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 Q and A

page: 27
61
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by housegroove23
no_one817 - Puppet Bush signed off that bill that will allow him to launch REX-84 and enforce marshal law at any time without the approval of Congress or anybody else.........ever since then a good number of us have already assumed that the "Global Elite" will carry out a false flag attack or operation that will allow them to enforce marshal law and keep Puppet Bush in power.

So this is not really new to some of us. Did you hear that there was rumor floating around a couple of months ago that says the "Global Elite" wants to take out Ron Paul because they saw him as the biggest threat to their evil plans? I wonder if they still will do this or if it will be someone else?


[edit on 2/10/08 by housegroove23]



I have not heard of rumors. I figured that since this signed bill was done in quiet, not many knew. But I'm glad some of you do.

The plan for Ron Paul just doesn't make sense. They will take out someone so it makes an impact on the election.




posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
no_one847, your comments in this thread speak for themselves.. The onus is now with ATS management and not with you.

While I am still wary, I will until proven otherwise, hear you out fairly.


Regards Freelancer



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
27 pages, and only a partial answer to my query (back a bazillion pages ago)
no_one; if making this thread so large that it really does finally attract attention is your goal, you are most assuredly on your way.
Please, i will ask again: what would you have us here at ATS do?
Are we to continue this back and forth diatribe, or will you finally, ultimately, give us SOMETHING to run with?
I certainly appreciate your tenacity in the face of seeming adversity, but , please, for the love of all that's decent...throw us a bone here..give us something tangible to utilize. Basically, poop or get off the pot, so to speak; back up your bs (no slam intended).
As far as as the "who" in the "may not be there for the election plot", see several threads on ATS...how timely...hmm..
Be Well...



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by housegroove23Let me guess, you must be a Scientist, Astronomer or a NAZA supporter.

Either way, its ok - your titled to your own opinion.

However, the truth is in there if you care to look.


No I am not a NAZA, nor do I believe in glass spires and tanks on either the moon or Mars, or whatever Hoaxland is peddling now. I will overlook Hoagland on that website and view some of the other stuff.

And for the record, I am fairly convinced no_one is who he says he is.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Freelancer
 


The onus is on us?


How do you figure we would go about proving or disproving anything of this sort? Short of a member sending us a whole slew of paperwork including, W-2s, Employee ID cards, pay check stubs and a letter from their boss, which no one wanting to remain "hidden" would ever do, what do you suggest?

Springer...



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


Forgive me for not explaining myself better. The OP in this thread stated:-


I think this is a good idea in theory. But I simply cannot provide documentation on who I am. I wouldn't put it past the people in gl to have a mole here. I offered a private Q and A to the mods here on this site. They have not replied. They offered for me to go on their radio show, and I at this point, do not want to take that risk. To many unknown factors as I have told the mods privately. I offered for them to put me in a private chat and they can bombard me with questions that I will answer in real time with no time for 'research'. They can then decide if they want to post the chat for all to see and make their own determinations.

Seems like the only fair compromise.

Seems like I'm the only 'OP' actually taking on these challenges.


While I agree work records and letters from the boss is asking a bit too much, the OP has stated he is prepared to chat privately with ATS management in real time and then have that chat posted for all to see if so required.

As you can see, this thread has been to some extent, held up and extended unnecessarily across many pages on the basic establishment of whether he is from GL or not. Had the OP through private real time questioning, satisfied yourself/staff that he was from GL then this would have allowed this thread to focus on the important issues this OP claims.

Respectfully Freelancer



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
reply to post by Freelancer
 


The onus is on us?


How do you figure we would go about proving or disproving anything of this sort? Short of a member sending us a whole slew of paperwork including, W-2s, Employee ID cards, pay check stubs and a letter from their boss, which no one wanting to remain "hidden" would ever do, what do you suggest?

Springer...


I have to agree. There is no way I am going to show you anything of that nature. I offered what I offered to the site. If its not enough, then people are just going to have to make their own mind up.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


This is an excellent question, when it comes down to it, a whistle blower will not go that far to prove that they are who they say they are. And skeptics will not accept anything less.

The current solution of moving the thread into Skunk Works is a good compromise for everyone. After moving the thread to Skunk Works the OP should be free from scrutiny from sceptics about his/her identity. unfortunately for some reason everyone is not understanding this concept. So this is what needs to be done after the thread is moved to Skunk Works.



Due to member demand, the following thread is now under close staff scrutiny.



Any inappropriate comments, insults, topic derailment, or trolling will result in immediate posting ban or account termination.


This is the only way. Yes, I believe that it has gotten that bad to resort to this. Don't you agree?

[edit on 2/10/08 by housegroove23]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Having read all 27 pages of this ongoing discussion in a single sitting, I tend to agree with most on here that the OP has much to do to convince the members of his authenticity. While I can understand his/her frustration with the naysayers, how can he/she deny them the instinct, when faced with these kind of sensation claims, to want some kind of factual basis to convince themselves that what they are hearing is the truth. It’s a natural human reaction after all. Don’t we all say “no way!” or words to that effect if we hear something we can hardly believe? Distant news of the death of a friend or relative will send us scurrying for the phone to find out more and how many persons on the face of planet earth didn’t bother switching on the TV on 9/11 and took someone’s word for it? Its human nature to be sceptical and while I sympathise with no_one817 for his/her rough ride, in posting in such a place as this he/she really should have expected this kind of reception from the kind of inquisitive minds that people like ourselves have. I sincerely hope he/she is genuine although I also sincerely hope the events he/she describes do not come to pass. Perhaps the course of action suggested by the poster above (and as agreed to in modified form by no_one817) will be enough to erase any doubts.

However, in the meantime, I would like to ask a couple of questions on an aspect that hasn’t been touched on yet- how has the restrictions of the OP’s job affected him/her in everyday life? I’m not asking for personal details just some indication of what it is like to live life under the pressure of constant secrecy. People talk about work all the time in social situations, how do you not let something slip after a few cold ones? Is there a cover story you have to rehearse over and over until you almost believe it yourself? Does everyone have the same cover story? If not who comes up with 2600 different cover stories? Are you taught techniques for dealing with this kind of thing? Or am I getting a bit too John Le Carre about it?

You have already told us about the punishing daily schedule you have, how do you keep that up?

Thanks for your time, hope you can answer some of these and they are a refreshing relief from questions about alien propulsion systems.


[edit on 10-2-2008 by Goldtop]



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 05:16 PM
link   





Another intelligent skeptic. Nothing wrong with that. I said many times here that there is nothing wrong with questioning me. I did expect it...


As to my daily life. It is hard at times. But the people who know me know not to talk about it anymore. Hence with my close circle, I have no problems. To all of them I work at Nellis. It is a widespread story people use. If anyone wants further details, I simply tell them I am not in the position to talk about it. Life only becomes annoying when I meet friends of friends. I was at a poker table once around town and hear a bunch of college kids talking about how they camp at Area 51 all the time looking for UFO's. The poker dealer there knew who I was as I have been there a few times before. He only is aware that I work at Nellis AFB. And he jokingly said to the kids that I would probably know much about Area 51 and that they should ask me. This all happened while at the bathroom. I came back and they just gawked at me. I knew exactly what had gone on as I kept quiet through all their rants. When a situation such as that happens I just joke it away. My response was " Sorry, master Alien Zorg has instructed me not talk" They all laughed and got the point that even though I was from Nellis, I have obviously been told not to talk about anything, or I simply didn't want to talk.

So with people who happen to be around me when the topic of gl hits, I simply joke away my involvement or knowledge and remind people I work at Nellis and have never hear seen or been to any base in the Rachel vicinity. A small story to sum up how I treat every day life.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by housegroove23
 



This is the only way. Yes, I believe that it has gotten that bad to resort to this. Don't you agree?


Aside from a few BS and Hoax's mentioned towards the claims made by the OP, I have not seen anything to warrant your statement. So I respectfully have to disagree.

Only one posting, mine, warranted the intervention of Springer and that was because I did not explain myself better.

When someone makes a controversial claim, as with the OP of this thread, it is expected that they prove their claim or claims. The nature of the claim in this thread is naturally difficult to prove and so alternative questions are required that may seem to some as 'trivial'..

Allowing the thread to continue as it has done has shown to many people here, that the OP is perhaps the real deal because he has so far stood against all the 'sceptics' and is still here defending his claims.

Perhaps the OP will make a general comment on the behaviour of this thread towards him?

Regards Freelancer



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by cbianchi513
Whoa- A sort of 21st century crusade... to cover up a Bush dynasty power grab?


Yeah exactly this guy don't make no sense in a way or the other


Originally posted by no_one817 As far as explaining it more, I don't feel I have to do that. I think it is pretty obvious. Someone from either party might not be there in the end, thus causing Bush to delay the election.


Right it's obvious. 1 point for you => ball to the center.

Ok Bush Senior & Junior may not be angels, sure.
But,
War=money / Elections=Delayed / US+Iran=War / U.S Empire=Shining again

Looks like a bad x-files episode from the 8th or 9th season.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   




I'm confused as to what you wanted from me in regards to this whole thread. I don't care if it goes on for 1000 pages or just one. As long people are educated, and made aware. And if people want to try and debunk me, I INVITE IT. I just get really frustrated when it is things that have already had answers or don't even make sense when trying to debunk me. When that happens, I get fed up with them and, unfortunately tune them out. Thats not the way

I want to handle anyone. So for those few people, I apologize.

For the people who have been skeptics and have had a civilized back and forth with me, I embrace.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   




Now what has just happened to me here is called good sensationalism. You should go to work for the Weekly World News. Go back to the post you lifted that quote from, and place it back into it's proper context.

In all fairness, you will see that this quote was not a representation of the OP's opinion or thoughts, but another poster.

Semantics like this are part of what is going poorly here.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Freelancer
 


What could he say in chat that would prove anything more than what he says in public? It is still JUST HIM TYPING whatever he wants no? That proves nothing, ads zero to any credibility ads zero support to his claims. How is that putting the onus on us?


There's the rub, there is virtually no way for us to vet these people short of the list I presented.

Now it comes down to, whether or not the membership wants to us to allow these type threads without the "paperwork"? Thus we have SkunkWorks, where any and all can bring what they will and the membership gets to decide for themselves.

IF it becomes clear (by membership consensus) a member is posting knowingly false information and refuses to back it up, we ban them. But again, that is up to the membership.

Springer...



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 06:19 PM
link   
It seems that from what I gather and "I'm sure you will tell me if I'm wrong," is that you have members that have much knowledge in most of the topics. I suggest that you let these members drill them. Say In a U2U environment. If they pass the test let the questions rip.
It doesn't have to be of a personal nature just enough for the expert to pass the person on to skunk works or wherever.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
reply to post by Freelancer
 


What could he say in chat that would prove anything more than what he says in public? It is still JUST HIM TYPING whatever he wants no? That proves nothing, ads zero to any credibility ads zero support to his claims. How is that putting the onus on us?


There's the rub, there is virtually no way for us to vet these people short of the list I presented.

Now it comes down to, whether or not the membership wants to us to allow these type threads without the "paperwork"? Thus we have SkunkWorks, where any and all can bring what they will and the membership gets to decide for themselves.

IF it becomes clear (by membership consensus) a member is posting knowingly false information and refuses to back it up, we ban them. But again, that is up to the membership.

Springer...


I only offered that as sort of a half way point. I wont call in, but rather than avoid, I came up with this. Now I understand it is still me typing. But it gets rid of the argument that I have time to research and what not.



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by no_one817
 


Eliminating the availability "research time" is pretty pointless and silly in the big picture isn't it?


Look, either you are, or, you are not who you claim to be, I will admit the odds are stacked so unimaginably against you being who you claim to be it's actually a moot point.

That's why we leave it up to the consensus of the membership. We STRONGLY believe in and support the Wisdom of the Crowd around here, it hasn't failed us yet.


The fact you are still posting without the membership calling for your demise here is mildly impressive, I will stand aside until and unless there is a reason to intervene as directed by the membership.

Springer...



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
reply to post by no_one817
 


Eliminating the availability "research time" is pretty pointless and silly in the big picture isn't it?


Look, either you are, or, you are not who you claim to be, I will admit the odds are stacked so unimaginably against you being who you claim to be it's actually a moot point.

That's why we leave it up to the consensus of the membership. We STRONGLY believe in and support the Wisdom of the Crowd around here, it hasn't failed us yet.


The fact you are still posting without the membership calling for your demise here is mildly impressive, I will stand aside until and unless there is a reason to intervene as directed by the membership.

Springer...


Well, if anyone else can come up with something I can think about, I'm all ears. my offer stands until there is something better



posted on Feb, 10 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Springer
 


You are right and I do understand the difficulty in establishing the 'truth' in these circumstances. Therefore in reflection to my original comment I acknowledge that the strength and diversity of the ATS membership is the overall deciding factor to an OP claims.



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join