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.

 

Battle of Los Angeles

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   
What do you guys think this was? I ask cuz I remember my mom telling me about it as a kid, she sweared it was something that could not be shot down. en.wikipedia.org...




posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 11:47 PM
link   
I read a little bit here and there, and recently saw a bit on the subject on Ancient Aliens.
But I think it is time for a well formatted documentary or book about this subject.
Seems very interesting. Does anyone know of any extensive research on the matter?
Be it book form or video.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:06 AM
link   
The last I remember hearing about this was it being a Japanese balloon lol. Maybe it has changed since, but that's the last I recall of it that the government shared, I'm sure you could google and find out pretty quick. I just remember hearing it and laughing. A balloon that never fell even though it was shot upon multiple times and considered a battle, really? lol.

Lookie, a movie about it with Michelle Rodriguez


2011 movie
edit on 11/21/2010 by kyrebelyell2004 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by kyrebelyell2004
 

1942 was too early for Japanese fire balloons. A weather balloon was the most likely cause.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Cyberspy
 


Just going by what I remember, and I distinctly remember a Japanese balloon during my research at the time. Just done a little google search, their balloons were announced in 1944, doesn't mean they could have been secret for 2 years. Either way, I don't buy it lol. Weather balloons, I say no. Although another search reveals it's actually harder to bring down a zeppelin/balloon type craft than many would speculate.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Never saw a balloon that could take over 300 rounds of fired weapons. The press telegram, my favorite paper at the time published it, never recanted it just stopped talking about it.
edit on 21-11-2010 by JonStone because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by JonStone
 


actually in the army report, it says over 1400 rounds where fired.



The full report from the Army Chief of Staff, General George Marshall , to President Roosevelt, included the following points:
1. Unidentified airplanes, other than American Army or Navy planes, were probably over Los Angeles and were fired on by elements of the 37th CA Brigade. These units expended 1430 rounds of ammunition.
2. As many as 15 airplanes may have been involved, flying at various speeds from what is officially reported from being "very slow" to in excess of 200 mph and at elevations from 9,000 to 18,000 feet.
3. No bombs were dropped.
4. No casualties among our troops.
5. No planes were shot down.
6. No American Army or Navy planes were in action.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by JonStone
Never saw a balloon that could take over 300 rounds of fired weapons.

Have a look here

"The balloon also remained aloft after two Canadian air force CF-18 fighters fired more than 1,000 rounds of cannon shells into it off the coast of Newfoundland."



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Cyberspy
 


Nice find, even with it being said, one could also go by this

Could Go By This

Either way, in reality, the most plausible cause is more than likely what you said cyberspy. But with things being the way they are today, I would not put it past a cover up story as that story was published in 1998. That's a lot of thinking time lol. Even with most scientists of the world being a non-believer in extraterrestrial lifeforms, I will never ask them for that kind of advice, at some point in time, almost every scientist is proved wrong to advancements. My thought for this "battle" will remained unanswered, as I was not there at the time shooting at that target, so my thoughts are the same as anyone else's that was not there.
edit on 11/21/2010 by kyrebelyell2004 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:58 AM
link   
I didn't have the stuff available at the time of posting, take it with a grain of salt. Here is what gets me, a city several times larger than Roswell, yet it was covered up to the point to where it could not overshadow the Roswell event as it should have. Truth is, we have more evidence and witness testimonies regarding the LA event then we ever did regarding the 1947 incident, why is this the case? So we have something that happened greater than roswell (aside from something being recovered), yet something very few people know about. I would imagine covering up things have gotten better since the time, or is it something else? Certainly worth discussion.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by kyrebelyell2004
 

I don't think that proof of what ever it was has been or will ever be found. It was too long ago.

reply to post by JonStone
 

Um... yeah.... Roswell.

It was this.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cyberspy
reply to post by kyrebelyell2004
 

I don't think that proof of what ever it was has been or will ever be found. It was too long ago.

reply to post by JonStone
 

Um... yeah.... Roswell.

It was this.



Yep, and they rushed that ballon off to Edwards airforce base under heavy gaurd?
Hmm, wonder why?



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Yep, and they rushed that ballon off to Edwards airforce base under heavy gaurd?
Hmm, wonder why?

Maybe because the program was Top Secret at the time?



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Turns out their making a movie about it, not sure of its budget or if it'll be any good or not. www.imdb.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I think The battle of LA refered to the Zoot Suit Riots.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
The movie has nothing to do with the event, really, other than a basic premise.


Does anyone know of any extensive research on the matter?
Be it book form or video.


Check the Classic Cases, in the stickied thread in the UFO & Alien Forum.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join