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.

 

Fox News reported OBL's death DAYS EARLIER!!!

page: 76
302
<< 73  74  75    77  78  79 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime
 


The simple answer to this thread is one of understanding.
The OP started a thread, and out of understanding on the part of an ATS mod, it was closed,
and then reopened.


edit on 9-5-2011 by burntheships because: edited in politeness




posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:52 PM
link   
The '20 post rule' is mainly to stop spammers, trouble makers (starting nasty topics like porn images and viruses), and those who don't know the 'ATS ways' yet and starting a bunch of nonsense 1 line threads.

We make special exceptions when a topic is of value, which we believe this one was.

If you have less than 20 posts and wish to start a thread, just u2u a mod for permission.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


The number is a Tweet ID. They are sequential. Meaning, all the ids before and after Meg's should be dated within a very short period of time to the time she claims.

Possibly, the Tweet Id is based partially on a date-time-stamp code with a unique message id. I don't know their system, so that's just a guess.


And perhaps, just guess....that ones from mobie phones have a seperate stamp up?

I really dont know, but I do know her tweet is screen shot with a date of April 28, from a
mobile phone.


edit on 9-5-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Gotchya...that's what I figured, I just wasn't sure if it had been confirmed. And, anyway, it's good to have it confirmed again... this is a heck of a thread.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 

Did this topic start as a thread in Introductions then?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Thank you Ashley. Man that saved me a bit of time and sanity, two things which are wearing thin for me right now.

Sorry off topic

Trowa



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


Haha. Thanks. Waaaaaaaaaaay beyond the screen shots. I just saw these three links posted on another website and since she's locked down her page to only her followers, I can't check to see what they are.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


The number is a Tweet ID. They are sequential. Meaning, all the ids before and after Meg's should be dated within a very short period of time to the time she claims.

Possibly, the Tweet Id is based partially on a date-time-stamp code with a unique message id. I don't know their system, so that's just a guess.

Thanks. Now I'm hella curious about which three this person linked. IS anyone here one of her followers so they can check that?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


I am very interested in this, and trying hard to be objective.

I took screen shots and also have the whole entire page printed...

Is it possible to alter a tweet date? I didnt not think so, and also, I did not think it was possible to
alter the tweeted moble phone, as it recorded her device.

But it seems the poster got spooked, which is understandable.
I dont think the OP understood the ramifications...until afterwards.
edit on 9-5-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Obviously twitter cannot be tampered with, and there are definitely conflicting dates from both twitterers, so something is amiss...

I persoanlly didnt buy the story the media put out, and after they started reporting, like most of us, I tried to find as much info as I could. Now although not entirely related to the early announcement, this BBC video titled :
"Bin Laden caught in 'trap' says Pakistani High Commissioner" clearly shows that the High commissioner is lying.

He states in this video that Osama came to the house only a few days ago, (this video went out on 2nd may) and when the reporter questioned him about this 'fact' you can clearly tell he is stalling because he was caught out lying, and then stalled to make up another unconvincing lie.

Please watch it and tell me I'm not imagining what I would consider as a blatant lie, surely his behaviour is that of someone who is masking the truth??!!

This adds to the fishiness, and poses more questions about dates. I have no idea how to make the video appear properly, so here is a link from the BBC News website, if anyone wants to make it appear on this page like the other videos then please do re-post. Thanks

BBC VIDEO
"Bin Laden caught in 'trap' says Pakistani High Commissioner"

www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by burntheships
 


I would think that, regardless of where the tweet is from, the tag would be assigned according to the same sequence...the reasoning being, it's not a sequence dependent on where the tweet came from, it's merely a unique identifier of the individual tweet. Her tweet about the ticker fits in, sequentially, with the rest of her posts from that day. This is the main reason I believe her account could not have been hacked to back-date the tweet... to both redate and reorder the tweet with a legitimate tag (one that fits in the sequence for the day it was back-dated to, rather than the day it was actually posted) would be rather complicated.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
halfway down this page check it out captures of the retweeters names
femalefaust.blogspot.com...

Re tweeted by ubutu4humanity, which I screen capped a few post through today that she sent to Megen. FUNKELSTILTZKIN and ?





Trowa



edit on 9/5/11 by TrowaBarton because: To add picture



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
The US had been spying OBL's house for months, so the date of the operation was carefully chosen and surely a few people were in the know.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
That Ubutu talked to her a bunch today tried going back through her tweets but they stopped at may 5th and said no more previous tweets were available

















All of those were form today

Trowa
edit on 9/5/11 by TrowaBarton because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/5/11 by TrowaBarton because: to fix link



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by TrowaBarton
 


Who/what's that? I am following Meg on twitter and just looked at her page. Her tweets do go bast the 5th if you keep scrolling down.

?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


The number is a Tweet ID. They are sequential. Meaning, all the ids before and after Meg's should be dated within a very short period of time to the time she claims.

Possibly, the Tweet Id is based partially on a date-time-stamp code with a unique message id. I don't know their system, so that's just a guess.

Thanks. Now I'm hella curious about which three this person linked. IS anyone here one of her followers so they can check that?


The best way to date these would be to check the dates of the Tweet IDs Meg's. Her Tweet ID + 1 and Her Tweet ID - 1. Different people will have made the tweets, and they should support or destroy the claim. If the dates of their tweets are significantly different, then she's out of order. If the tweet id dates from those are close to the same as hers, then it supports her claim and nullifies the possibility that she "hacked" twitter.

I don't know how to query the tweet database for this information, I just know what needs to be done.
edit on 2011/5/9 by Aeons because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Immortalgemini527
 


Whats really interesting is your interest in posts that your not interested in.
Now that I find really interesting, if not uber interesting.


Me thinks your thinking that your less obvious than you really think you are.
edit on 9-5-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



I guess since you’ve been following me for the last 2 weeks saying slick stuff to me that I have ignored over and over again, you would be the one who knows me the best. if I wasn’t interested in a topic then I wont reply, I just deny ignorance, thats all I do, if that’s wrong then so be it. Please stay on topic as every body else has done for the last 3 hours, it was none of this until you came, thank You.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


Strange I tried this afternoon on ubutu4humanitys page and it wouldn't let me.

Trowa



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
BBC NEWS VIDEO
www.bbc.co.uk...


Please watch this video from 35 secs until 1:40, paying close attention to the stalling/lie at 1:21.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TrowaBarton
 


My understanding of that is this: It was tweeted on April 28th, and then retweeted that many times.
That original tweet will not show the dates of all of the retweets.



new topics

top topics



 
302
<< 73  74  75    77  78  79 >>

log in

join