that? I fully accept the fact that there are black operations ongoing. I just do not accept that they have anything to do with a secret space program.



Well, i guess if the govt says there not stealing tax payer's dollars, then their not!
Well, I guess since the govt tells us there are WMDs in Iraq then there are.
... see the drift?

Ahh, you are one of those people. I should have known.



new topics

top topics



 
105
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join