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.

 

Aug 8 2009 Arlington Texas UFO - A MASSIVE coverup

page: 7
62
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by seanizle
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Then again the best way to hide something is in plain sight, so, who knows....


EXACTLY!

Some of the comments within this thread are proof that the premise of my signature works.




Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
If this officer did not want to be identified, he would not:

1) meet at his home with you (a relative stranger)

2) exchange email conversations with you (a relative stranger)

3) say he was only one of four officers responsible for keeping the ramps on I-20 clear





Now THOSE are good points, deserving an explanation




posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Which would argue that if the object in the photo was a plane component, it would be tightly covered. Though it may be possible that it is covered, it really doesn't look like it when you look at the smooth S curve on the very left edge (the front?) and the way the shadows work around the form (possible if the tarp is booty tight).



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by astronomine
 

The tarp is usually pulled as tight as they can wrap it around the component. They need to protect it against the elements, so the tarp is as tight as possible.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr_skepticc
 


Well, let review your statements.....first you say you talked to a Lady and a Mr. Smith, both laugh and say it happened but it was their F-35 transport for testing. So, your first sources clarify that indeed there was an escort.
Now, the police that were the said escort, to laugh and say they never heard of this.

Hmmmm.....suggestion, when lying you real have to cross check your claims, make sure they match. I take back my comment, you would fail and never make a living in Sales & Marketing. And your career as a disinfo agent is on shaky ground too.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


On a related note to your statement, I once divulged an experience involving a triangular craft I saw when I was a child to a MUFON director. It took a lot of courage to tell of the events that happened, and once I had told him, he no longer communicated with me. It took a lot of courage to tell him what happened, as I had not told anyone. I lost a lot of respect for MUFON that day. I may just start a thread about it.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Though "hiding in plain sight" is a very effective tool, it's difficult to grasp that concept when we're talking about a convoy with police escorts of a strangely-shaped object.

On one hand, they have the option to cover it up and proceed, giving civilians nothing much to document. Though there may be initial intrigue, this will dissipate as there is nothing really much to comment on but a covered object with police escort, which would be right in line with how they transport military things anyway.

On the other hand, they can drive amongst civilians with a freshly obtained UFO, close enough to where they could take pictures of its shape/size/color/etc.

If the object were of a secretive nature, there would not be civilian pictures of it, not because I doubt that this happens once a while, but because it would have been simpler to cover it and have it fade in memory.

If the object was not covered, it was meant to be seen and/or doesn't matter that it was seen.

Point being that, when there are pictures of the object from civilians that are being discussed fervently, hiding it in "plain sight" was really not the best method.


[edit on 16-12-2009 by astronomine]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Dagar
 


Go back and reread the OP....I don't believe he ever referred that they met in person at this home. the only reference to the officers home was when he said he had to end the interview because his family had just arrived home and he didn't want them exposed to any of this.

I believe it was an interview via the internet.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but wouldn't putting a tarp over excessively hot metal cause the tarp to melt or catch on fire?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   
So no one saw a massive crane on the side of the road lifting this thing onto a flatbed? That could have (and should have) taken hours...and partially blocked a portion of the road if that's where it went down.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Also, let's assume that it was a recovered UFO.

Would it not be a tad on the unsafe side transporting it so close to civilians? What if it exploded? or the bindings holding it down broke and the object crashed into oncoming traffic? Or there was intense radiation emanating from it?

Despite the curiosity, would it not be more logical to secure the roadways more thoroughly before transporting it? How long would it really take to get cops mobilized to close off incoming cars and for cops to hop on the freeway and keep the traffic at bay with their zigzagging?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
sorry to say this but did anyone of you had the time to watch the videos that i posted earlier on page 6 ?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

i believe that its related to the incident every body is talking about and the videos were posted on august .

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Dr UAE]

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Dr UAE]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Right, let's just deal with the facts as we know them and try and determine what it was on the back of that lorry, to start with Vought aircraft industries have indeed taken possession of an F-35C Lightning II joint strike fighter, now according to their web site they are going to be testing for: 'Navy variant landing gear and airframe structure for carrier landing operations', yeah… so I would imagine they would need the main body of the aircraft and the landing gear (I'm presuming here, maybe a aircraft expert could confirm that) I didn't see any landing gear in any of the pictures, but the pictures are so bad in quality it's impossible to say said landing gear wasn't on the flatbed, or indeed taken at another time to the Vought plant, the date of the incident was Aug the 8th, the Vought website states they have taken possession of the F-35C but the web page is dated the 11th of November, now that in itself doesn't mean anything because companies don't update corporate websites each day, so it's safe to say the they got the F-35C aircraft (or parts of it) sometime between the 8th of Aug and the 11th of Nov, Mr_skepticc claims he's phoned up the company and spoke to a person/persons unknown, and they (Vought) claim that Aug 8th is when the F-35C was moved down the Texas highway to their plant, the only way we're going to get closure on this as far as I can see is to find out the contracting company who own the flatbed lorries and ask them, (1) if they moved an F-35C on Aug 8th (2) if they had a police escort to do this (3) the highway was blocked to the general public. I don't live in the USA so I can't very well go ringing up Vought and ask for the contract company they use, but maybe someone here who thinks it was UFO and Mr_skepticc is full of BS can....

Here is the website: Vought

And here are the contact details:


Administrative Contacts
Corporate Communications
Mike Schwarz
972-946-5298
schwami2@voughtaircraft.com


Government & Industry Relations
Janie Danhof Haga
972-946-0749
hagaja@voughtaircraft.com


Media Relations
Lynne Warne
615-974-6003
WARNELY@voughtaircraft.com


Supplier Relations
Greg Smiley
972-946-3181
vaii_supplierrelations@voughtaircraft.com


Washington Operations
Mick McKeown
703-619-1434
voughtwashdc@aol.com



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Dr UAE
 


After viewing those videos and comparing them to the pictures, particularly the second one, that object looks much bigger than parts of a jet.

Are those videos from the same incident? The object looks the same.

And to Mr_skepticc, can you do a comparable side-by-side as you did the first picture with the second? As the second picture has more of a similar viewpoint as in the videos, it'd be interesting to see how the size of the jet component fits with the rear view of the object. This would make more sense than using the angular shot, no?

[edit on 16-12-2009 by astronomine]

[edit on 16-12-2009 by astronomine]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I just thought of something. Wouldn't the following statement make it fairly easy to narrow down the identity of the officer? Does anyone know if any officers were prosecuted (for any reason) or dismissed from the Dallas Police Department since this story broke? Assuming that this is true and because he didn't write back, I hope that he and his family are okay.




The officer, who was an 8 year veteran of the Dallas Police Department, was assigned to normal street patrol in a particular section of the city (again information has been withheld per his request).





[edit on 16-12-2009 by gazerstar]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Majestic RNA
 

It may not have been completely assembled, but even if it was, aircraft are transported on dollies, laying on their bellies. If the sit on their landing gear the are too tall and unstable. Most of the time they don`t have a police escort, unless they`re in a high risk area. Most people aren`t going to try to steal 3/4ths of an airplane that they can`t move. So usually the escort is just a pair of pilot cars.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
From this thread.


Originally posted by Sam60
I've taken the liberty of showing your comparison pic (below). I think that clearly shows it's a wrapped plane on that truck.

The shape matches.

The size matches.

The wrapped appearance matches.



I've also shown your other picture of the wrapped plane being made ready for transport.



I'm convinced.....

It's a plane.



Note that the comparison plane is an F22 and is about 12ft longer than the F35.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
This entire incident is entirely possible. It could also be pieces of large machinary or parts to top secret vehicles or devices. It really is hard to say.

I will tell you that I have spoken with a trucker who was part of the "White Glove Fleet" and he told me a few stories. Mostly about going to nearly abandoned warehouses in the middle of industrial districts to pick up sealed top secret cargo, and other times going to top secret facilities in the middle of nowhere, that are well hidden, to pick up trailers that were completely sealed, sometimes refrigerated.

He mentioned on one occasion that he was called by the military in the dead of the night to go out and drive his truck to the middle of nowhere. He went down a dirt road in a pretty thick forest and came to a clearing where he helped load and transport a crashed craft. He was not told what it was, but he said it was like a huge ball that was slightly flattened and was aluminum colored with orange and black burn marks all over it. He assumed it was a crashed military craft, or experiment, or perhaps a satellite. It did indeed hang off the sides of his truck bed and he had escorts for the wide load.

He didn't go into any more detail, but it did get me thinking...
Of course he could have been just pulling my leg, but he did seem genuine. Especially given his military experience and him being a retired military guy with high clearances.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by DJM8507]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:46 AM
link   
As a member of the army that's worked with military aircraft for the last 9 years, I can tell you that the Army and Air Force do not show their aircraft in public. They don't haul helicopters, or military aircraft down the highway. They put it in a bigger military plane or helicopter and fly it to its destination with a Chinook (CH-47), or a big air force plane like a C-140, etc... If the aircraft is functional, they usually just fly it to its location.

A lot of what you would see on a military aircraft is classified material, not to mention seeing it at all is something the military doesn't want done because it can give any enemy possible intel on it.

Whatever that thing was being transported, they were in a hurry, and it was a last minute operation.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Crayfish
 


This is just my opinion, but the comparison seems off.

If you look at the truck itself in the added image and kind of guesstimate the truck with the UFO, they either seem to be on different lanes or the UFO truck is smaller than the added truck (the top of the UFO truck being roughly determined by the bright glare above it).

The lines leading to the vanishing point converge too fast with the added truck to the UFO truck.

Perhaps if the scale of the added truck was reduced it would look more in line with the environment.

Initially I wanted to say that the implied jet shape in the added truck doesn't look the same as the UFO, but that could be because it is covered tightly, thus making the gaps, angles and components smoother and appearing more like a UFO and less like a mechanical piece (as stated by Zaphod58).

[edit on 16-12-2009 by astronomine]

[edit on 16-12-2009 by astronomine]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   
OP keep yourself safe. if it really was all that this man claimed it was, i would be careful but deff a good idea to get this story out


S&F



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join