Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

D.I.A Document. Did someone forget their black marker?

page: 1
8

log in

join

posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Hello ATS!


FOR WHATEVER REASON-PERHAPS EXTRA TERRESTRIAL INTERFERENCE-REF MSG TRANSMISSION BECAME GARBLED


So, I was bored today (as usual) and was looking through various FOIA documents. As many who do the same know, most of these documents consist of messages between agencies through official channels and are devoid of anything exciting at all. I’ve been in the Military for a while, so my experience with message traffic isn’t confined to FOIA documents.

Anywho.

It’s very rare to see sarcasm / jokes / etc…in message traffic…even in the UNCLASS kinds, so to run across this was a little strange.




Highlighted text is mine, obvioulsy.
DIA Source
Located on page 67.


Page 66 has what these agencies were talking about, apparently some sighting in Ghana, which they attributed to “Space Debris”

Anyway, perhaps this raises more questions, or just some friendly joking between two message writers. Regardless, I thought it was interesting. Hope you think so too.

Juston

edit on 4/4/2011 by Juston because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
D'oh! Looks like they did forget. I bet someone will get fired for this, lol.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Juston
 


Couldn't "extra terrestrial interference" mean

the Sun or a satellite maybe?



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I would like to know what is redacted after the " most plausible explanation part .
As for the point of the OP , I don't see anything to suggest any revelation of ET . unless we speculate the part of the message that's garbled goes something like " bought the satellite down " , but that's just speculation



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Juston
 


This Document could have been forged by a 5 year Old with a paint application



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TedHodgson
 


Apart from the fact its in a PDF on the DIA website ..... as stated in the OP .



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I think i know what the blacked out bits are.
Apparently it means None of our buisness



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 


Not being smart with ya, but definitions do better than me explaining.

Definition of TERRESTRIAL
1a : of or relating to the earth or its inhabitants b : mundane in scope or character : prosaic
2a : of or relating to land as distinct from air or water b (1) : living on or in or growing from land (2) : of or relating to terrestrial organisms
3: belonging to the class of planets that are like the earth (as in density and silicate composition)
— terrestrial noun
— ter·res·tri·al·ly adverb

Definition of EXTRATERRESTRIAL
: originating, existing, or occurring outside the earth or its atmosphere

Link


So no, I don't think thats what they meant.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by TedHodgson
 




Yet it wasn't.


Originally posted by Juston
DIA Source
Located on page 67.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Blacked out areas, or redacted text is used to ensure current security for an on going activity, or one that has been classified due to its nature and subject matter.

Most redacted docs are preserving operational security, in one form or another. It is to prevent access from foreign intelligence services, of which many are not friendly.

Even the littlest bit of info can be used with other fragments of data to form a bigger picture for them to use. This is why most people have no clue about this stuff, because loose lips sink ships...




posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 


And its hard to create a PDF?


Seriously, it wasnt missed and it wasnt "looked over", conspiricy nuts can take it out of context but it neither makes them right nor smart
edit on 4/4/11 by TedHodgson because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Juston
 





So no, I don't think thats what they meant.


Not trying to be smart with ya but,

the Sun does not originate, exist, or occur inside the earth or it's atmosphere.

Technically any interference that is not caused by the terrestrial planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars,) could be considered "extraterrestrial".

edit on 4-4-2011 by ZombieJesus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ZombieJesus
 


Okay, so it could be something less extravagent than what I assumed they implied.

It was contained in their U.F.O files, so you know, naturally I assumed they were talking about those other types of extra terrestrials, however, I'll not discount the more down to earth possibilities either.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
They spelt satellite wrong.

Not that it proves anything either way, just an observation really.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Well, it doesn't seem like they take it seriously that it might be UFO activity - after all, later in the memo, they talk about it being cocktail chatter, and also they were wishing someone a Happy Halloween. So.. a lot of the wording seems less than the normal serious nature of these memos.

Blacked out info often is stuff we'd never think as being sensative in nature. A lot of it is just them covering their arse as far as protection of privacy goes. They will black out stuff like street names, even if it has nothing to do with the subject matter. Blacked out info can be quite as mundane and wortheless as the stuff they leave in.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by TedHodgson
Seriously, it wasnt missed and it wasnt "looked over", conspiricy nuts can take it out of context but it neither makes them right nor smart


Thank you for coming into a thread in the "Aliens and UFO Forum", on a conspiricy site no less, and proceed to call people "conspiricy nuts" who are not "right nor smart".


Seriously.

There is a document, from the DIA.gov which was imo interesting, and I'd thought to bring it to the community for discussion. I've made no wild claims, nor has anyone else.



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Juston
 


Did i say "You took it out of context" ?

Nope.

I am saying "Conspiracy nuts" Will take it out of context, as of the normal proceedure here on ATS and then the thread will be buried just to be re-posted 2 years later by somebody else who thinks its in some way relevant



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TedHodgson

conspiricy nuts can take it out of context but it neither makes them right nor smart


Hi Ted, there's another DIA document here - would you say 'conspiracy nuts' have taken that one out of context as well?



posted on Apr, 4 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


And that is what I noted too, as mentioned in the OP, it's pretty unusual to have people joking in official correspondence.





new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join