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.

 

FEMA Admits to UFO's

page: 11
47
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   
This is absolutely ridiculous. If I respond too much directly I'm likely to breach T&C at this point so, instead, for the most part I'll simply let YOU answer YOU.


Originally posted by LoneGunMan

Ok now I see I am arguing with a wall. EVERYONE IN THE FIRE SERVICE HAS HEARD OF IT.

They have NOT, NO ONE has ever seen this section about UFO's in the guideline!!

Give me a FEMA link anything that states the REAL guideline has this in it. Anything but TELEVISION! OR the Internet! Because in the REAL world of the fire service you are wrong.


So no one has seen it? No one knows about this UFO section? It's a myth? Well how come previously you admitted you and your fellow firefighters knew all about it? You said:


This is not the official belief of FEMA or the International Firefighters Association. One author got all crazy and it got published.


Which is it? Here you are admitting that the UFO section WAS published in the manual. Later you claim it's a myth? Which is it?

You also say:



I do however have access to the newest edition to the FEMA guidelines and in the fire service the one that has the UFO/Alien section is a joke with all the brotherhood.

It was a poor judgment error. The public should never have seen it now we have to pass the information down my word of mouth.


So, again, you previously admitted the manual did have a "UFO/Alien section". So which is it? No one has seen or heard of it, it's a myth, as you now claim, or yes it was published, there was an Alien/UFO section and this is commonly known among the "Brotherhood"? That's a rhetorical question, by the way, having claimed both opposing positions, you destroyed your credibility, and so I'm not really interested in which position you happen to want to choose at this point.

You have changed your story. Done a complete U-Turn. First you admit the chapter existed, it was published, and that this is common knowledge among firefighters, now you are trying to claim it's a TV concocted myth and disnfo by myself and others and no firefighters has seen it or knows of it, saying:


Give me a FEMA link anything that states the REAL guideline has this in it. Anything but TELEVISION! OR the Internet! Because in the REAL world of the fire service you are wrong.


The "disinfo" is yours, as your contradictions demonstrate. This document was used by FEMA in their training academy, with the ET/UFO chapter, it's not a myth and the evidence has been provided to prove this.


Then you keep telling people the proof that it is by giving a link to a post you made on ATS?!?


Er, no. The link was to a post which itself contained links to the evidence outside ATS. I've posted it about five times now. We're done.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by Malcram]




posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla
This information is several years old. FEMA develops protocols for the unknown. Doesn't mean there are UFOs, just that they have a protocol in case one turns up. Seriously, do you expect the government to publish a smoking gun?


Could you point me to the information in dealing with prospective time travellers?

Or the Sith...that would fuggin rock!

Thanks man!



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Malcram
 


No, your posts are not invisible, I had seen those before, but apparently I can not make other people understand that I do not consider the History Channel (or anyone else that is not really related to FEMA) as an official FEMA source, so any source that is not FEMA or the book's authors is not (in my view) an official endorsing of the book by FEMA.

To me, it does not matter if it's Joe Plummer or the History Channel that calls it a "FEMA approved manual", if it was really a FEMA approved (and if there is such thing as a FEMA approval), I think that there must be somewhere something more than other people calling it that.

For example, in that post that you talk about, on the "description of the content" of the documentary, it says (but not on the link provided):

The documentary shows an American disaster control manual that was once used in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) National Fire Training Academy Open Learning Program. The 1993 manual is called Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control. It contains a shocking chapter about how "first responders" should manage incidents involving UFOs.

But if you do a Google search on fema "fire training academy" "open learning program", you only get (or at least I only got) six results, all pages about UFOs and not one page pointing to FEMA or any Fire Department.

So, wherever I look, I am only seeing circular references, where an article uses other article's text and so forth, without any direct connection between the book and FEMA.

PS: Is there a FEMA list of aproved manuals? I haven't seen any, only their own brochures and documents.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Have you read the latest post with the transcript from the History Channel show?

Do you not consider Peter Blaich - who works for FEMA, is an Academy trainer among countless other credentials, and is an expert in this field who calls the manual in question "FEMAs Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control" - to be a credible, knowledgeable source, with direct ties to FEMA?


[edit on 16-4-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
This is hilarious.

Personally, I don't see the point as using this as the smoking gun. It's not!

Because they have a section dealing with UFOs and aliens, and it's FEMA approved, doesn't mean UFOs and aliens exist.

Why can't people see that.

Just because we've got millions of eye witnesses through man kind's history saying they've seen this and that in the sky, does not mean that aliens exist. C'mon people. I'm sure 100% of those millions of people saw something else 100% of the time.

Just because we've got high ranking officials come forward and say they've worked with this project and that project and admitted to UFOs and alien life does not mean they really exist. So what if they've got pictures and videos? Most of them are obviously CG, even the ones created way before computers existed. Even the footage from NASAs shuttles are fake. I mean, people haven't been able to explain them all away, but the ones that cannot be explained, shouldn't even be dealth with. Who cares? Astronaughts come forward, pilots come forward, policemen come forward, even firefighters come forward. Hell, even FEMA lets them publish the garbage! As far as I'm concerned, they're all crazy. 100% of them are wrong 100% of the time! And that's a fact, because I said so!

Come on skeptics...let's be real here. Even if this is not the "smoking gun" as some so eloquently put it...it's definitely another reason for UFOs and aliens to possibly exist.

In fact, the more I think about it...there has never really been a "smoking gun". The only time we'lls see a smoking gun, is probably when aliens invade Earth and Texans and people everywhere are armed with smoking guns, bussing caps at green, mean big-headed beings everywhere. Then, again, the skeptics may truly believe they're simply on the set of the next big film for the big screen.

No, there has never really been a "smoking gun." All the sightings, abduction reports, videos, pictures, testimonies, this little hand book...they're not the proof the world needs...they're millions and millions of bits and pieces of evidence that simply indicate to a large extent that there are extra terrestrial life out there, and that they've been having contact with us for quite some time now. Logic tells me, when countless evidence is suggesting one thing, what is being suggested is probably what is the case.

Thinking about all the evidence that there is, you'd have to think that someone would have to be crazy to dismiss even the possibility of extra terrestrial life making contact with us.

This is just another piece that fits into our big puzzle of evidence. Soon enough, that puzzle will be comleted and staring back at us, would be the huge face of reality, accompanied by a squadrant of alien beings!

My advice to you skeptics is this, do not waste your time trying to use logic and reason to explain away things, that, if you were using logic and reason correctly in the first place, would not need explaining away. You dissappoint me!



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Does anyone know if there is a possible download of the actual book in pdf form?
Even if this book was written by two former fire fighters it still had to get the approval of some government person I am sure so there has to be a reason why it is in this book. I doubt that it just ended up in there as part of lack of oversight on some ones part.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I think what Armap is trying very hard to say is that FEMA have not endorsed this book. There isn't any indication or logo on the book's jacket that says FEMA. On FEMA websites there is no mention of it being FEMA endorsed. The closest someone has come to a connection to FEMA is...


Peter W. Blaich, a fourth generation firefighter with the FDNY, is assigned to Ladder 123 in Crown Heights Brooklyn. He is accredited by the United States Department of Defense as a Fire Protection Specialist as well as a Community Emergency Response Team Instructor for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Disaster Resource

That doesn't mean he is in a position to endorse FEMA products anymore than wearing adidas means you are sponsored by adidias...

Now if FEMA hasn't endorsed the book...it removes the possibility that the book is some form of tacit admission of aliens in the Solar System. It remains interesting, based on the bizarre chapter, but no 'smoking gun'.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Mike Shackled
 


The book requires no government "approval" to be used at a firehouse. You may even find a copy of Huckleberry Finn in a firehouse library.

I'm not really equating the two. The book in question has a lot more to it than the chapter on UFO's and aliens. I'm sure firefighters would find some of it useful, some of it not.

[edit on 4/16/2009 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Again, where's the evidence that this is not from FEMA?

This story has been around for awhile and it's been on the History Channel and a segment of ABC news. A guy from FEMA called it a FEMA guide. FEMA offices are in the appendix in the book and you can read some of it on google books.

My point is, there's no reason or logic being used here because no evidence has been presented that it's not from FEMA.

What is the question based on?

People seem to throw out reason and logic when it comes to things like ufology and the paranormal.

All of the evidence that has been presented has said FEMA and there has been no evidence that says anything different. FEMA could have ended the story years ago with a one line press release that says, "this book is not connected to FEMA."

The story did not just start yesterday, it's been arouind for awhile.

Asking questions without reason or logic is not being skeptical but illogical.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


FEMA have "endorsed" the book because it is required reading in FEMA Training Aademy programs. That's like saying an education system hasn't "endorsed" a book that they insist students read as part of the syllabus. That is an endorsement. It shows that they accept and approve the content of the book in question, and require students to be educated by means of it. That is why FEMA employees and experts in this fleld refer to it is "FEMAs Fire Officers Guide to Disaster Control".

I suspect that FEMA has even more of a hand in the book than that, however, what is already known at this stage still clearly shows that this manual is "endorsed by FEMA"


[edit on 16-4-2009 by Malcram]



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcram
reply to post by Phage
 


I think the point may be, how does such a manual come to be in firehouses "across the US"?

For instance, school text books are often published independently, but certain ones become part of the syllabus decided by the education system and so become "required reading".

Who decided that this manual should appear in firehouses, and why? See what I mean?


So me being the only one on this thread that has access to the firehouses fema guideline and you get to make all the frivolous claims you like?

I am trying to defend AMERICAS FINEST against a TV hit piece that non of the FD is happy about, then you basically call me a liar, I explain what I meant and got THAT post removed for being off topic. How many of you had to complain to get that done? I cannot defend myself against someone on this board now? Because I was being casual the other night and then tried to define what I meant and got my post removed?

This is right on topic.

Not one firefighter, officer or instructor can find this claim in my county. I was in Lansing, Mi. yesterday and visited the state of Michigan fireboard and they told me this was a hoax. Now either the state of Michigan is lying to one of there registered firefighters or the TV was lying.

Edit to add: You want to find the truth? Contact the IAFF. Ask them. www.iaff.org...



[edit on 16-4-2009 by LoneGunMan]



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Malcram
 
Okay, I'm not being very clear with 'endorsed.' Like Armap. I did several searches through the FEMA literature database. I tried several variations without success. When Armap looks for something he finds it. This only tells us one thing, and that is the publication isn't on the FEMA database.

In the course of searching I looked at the most downloaded publications and something caught my eye...FEMA publish their own documents and they are referenced 'FEMA 4563' etc.

So I look at the 'Disaster Control' book from 1992. It isn't published by FEMA, but Penwell Books. No FEMA cataloger...an ISBN.


Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control By Charles William Bahme Edition: 2 Published by PennWell Books, 1992 ISBN 0912212268, 9780912212265 641 pages


It's a good enough book to have been referenced in 'scholarly' works. Nevertheless, it isn't DHS or FEMA. Bahme has written other instructional manuals and none of those were published by a Govt Dept, just private publishers like the one above



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


Yes it is connected to FEMA.

You saying it's not connected to FEMA means nothing. You have to provide some evidence that says it's not from FEMA.

Again, it's been on the History Channel, ABC News and a person that works for FEMA called it the FEMA's guide.

If you have evidence that it's not from FEMA then present it. Your speculation is just that, speculation.

If you or Armap or anyone else has any evidence that says it's not from FEMA then lets see it.

You and others keep speculating like these are new questions. This story has been around for awhile and you should be able to easily find a press release or something that supports this assertion.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by platosallegory]



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I find it very sad that many of those who think that aliens exist will stoop to trying to decieve us skeptics. We need very little proof and all you offer us is trickery.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
Not one firefighter, officer or instructor can find this claim in my county. I was in Lansing, Mi. yesterday and visited the state of Michigan fireboard and they told me this was a hoax. Now either the state of Michigan is lying to one of there registered firefighters or the TV was lying.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by LoneGunMan]


this is old hat.. and the writing has been on the wall. these books were distributed by FEMA and it was official, for a brief time. after it was deemed problematic the offical coverup was in motion - "it's a hoax" and the book was re-wrote. that's why it's very hard to find a trail that deems otherwise. another mult-headed gov. snafu buried.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by platosallegory
 



You saying it's not connected to FEMA means nothing. You have to provide some evidence that says it's not from FEMA.

I provided evidence that it isn't published by modern FEMA, HMS or any Govt Dept. It's published by Pennwell Books. Penwell Books don't publish for FEMA or Govt Departments, they are a private business that publish safety manuals and suchlike. The author writes safety manuals and has done since around 1967. Some of his manuals may be used by Govt Depts but that doesn't mean they are commissioned by those Departments.


Fire Officer's Guide to Disaster Control By Charles William Bahme Edition: 2 Published by PennWell Books, 1992 ISBN 0912212268, 9780912212265 641 pages
Google Books

PennWell Books



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gawdzilla

Originally posted by NephraTari
reply to post by Gawdzilla
 


that does not explain their section on how to treat an alien. If if was just for perceived purposes they would not try to give them instructions on how to help or interact with them.


So, they DID publish a smoking gun? And distributed it publicly? They just admitted they have knowledge of aliens, right? And don't mind you knowing, right?

Puh-leeze.


To you I say .........yes! They obviously have experince with helping crashed/injuried et's due to all the crashes in the last few decades. Secondly yes they would print it and put it out there havent you ever heard the best place to keep something secrete or to hide it is out in the open or in plain sight? Must people dont really pay attention to certain things and to the ones that do and point it out makes us look like a bunch of crazies!! Which is exactly what they want to do..... I believe it and I'm not crazy LOL



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdrawkcabIIMy advice to you skeptics is this, do not waste your time trying to use logic and reason to explain away things, that, if you were using logic and reason correctly in the first place, would not need explaining away. You dissappoint me!
I do not use logic and reason to "explain away" things, I try to use logic and reason to understand things.

Whenever I do not see enough data to reach a conclusion I do not consider it understood, and I keep that on my "to understand" list.

Even simple things like a new word, either in Portuguese or in English (and that happens a lot to me, I did not learnt English at school, so there are many things I do not know) are put on that list, and I look that word in a dictionary on my first chance to know what it means and/or what is the origin of that word (a very interesting information, it shows the "history" behind that word).



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Kandinsky
 


I see these rather as red herring which overcomplicate a fairly simple subject.

It doesn't matter who wrote, commissioned, or published the books. I'm not aware of anyone insisting FEMA did this, although I'm still looking into FEMA's relationship to the book.

What is clear, and very simple, is that experts in the Fire Service, associated with FEMA, call this manual "FEMAs Officer's Guide...", as do others who have investigated the manual such as ABC news, the COMETA researchers and the History Channel.

So unless, ABC, the History Channel, COMETA, and an expert FEMA and Fire Service insider are all wrong - then a "FEMA Manual" is EXACTLY what it is.

What is also clear is that FEMA uses the guide in FEMA Academy training programs, which is a direct endorsement of the book and it's content.

So all this waffle regarding publishers and commissioning is pointless obfuscation, IMO.
Put simply, it's a "FEMA manual", just as Peter Blaich and others have said, which was all that was ever claimed.

Why debate claims that weren't made?

This is what we know so far. It's pretty simple. More may be discovered in time.

[edit on 16-4-2009 by Malcram]



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join