It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


HELP ! I need to get more info on these secret documents.

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 10:15 AM
Following my thread on the UFO MOON ROADS? which discusses a video i made myself and the efforts of individuals to eagerly debunk my observations, i have stumbled uppon a multitude of information which just does not let me in peace with the various issues associated with the moon.

I will not go into great detail at this time concerning the data i am gathering.
What i want to discuss right now is the following fotos which are an extract from the video of another thread.:


PLEASE HELP ME find this document .

I strongly believe that if everything is as we are led to believe there would not be this multitude of hiden info around. People would normaly get easily to this info.

It becomes harder everyday to remain a skeptic. On the other hand to become a believer you need to know what to believe in, and thats hidden...


posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:19 AM
reply to post by GEORGETHEGREEK

If it's real, then I would imagine that it's from an alternate dimension or something. I don't know how long you can keep something like that a secret. I don't think these folks "over here" are going to have a paper trail of evidence lying around.

And then if something happens to the government, they've got documents lying around.

Definitely from "over there", rather than "over here", if it is the real deal.

Looks like we can even get more clues from your screen shots there.. Actually, those screen shots just lay it all out, so lets get to reading!

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:46 AM

I didn't look at the date of the info, and it's over 10 years old.

[edit on 2/22/2009 by eaglewingz]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:56 AM
The title of the project is "Intercontinental U.F.O. Galatic Research and Analysis". I tried doing a Google search on this, with the dir. Colman, but I wasn't able to locate this exact document.

You might want to fish around the miscellaneous seach engines and see what comes up.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:00 PM
reply to post by GEORGETHEGREEK

Well my first comment to you is this.

How can there be a multitude of hidden information if you have found it?

Not very hidden if you ask me.

Second, documents are VERY easily altered and/or hoaxed...

Therefore, the validity of these documents comes into heavy scrutiny and question.

Maybe with the knowledge I have and the field I am in will be a bit of help to you...

We tend to use code-names such as SENIOR CITIZEN or MERIDIAN without understanding how these are assigned. I've done some research on this and here's what I've found. (Please note that this information refers to how the Department of Defense does things. It does not include how code-names are assigned by the Department of Energy or the CIA.) One source that's reasonably available is Title 32, Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix C (to Section 159a).

Based on that source and others, I've found that they are assigned by the joint Chiefs of Staff. There are actually 3 types of code-names, which are:
(1) Classified single word codewords. I had wondered why the Air Force replaced some codewords with euphemisms like "advanced program evaluation".
Here's some examples of what I mean:

Old name -----> New name (same PE #)
________ ________ ___________
CENTENNIAL "applied technology and integration" 0305142F
OMEGA "advanced program evaluation" 0207591F
BERNIE "combined advanced applications" 0305172F

This has occurred with current programs, but the older historical codewords haven't yet been revised.
Apparently, the Air Force has screwed up for a few years and mistakenly listed single word codewords in budget documents. That means that the following codewords I've found in USAF budget documents since 1980 are quite sensitive:
* AURORA (this was definitely a slip up! Classified funding for the B-2, no Program Element number listed)
* OMEGA (PE 0207591F -- some kind of tactical program, possibly an aircraft).
* CENTENNIAL (PE 0305142F -- intelligence program)
* CAVALRY (PE 0305185F -- intelligence program)
* GENTRY (PE 0101816F -- the 0101xxxF program number puts it in the category of offensive strategic programs. (Ah, the nuclear glory days of a decade ago...))
* LEO (PE 0102822F -- Reagan-era strategic intelligence program for the nuclear war planners)
* MERIDIAN (PE 0603105F -- strategic nuclear program)
* OLYMPIC (PE 0603111F -- another nuclear program)
* BERNIE (PE 0305172F -- yet another intelligence program)

None of the codewords I mentioned are abbreviations, i.e., the LEO program is not "Low Earth Orbit".
Also, I'm aware that NSA uses 5-letter codewords for sensitive SIGINT programs, such as DINAR. Another example of a leak involving a codeword is when the Navy released some material to me that indicated they had censored data on a project with the codeword INFRARED (part of the new ship self defense program).

(2) Unclassified 2 word nicknames, such as SENIOR TREND or COPPER CANYON (a USAF hypersonic research program). Of particular interest is the following (found in the reference listed above):

A combination of two separate words, which is assigned an unclassified meaning and is employed only for unclassified administrative, morale, or public information purposes...A nickname is not designed to achieve a security objective.

(3) Exercise terms, such as "Red Flag" used for training at Nellis AFB. None of these are single word terms.

The guide lines for choosing 2 word nicknames, such as SENIOR RUBY (a U-2 SIGINT program) are interesting -- among the words of wisdom are:

A nickname must be chosen with sufficient care to ensure that it does not:
(a) Express a degree of bellicosity inconsistent with traditional American ideals or current foreign policy.
(b) Convey connotations offensive to good taste or derogatory to a particular group, sect, or creed.
(c) Convey connotations offensive to our allies or other Free World nations.


On another subject - as far as Groom Lake goes -- here's something to ponder: We know that Groom was used for the U-2 in the 1950s, the SR-71 in the early 1960s, and various Stealth stuff in the late 1970s and early 1980s. What was Groom used for in the late 1960s and early 1970s? In some research I've been doing with Department of Energy material, I'm picking up hints that Groom Lake was used for unknown classified experiments conducted by Los Alamos National Laboratory, during that period. This is interesting, because LANL doesn't do much with nuclear weapons design (which is usually handled by Sandia National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.)

I hope this helped. This is also very much the same way Lockheed "names" projects and designates classifications based on the sensitivity of the program.

usually, when i get a budget or an audit the first thing I look at is the "name" of the project.

From that "name" I can gather a very good idea on what I am dealing with and the sensitivity of the document/file I have been forwarded/handed.

By being able to deduce this information, I am aware of the sensitivity of the manner and on the importance of my attention to the file.

If you will be able to understand how intelligence agencies and defense contractors name their projects and than understanding the sensitivity related to the names than you will be able to have a much better understanding on whether a document your looking at is valid or altered.

if you have any questions please ask...

Sorry guys. I did not reference the source I used. I didn't want to type all that out and explain it to you guys in my terms when I have already found something that has been written.

I made a quick search and found this article. And it is to the "t" on how lockheed names their projects... the name of the author is Paul McGinnis

[edit on 22-2-2009 by mrjenka]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:01 PM
i have
it seems we need to expand and combine our efforts here

mr none

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:07 PM
reply to post by Quazze

DO NOT waste your time research this.

You will not find anything useful pertaining to this. All your going to do is waste your time.

Governments and intelligence outfits will not by any means name a project or a committee with anything that may alert or bring unwanted attention.

Please refer to my previous post based on naming classified projects.

For instance. if lockheed was working on an "alien" technology they obtained from any number of sources they wouldn't name the project "Reverse-engineering alien technology we bought from the dia"

They will however name it based on a plethora of different things.

You guys have to be more aware of the information you are reading. When doing research, especially on a topic such as flying crafts and eben's than you have to take everything you read with a grain of salt....

I hope this helped. Please ask me to clarify or elaborate if need be. I will try my best to answer you while also playing within the parameters that have been set for me..


posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:23 PM
Also. if your doing real research than I would like to guide you to Titan, the biggest moon of saturn, & saturn itself.

If your serious about the research your doing than Saturn and Saturn's biggest moon, Titan should be where you start your research & most likely where you will finish with it.

Any questions, or if you need me to elaborate or clarify please ask.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:52 PM
Why do you suggest looking at Saturn and Titan?

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 01:54 PM
reply to post by GEORGETHEGREEK

This might help. It is from the time period of your pictures and talks about the current thinking of the two leaders.
Ronald Reagan and Russian leader Gorbachev promoted a future “UFO alien” false flag invasion

Although billed as a personal “fantasy,” Reagan promoted the weaponization of space and a global “friendly fascist” state with the meme of a “UFO alien” false flag invasion, at least 4 times during his presidential career. Reagan injected the “UFO alien” invasion meme into the Nov. 19, 1985 summit with Michael Gorbachev. The U.S. Department of State Memorandum of Conversationreports that:

"Reagan said that while the General Secretary [Gorbachev] was speaking, he had been thinking of various problems being discussed at the talks. He said that previous to the General Secretary’s remarks, he had been telling Foreign Minister Shevardnadze (who was sitting to the President’s right) that if the people of the world were to find out that there was some alien life form that was going to attack the Earth approaching on Halley’s Comet, then that knowledge would unite all the peoples of the world."

In a February 16, 1987, speech the "Survival of Humanity," Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev gives explicit public long-term credence to the future “UFO alien” extraterrestrial invasion meme:

"At our meeting in Geneva, the U.S. President said that if the earth faced an invasion by extraterrestrials, the United states and the Soviet Union would join forces to repel such an invasion. I shall not dispute the hypothesis, although I think it’s early yet to worry about such an intrusion. It is much more important to think about the problems that have entered in our common home."

[edit on 22/2/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 06:52 PM
I know all about Reagan , well not all but enough concerning the alien matter.

It somehow fails me to believe that a great man, a president of a great country
speaks about non existent matters and does talks of example to unite nations...

As for the research it is a casual but continouus search. I do not need it to be thourough but enough to have a glance at the fire behind the smoke...
I have along way before i reach those other plannets.

I am asking the rest of you in case you have fallen against a link to the document i am looking for and i strongly agree that it almost imposible to find it conventionally just because i am looking for it. Thus THIS thread.

top topics


log in