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.

 

CIA Leaked Document or Fake... You Decide.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Don't you guys find it curious how all of the supposed "leaked" documents are geared towards HUGE conspiracies and the likes?

You never hear about a "leaked" document detailing the schematics of a new weapon system. They're always about ALIENS and UNDERGROUND BASES, ETC.

That's why I take these with a grain of salt.

As for this one in particular; BOGUS. This is your classic case of SOMEONE HAD TOO MUCH TIME ON THEIR HANDS.


Mr. M




posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 02:19 AM
link   
However, it was a good effort on their part. But the format is ALL wrong. Trust me, certain formats are standard within the intelligence community, and this is not one of them.


Mr. M



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 04:47 AM
link   
It's a fake. Like someone mentioned if it were real it would only be available for seconds, because the CIA would take it out.

I dont think we (at least me) would ever see "real" top secret documents. Would be fun and interesting to see though. "Curiosty is a gift"



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Concerning the red page. It appears to by Cyrillic, and maybe one of our members like Cyrus or Russian would be a doll and translate it for us.

My knee-jerk question is this:

Why are the titles of the first four bullets in English? The last title is "RESULTS" (I can translate a little Russian, but just enough to be dangerous.)



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 01:32 PM
link   


I'm going to make some leaps and bounds here so stick with me kids.

Dr. Joseph M, is actually a guy named Joseph Matheny who I don't think is a doctor, he may have a phd in math but I think maybe just a bachelors.

Joseph matheny is the guy behind Ong's Hat/Incunabula mythos fame, currently it is in a stage he and his cronies are calling El Centro and Omega, having to do with mind control, this would tie into it and is fairly typical.

Joseph was on the art bell show a few years ago, I don't think it went well but with the new host it might be easy to slip something in there.

Just a guess I could be wrong, if I'm not it's safe to assume it's crap.

i am not an expert on Ong's hat, only scanned it a few times but it reeked of bs.



Hey folks,

Sorry I'm usually not a pain in the ass about this stuff, but I am curious as to what people think of my theory regarding the fake document.

Spiderj



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
Concerning the red page. It appears to by Cyrillic, and maybe one of our members like Cyrus or Russian would be a doll and translate it for us.


Cyrus is unable to translate the text due to his recent banishment.

I'm approaching this document with skepticism. I don't have an opinion at this time.



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by StarChild
However, it was a good effort on their part. But the format is ALL wrong. Trust me, certain formats are standard within the intelligence community, and this is not one of them.


Mr. M


Absolutely correct. It is completely wrong.



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 03:16 PM
link   
ROFL!!!!!


What I can't believe even more than this document are that people here are seriously taking into account it might be a valid one.(saw this on another forum before, the reaction here is more comfortable
)

Jeeeez! Dear CIA, please publish one ts doc to let those people see that we don't :
[X] use Arial
[X] use underline or caps lock for everything that might be important
[X] write like a kid
[X] layout like a damn 1st grade'io

I can't stop laughing, some people are just too funny. I wish all people would be so sheepy.

[Edited on 14-4-2004 by shoo]



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by StarChild
However, it was a good effort on their part. But the format is ALL wrong. Trust me, certain formats are standard within the intelligence community, and this is not one of them.


Mr. M


Starchild has brought up a very good point. Another one is the utter lack of grammar skills exhibited in the document. Is the main character in that memo writing a book or something? I thought a thread last week revealed that he was???



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Successful disinformation is usually 95% truth, so they say.



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 04:39 PM
link   
What program do i have to download/install to see these files?



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I think Adobe acrobat should do it crash.

Spiderj



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Ok, first of all, Thank you DaRage for clearing up theafterlife comment... I about blew a gasket in my think-bucket when I read that (I swear, too many of you don't know how to #ing read!)

Now, as to the validity of this doc, I don't know. I would have to see the original doc myself. Oh, I'm sorry... I forgot to mention that THIS ISN"T THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT! Ummm... top secret documents aren't stored in PDF format. As a graphic artist I can tell you for sure that this was retyped. Font is alot smaller and more web-friendly than images, which get converted into various LARGE size files, and if they used the original scans of the doc, the file would probably be a couple megs or more. If you want to get info out as fast as possible on the web, you make the file size as small as possible. It's really quite a simple concept, but I guess people just don't understand this (just like people don't understand why black vinyl lettering won't show up as good on a window as white).

I'm still waiting for TheNeo's statement of contradictions on this. It makes total sense to me, with no contradictions that I can point out yet. There are those of us who have always known that the body is just a vehicle, among other things, and when we come out and try telling people stuff like that we get laughed at and 'debunked' by the masses of short-sighted people who cannot even concieve of anything more complicated than mechanics. C'mon Neo, show us what you are talking about here... don't leave us hanging!



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 07:40 PM
link   
This is just another prop for the Ong's hat myth.

Spiderj

My opinion



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 07:47 PM
link   
i dont know....looks pretty fake to me. wouldn't this stuff be encrypted by some secret, impossible to break encryption or something to ensure it secrecy just in case this ever leaks (like now).



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 01:03 PM
link   
Having seem many actual TS government documents, I can say with 100% certainty this document is an absolute fake.



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 01:18 PM
link   
total utter, and complete bs.
laughable.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Ya gotta admit it's interesting if you like "Religion" wrapped with a CIA label it may be phony but I got a good laugh.

Paul



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   


But the format is ALL wrong. Trust me, certain formats are standard within the intelligence community, and this is not one of them.


Starchild is right - this format reads all wrong. I had a top secret clearance in the military and part of my job was to read classified/secret documents and messages and determine if they needed action. Nothing I have ever encountered ever read like this format with this much detail. It's a fake....



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 08:13 AM
link   


'TOP SECRET' covers of manuals are yellow, with a white border, with the words 'top secret' in white. (manuals that are classified 'secret' are red with a white border.


Im going with BS in this one.

TS covers are orange (sp), not yellow. And differant agencies and departments have different ways of spelling it out. Some have stripes, some have black letters, some white letters, some have logos, other do not, some have borders.....but regardless of who or where it came from the color codes still stand.

TS-Orange (sp)
Secr*et-red
Conf*identel-blue
Unclass-green



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join