NSA Document Flight 93 intercepted coming soon

[jaydeehess]

Whoa,,,,,,,,,deja vu

Its like I've already read the posts on this page before today even though the timestamps says they were posted today.

[Gavron]

Gotta agree with you there, Jay. Just roll the year back a couple years, and you would see the same answers.

Nothing new here, move along.

[Lupie]

Well,

You know, there are many people who, for whatever reason, need to pretend to be something they are not. You see them in bars. The fellow who claims to be a Vietnam Veteran who, when asked his age, ends up being in gradeschool at the wars end. Or the person who pretends to be a member of Special Forces, who when asked where the mess hall is located at one of the many posts they supposedly trained at, gives you a blank look and the B.S. excuse-"oh, what I did was classified".

This person who claims to be an "NSA Agent", or employee, is one of these people. He/she is a sad, and typical example of a fraud who needs to use, and lay claim to the hard work and intelligence of others in order to boost their nearly non-existent self worth to a point where they somehow, some way, can get the approval they so desperately need, yet never have. But in the end, this futile charade still boils down to one word-FRAUD.

[T.A.M.]

Well,

You know, there are many people who, for whatever reason, need to pretend to be something they are not. You see them in bars. The fellow who claims to be a Vietnam Veteran who, when asked his age, ends up being in gradeschool at the wars end. Or the person who pretends to be a member of Special Forces, who when asked where the mess hall is located at one of the many posts they supposedly trained at, gives you a blank look and the B.S. excuse-"oh, what I did was classified".

This person who claims to be an "NSA Agent", or employee, is one of these people. He/she is a sad, and typical example of a fraud who needs to use, and lay claim to the hard work and intelligence of others in order to boost their nearly non-existent self worth to a point where they somehow, some way, can get the approval they so desperately need, yet never have. But in the end, this futile charade still boils down to one word-FRAUD.

like I said, he needs help.

TAM:)

[tsig]

How many facts do i have to post before you will be mature enough to admit you are wrong and i am who i say i am?

One would be enough if it were true.

[tsig]

Good lord, how old are you? :D

Want to meet by the bicycle racks after school now? :LOL:

Are you so afraid to back up your posts? Poor Roger...

His continued use of the word "mature" tells me he has age issues.;)

[AJM8125]

His continued use of the word "mature" tells me he has age issues.;)

Were it only that issue. You can have another 2000 post thread on the other issues I've noticed.

[ULTIMA1]

You said the NTSB had to do a report. It is the FBI investigation.

The NTSB has to investigate and do reports on all aircraft crashes if its a crime or not.



NTSB does not do criminal investigations. The NTSB does not have to report.

See answer above.


The NTSB did not do an investigation into 911, the FBI did.

See answer above.


Wrong; 800 was an accident.

But it was originally considered a crime and as shown there were criminal investigations done.

[ULTIMA1]

In this forum the unwritten rule seems to be that if one is proven wrong he admits his error/mistake, and moves on. No need to leave the forum.

Don't you think this is a better idea?

No, if i have people leave then others with closed minds my start to realize they need to wake up and face reallity.

[ULTIMA1]

So you admit that you've seen said CRITIC. Correct? And what is this qualifier "repeated from the public internet" supposed to change?

I was quoting from the internet, i have read the Critic but cannot quote from it since it is classified.

However, common sense would suggest that a sovereign nation and its agents don't prance about revealing secret information.

Well thats why if you read my post i have filed a FOIA request for a declassified copy to post.

[ULTIMA1]

You were discussing the contents of a NSA CRITIC - a document you claim is classified.

No, iwas quoting formf the public internet about what i supposed to be in the Critic.

I cannot quote form the Critic since it is classified.

Are you permitted to discuss the contents of classified documents with people who do not have the appropriate clearances?

No, and I have not discussed the contents of the Critic, only whats stated about it on the public internet.

[ULTIMA1]

Nice dodge.

Absolute proof you are fraud. When someone challenges you with a way to prove beyond a doubt that you are who you say you are, you back out.

Its not my fault you and otheres are not mature or intelligent enough to figure out who i am form all the information i have posted. Seems you and other are afraid to admit that.

[JimBenArm]

I was quoting from the internet, i have read the Critic but cannot quote from it since it is classified.

But if the one on the internet is the same one as in the Critic, then how do we know which one you quoted from? Huh? How will your superiors know?
"Oh, I know that's what is in the classified document, but I wasn't quoting from that. I just was quoting from the internet, so it's okay."
Yeah, no problem!

Man, you are, by far, my favorite!

[lapman]

The NTSB has to investigate and do reports on all aircraft crashes if its a crime or not.
False. The NTSB only has to investigate accidents.

But it was originally considered a crime and as shown there were criminal investigations done.False. The FBI was performing a parallel investigation to rule out a crime. The NTSB does not perform criminal investigation. Proof of this was in the very link that you provided. It specifically states that the NTSB is not setup for criminal investigations. Since I already posted this, you are lying. What a surprise. :rolleyes:

[ULTIMA1]

I trust I've made my point to the rational, sane people in the thread. *bows*

No dice.

The sad part here is, you're preaching to the choir! We get it, the troll does not! Stop the feeding frenzy.


Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance.

[ULTIMA1]

One would be enough if it were true.

Well all you to do is have common snense and have basic intelligence to figure out all the information i have posted.

But sadly most poeple on here are either not smart enough or they are smart enough but they are not mature enough to admit i am who i say i am.

[ULTIMA1]

But if the one on the internet is the same one as in the Critic, then how do we know which one you quoted from? Huh? How will your superiors know?

How many times must i post this?

The actual Critic is not posted on the public internet, only some information on what is supposed to be in the contents of the Critic.

The actual Critic does not contain word for word whats the internet states.

[JimBenArm]

How about the ones of us who are smart enough, mature enough, and sexy enough to know you're not? Huh?
Forget about us, did you?

[JimBenArm]

How many times must i post this?

The actual Critic is not posted on the public internet, only some information on what is supposed to be in the contents of the Critic.

The actual Critic does not contain word for word whats the internet states.
Yes, of course.
Nice try.
Vanna has some lovely parting gifts.
Thanks for playing.

[ULTIMA1]

False. The NTSB only has to investigate accidents.

Please do some research befor posting about something its clear you know nothing about.


It specifically states that the NTSB is not setup for criminal investigations. Since I already posted this, you are lying. What a surprise. :rolleyes:

Why are you lying? Anytime a crash is considered a crims the FBI and NTSB must investigate, please read the regualtions governing crash sites that are considered a crime.

[ULTIMA1]

How about the ones of us who are smart enough, mature enough, ?

Well you are not smart enough or mature enough or you would have figured out i am who i say i am. Please try again

[JimBenArm]

Well you are not smart enough or mature enough or you would have figured out i am who i say i am. Please try again
I have figured it out. From post #1 in this thread.

If you were who you said, you would not have had to file a FOI request to see the document.

If you were who you said, you would have pulled this document already, taken it to the press, and spread it everywhere.

You haven't done this, therefore you are not who you claim you are. Unless you are a craven coward, as well.

You're not, are you?

[lapman]

Please do some research befor posting about something its clear you know nothing about.




Why are you lying? Anytime a crash is considered a crims the FBI and NTSB must investigate, please read the regualtions governing crash sites that are considered a crime.
Wrong. Your own link (http://flight800.org/conflict.htm) proved you to be wrong.
The structure of NTSB investigations is not suited to criminal investigations.
and
Simultaneous with the FBI's criminal investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), exercising its authority and responsibility under the law to investigate civil aviation accident investigations, conducted and continues to carry out a massive, thorough and exhaustive examination to identify a non-criminal cause for the flight 800tragedy. It is our understanding that the results of the NTSB's accident investigation, to date, will be presented at the public hearing in Baltimore. The FBI is the primary criminal investigative agency of the government and decisions regarding the presence or lack of evidence of criminal activity are committed to and made by the FBI and the Department of Justice. I do not believe it is appropriate for the NTSB, and agency whose jurisdiction is to conduct aviation accident investigations and which has no criminal investigative jurisdiction, to examine the particulars of and to present the results of the criminal investigation at a public hearing, particularly when there is a possibility, albeit remote, that the criminal investigation could be reactivated based on new information.
Therefore, you are the liar.

[Mr. Skinny]

<snip>
http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
<snip>.
Did you read this part of the NSA security manual?:

Perhaps one of the first security practices with which new NSA personnel should become acquainted is the practice of anonymity. In an open society such as ours, this practice is necessary because information which is generally available to the public is available also to hostile intelligence. Therefore, the Agency mission is best accomplished apart from public attention. Basically, anonymity means that NSA personnel are encouraged not to draw attention to themselves nor to their association with this Agency.

(bolding mine)

[beachnut]

Here is what the NSA expert says...The NTSB has to investigate and do reports on all aircraft crashes if its a crime or not. ...
Here is what the NTSB experts say...The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The Safety Board does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket.
The NTSB says it does not have to do reports. The NTSB statement was directly from flight 93 information posted by the NTSB.

One of the first woo things I heard about 911 was there was no NTSB investigation. I quickly respond to those talking to me, "the NTSB does not do aircraft crashes that are crimes", they pick up their stuff and hand it to the police and go home. U1 is repeating the standard failed tripe of party members in 911Truth.

How is this related to 911 understanding?

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/ultima-1sm.jpg
U1 reads a Critic that state Flight 93 was shot down. ... "Critic" that i asked for that states that Flight 93 was intercepted. ... In addition to being shot down 93 was intercepted. It makes sense now.

Soon the interception and shoot down paper on Flight 93.

Will it be like his interpretation of the NTSB role in crime?

[ULTIMA1]

If you were who you said, you would not have had to file a FOI request to see the document.

Well if you could read you would known that i did file an public FOIA request to show it on this forum.

If you were who you said, you would have pulled this document already, taken it to the press, and spread it everywhere.

Again of you could read my FOIA request is for a declassified copy, since i cannot post a classified copy to anyone.

You're not, are you?

Thanks for proving again that you cannot figure out i am who i say i am.

[ULTIMA1]

Did you read this part of the NSA security manual?:

Thanks for shoiwng that you completely avioded the facts and that i have proven my point.

[ULTIMA1]

Here is what the NSA expert says...
Here is what the NTSB experts say...
The NTSB says it does not have to do reports. The NTSB statement was directly from flight 93 information posted by the NTSB.

Just becasue the NTSB stated it was not going to make a public reports does not mean they still do not have to do one.

"the NTSB does not do aircraft crashes that are crimes", they pick up their stuff and hand it to the police and go home.

Thanks for admitting the NTSB is involved (as the law states) with crime scenes along with the FBI.


Will it be like his interpretation of the NTSB role in crime?

Seems to me like its you that needs to read the federal requlations on the NTSB so you might know what goes on.

[Mr. Skinny]

Thanks for shoiwng that you completely avioded the facts and that i have proven my point.
I don't recall challenging your point, but you have shown TS/SI on the website. Happy now?

How about responding to my question? Aren't you violating NSA security practices by advertising your NSA affiliation on the Internet?

[beachnut]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance.
This funny; you go a rent a spook web site and lifted the abbreviated security clearance on a badge to be your TS/SI which means what?

It means you just proved you are just a fake digging up junk from the Internet. You have googled your way to be a NSA analysts using the identity of a gate guard who works at the NSA.

You can't talk about classified, you cant talk your way around classified, and you can't post that you read a classified message and say anything about it. If you really worked at the NSA you would loose your job. You even posted a phone number where the name you use answers the phone but never calls back.

You posted a wannabe spy organization web site. You should never show us where you lifted the ideas behind your made up identity.

You just proves you have no clearance and no clue what clearance you would have; you lifted it from this web site or you see it on peoples badges when you work the gate as a guard. I am a real analyst; a SAC trained killer.

[ULTIMA1]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance

[ULTIMA1]

It means you just proved you are just a fake digging up junk from the Internet. You have googled your way to be a NSA analysts using the identity of a gate guard who works at the NSA.

No it means that i have proven to people like you who cannot get on a secure net that i have that there is a TS/SI clearence.


You posted a wannabe spy organization web site. You should never show us where you lifted the ideas behind your made up identity.

So how many sites and what kind of sites can i post before you can be mature enough to admit i have proven my point? But we know that you and others on here can never be that mature don't we?

[beachnut]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance
Yes you see the badges when you work the gate. The TS/SI is what you found on the web.

When is the report coming, and the NTSB does not investigate crime.

You work at the NSA, go on over and check it out; what is taking so long? Are they in your building?

[JimBenArm]

Well if you could read you would known that i did file an public FOIA request to show it on this forum.Yes, I know you filed one. Now, if you were who you said, you would have walked down the hall, pulled the file, and posted it everywhere. At least that's what someone who is not a coward would do. Are you really that concerned about your stupid job that you wouldn't risk it to bring someone evil enough to do these things to justice? Or is it that you don't really have that job? I know which one it is, and so does everyone else, except you.


Again of you could read my FOIA request is for a declassified copy, since i cannot post a classified copy to anyone.And a declassified copy is going to be what? Anything incriminating? Yeah. Sure it is. Just like you're an NSA analyst.


Thanks for proving again that you cannot figure out i am who i say i am.
Don't hate me because I'm beautiful. Hate me because I have you completely figured out.

[ULTIMA1]

I don't recall challenging your point, but you have shown TS/SI on the website. Happy now?

Well at least one person on here can admit to something.

[quote]How about responding to my question? Aren't you violating NSA security practices by advertising your NSA affiliation on the Internet?

No, not really since i have not disclosed anything.

[Mr. Skinny]

[quote=Mr. Skinny;4666179]I don't recall challenging your point, but you have shown TS/SI on the website. Happy now?

Well at least one person on here can admit to something.
Yipee! Does that mean I'm "mature"?



No, not really since i have not disclosed anything.
It doesn't say you have to disclose anything. It says: Basically, anonymity means that NSA personnel are encouraged not to draw attention to themselves nor to their association with this Agency.

[ULTIMA1]

Yes, I know you filed one. Now, if you were who you said, you would have walked down the hall, pulled the file, and posted it everywhere.

You do know that the Critc is clasified right ? That means i cannot post it to anyone.

And a declassified copy is going to be what? Anything incriminating?

Yes, enough to prove my point about the official story, and to hopefully get a real investigation into 9/11 going.

[ULTIMA1]

[quote=ULTIMA1;4666202]
It doesn't say you have to disclose anything. It says:

But just stating i work there is not like if you dislcose something.

It states "personnel are encouraged not to draw attention" it does not state you must not.

[lapman]

Just becasue the NTSB stated it was not going to make a public reports does not mean they still do not have to do one.That's false. There is nothing that is stated anywhere that they were required.



Thanks for admitting the NTSB is involved (as the law states) with crime scenes along with the FBI.
False. The law does not stated that they had to do any type of investigation into 9/11. They did it at the request of the FBI. That is clearly stated.

Seems to me like its you that needs to read the federal requlations on the NTSB so you might know what goes on.I did. There is nothing in them that states that they have to investigate a crash where the cause is known.
Section 831.4
Accident and incident investigations are conducted by the Board to
determine the facts, conditions, and circumstances relating to an
accident or incident and the probable cause(s) thereof. These results
are then used to ascertain measures that would best tend to prevent
similar accidents or incidents in the future. Since the crashes were caused by a crime, there is nothing for the NTSB to investigate that it could create recommendations to prevent them in the future. There is NOTHING in the law that requires them to investigate crashes caused specifically by a criminal act.

[Mr. Skinny]

[quote=Mr. Skinny;4666210]

But just stating i work there is not like if you dislcose something.

It states "personnel are encouraged not to draw attention" it does not state you must not.
Forget it. Apparently you have a reading comprehension problem.

[beachnut]

You do know that the Critc is clasified right ? That means i cannot post it to anyone.



Yes, enough to prove my point about the official story, and to hopefully get a real investigation into 9/11 going.
Do not attempt to use "double-talk" in order to discuss classified information

You fail to follow your guidelines from the NSA you pretend you work for.

Any talk at all about a Critic and flight 93 and comparing it to the INTERNET rumors is prohibited and you will not have a clearance, or you will be reprimanded. Period.

You have not figured out your own cover story super analyst.

Go on over and check the status on the classified you have already leaked.

[ULTIMA1]

Since the crashes were caused by a crime, there is nothing for the NTSB to investigate that it could create recommendations to prevent them in the future. There is NOTHING in the law that requires them to investigate crashes caused specifically by a criminal act.

Baby steps.

By law dose the NTSB have to investigate every aircraft crash scene, YES or NO?

[ULTIMA1]

You fail to follow your guidelines from the NSA you pretend you work for.

When have i used doubletalk?

[Sabrina]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance.

I note you left out this part:

(*) - Fully cleared status means that the person has been cleared to the Top Secret (TS) level and indoctrinated for Special Intelligence (SI).

Indoctrinated for Special Intelligence... in other words, they've been given access (read on) to a particular compartment under the aegis of SCI, which includes SI. Sorry, but you haven't proven a thing other than you have no ability to admit yourself when you are mistaken.

I'm not denying that the SI compartment exists, along with several others that you have to be cleared at the TS/SCI level in order to access. I AM however denying that it is a clearance level in and of itself. There are three clearance levels, as I stated before; Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret. SI is considered part of the SCI addition that can be tacked on to the Top Secret clearance. It's a COMPARTMENT, nothing more.

If it'll make you feel better though, I do acknowledge that NSA seems to have indicated, at least to someone who didn't read the whole section there, that a TS/SI clearance exists. That doesn't make it a security clearance in and of itself.

[ULTIMA1]

[quote=ULTIMA1;4666214]
Forget it. Apparently you have a reading comprehension problem.

So does it state encouraged or must not?

No problem with comprehension.

[ULTIMA1]

IIf it'll make you feel better though, I do acknowledge that NSA seems to have indicated, at least to someone who didn't read the whole section there, that a TS/SI clearance exists. That doesn't make it a security clearance in and of itself.


Well at least you can admit something.

As far as the TS clearence with SI (TS/SI) it is what i hold as i have been stating.

[AJM8125]

Forget it. Apparently you have a reading comprehension problem.

Reality comprehension too.

[nicepants]

Are you permitted to discuss the contents of classified documents with people who do not have the appropriate clearances?
No, and I have not discussed the contents of the Critic

See below


The actual Critic does not contain word for word whats the internet states.

First you admit that you're not allowed to discuss the contents of this CRITIC....then a few posts later you make a statement regarding the contents of said CRITIC.

[Mr. Skinny]

So does it state encouraged or must not?

No problem with comprehension.
Yes, it states "encouraged". However if you read the site, it basically states that you don't have to deny that you work for the NSA if asked by a neighbor, etc., but I don't read that to mean "you can go on a dozen internet sites and advertise the fact."

Frankly, I'm suprised your Security folks and your supervisor haven't disciplined you, or at least given you a butt chewing and told you to stop. The fact that you are still posting here and at other sites leads me to believe that the NSA is either unaware of what you are posting or you're not really an NSA employee.

[AJM8125]

Wondering if the attendants gave him extra time today or are they trying to wrestle the keyboard away from him. Time to slip into a nice straight jacket Roger.

[lapman]

Baby steps.

By law dose the NTSB have to investigate every aircraft crash scene, YES or NO?
NO. This has aleady been proven.

[beachnut]

When have i used doubletalk?
I means you can't discuss classified even by saying it is on the Internet so it is not classified. You don't have a clearance you don't know the rules!

It can't be more clear it comes from your NSA rules! You should read your own web site you are making up your cover from; and more telling is the fact all clearance holders know what I am talking about; you don't.

Anyone with a clearance knows what I meant and they know the rules; you don't and this post by you proves it.

[AJM8125]

Yes, it states "encouraged". However if you read the site, it basically states that you don't have to deny that you work for the NSA if asked by a neighbor, etc., but I don't read that to mean "you can go on a dozen internet sites and advertise the fact."

Frankly, I'm suprised your Security folks and your supervisor haven't disciplined you, or at least given you a butt chewing and told you to stop. The fact that you are still posting here and at other sites leads me to believe that the NSA is either unaware of what you are posting or you're not really an NSA employee.

I'm not sure how close you've been following this but awhile back there was a poster here by the name of No Such Agency who pretty much blew U1 out of the water. But just as with the others who have shredded him when he's blabbered his way into their feilds of expertise, the song remains the same even when he's been caught dead to rights.

[Akhenaten]

Yes, enough to prove my point about the official story, and to hopefully get a real investigation into 9/11 going.





But hasn't someone else already seen the document and posted the contents on the public internet? That's where you say that you quoted the CRITIC from. Why didn't this first appearance of the information prompt any new investigations?

You also say that the wording is slightly different between the two versions. How did that come about?

[Mr. Skinny]

I'm not sure how close you've been following this but awhile back there was a poster here by the name of No Such Agency who pretty much blew U1 out of the water. But just as with the others who have shredded him when he's blabbered his way into their feilds of expertise, the song remains the same even when he's been caught dead to rights.
I've been following U1 since he got here. I don't post a lot, but I've never put anyone on my ignore list, so I see everything he writes.

I'd report him myself, but I know at least one other poster has said he called the NSA about him.

All I'm sure of is that he's treading dangerously on the edge, if not entirely over the edge re: DoD security guidelines.

If for some reason it turns out he is an NSA employee, I think someone in U1's Security office needs to be fired.

Thanks for trying to warn me though! :)

[Reheat]

I'd report him myself, but I know at least one other poster has said he called the NSA about him.

All I'm sure of is that he's treading dangerously on the edge, if not entirely over the edge re: DoD security guidelines.

If for some reason it turns out he is an NSA employee, I think someone in U1's Security office needs to be fired.

There is no question in my mind that he has gone over the edge, very blatantly. It's also very obvious that he knows virtually nothing about COMSEC, that is not until he eventually realized he was wrong AFTER Sabrina nearly beat him over the head with information. This change in attitude only occurred quite some time after he initially argued about it.

Remember, he did not bring up the Wayne Madsen internet woo until quite recently. This is after he had posted the crap about the NSA document both at ATS and here for several months.

If he has a Security Clearance ANYWHERE (I don't think he does), it needs to be revoked and a new background investigation accomplished (as a minimum). If I were his boss, I would also fire him IMMEDIATELY.

[T.A.M.]

Just think to ourselves for a moment.

If Ultima1 really is who he claims he is, an NSA analyst, working for the DoD, would he need to file an FOIA request to get an UNCLASSIFIED/DECLASSIFIED version of a document?

I mean according to the letter he showed us, did the woman responding to the request, tell him as much??

TAM:)

[NobbyNobbs]

Thanks for shoiwng that you completely avioded the facts and that i have proven my point.

How do you manage to type when you have your fingers in your ears singing "lalalalala"?


And one more question, a serious one. Today you have posted 21 times to this thread. So, did you take the day off from work, or are you misusing government property?

[tsig]

Were it only that issue. You can have another 2000 post thread on the other issues I've noticed.

I know but I'd like to keep posting here.

[tsig]

No it means that i have proven to people like you who cannot get on a secure net that i have that there is a TS/SI clearence.




So how many sites and what kind of sites can i post before you can be mature enough to admit i have proven my point? But we know that you and others on here can never be that mature don't we?

What's more important to you. Your job or your country?

[tsig]

[QUOTE=Mr. Skinny;4666210]

But just stating i work there is not like if you dislcose something.

It states "personnel are encouraged not to draw attention" it does not state you must not.

When the boss says "encouraged not to draw attention" it usually means you will be neck deep in do-do if you do.

[Mr. Skinny]

Just think to ourselves for a moment.

If Ultima1 really is who he claims he is, an NSA analyst, working for the DoD, would he need to file an FOIA request to get an UNCLASSIFIED/DECLASSIFIED version of a document?

I mean according to the letter he showed us, did the woman responding to the request, tell him as much??
TAM:)
Actually, I just did my 1st quarter security briefing today (online) and one of the powerpoint slides specifically said DoD agencies did not need to use the FOIA process.

EDIT: Ultima, will you please learn to use the quote function properly?

You keep quoting me on your material and vice versa.

Come on, this shouldn't be too hard for a NSA analyst. I don't want your statements attributed to me, and if you continue, I'll be "immature" and "cry like a baby" to the mods.

[AJM8125]

Actually, I just did my 1st quarter security briefing today (online) and one of the powerpoint slides specifically said DoD agencies did not need to use the FOIA process.

EDIT: Ultima, will you please learn to use the quote function properly?

You keep quoting me on your material and vice versa.

Come on, this shouldn't be too hard for a NSA analyst. I don't want your statements attributed to me, and if you continue, I'll be "immature" and "cry like a baby" to the mods.


I'm pretty sure he does that on purpose. It makes it harder to track his quotes. Not that much harder though.

[Sabrina]

Well at least you can admit something.

As far as the TS clearence with SI (TS/SI) it is what i hold as i have been stating.

Really? Been read on for any other subsets? Just curious; you seem to willing to divulge sensitive info on the internet, why not share the others? Or is SI the only one?

Assuming you're telling the truth (which I still find EXTREMELY hard to believe), you're stating it wrong then. There's a way you're supposed to indicate that you have the capability to be read on for certain subsets, and it isn't by tacking their abbreviations onto the TS abbreviation. Can you figure out where you're going wrong with this here, or are you going to obfuscate some more?

[fitzgibbon]

Ladies and gentlemen,

I think we can pretty much agree that U1 is neither what nor who he claims to be as his oh-so-many gaffs have demonstrated. Might I propose that it's probably best to let this thread slide until or unless there is anything forthcoming on the FOIA request front (which I expect we'll get a verifiable accounting of from 16.5) when and/or/as/if it comes to pass.

Ultima1 is your garden-variety narcissist of the 'I don't care what you say about me so long as you pay attention to me' model. Best to keep your powder dry for such arguments that are more likely to render intelligent discussion as "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin" or "Does this dress make me look fat" or "Will the Leafs take a Cup in the 21st Century?".

[TjW]

<snippage>
If for some reason it turns out he is an NSA employee, I think someone in U1's Security office needs to be fired.


Ah, here's where we disagree. Take the position of an opponent, sizing up the efficacy of the American intelligence community.
You follow up on page after page of a known analyst's public output, trying to gauge the subtlety and depth of work done in secret. You consider how ably complex sets of facts are correlated. You weigh carefully the ability to clearly exposit conclusions to other people.
What opinion do you develop of U.S. capabilities? It's freaking brilliant. The guy deserves a raise.

[JoeyDonuts]

Really? Been read on for any other subsets? Just curious; you seem to willing to divulge sensitive info on the internet, why not share the others? Or is SI the only one?

He's stated here that he's been read into SIX compartments.

SIX!

So, that would make his clearance level TS/SI/HAARP/MAJESTIC12/LINDBERGH/KFCSECRETRECIPE/BARBARASTREISAND.

[Sparky]

Well at least you can admit something.

As far as the TS clearence with SI (TS/SI) it is what i hold as i have been stating.

Give it up, Junior. You have no credibility left. Your daily drive-bys are not helping your cause, either.

Most of us are content to ignore your petty rants about immature behavior and your desperate pleas for attention and are willing to patiently wait for 16.5 to post the FOIA result if and when it arrives.

Just face the facts. There isn't a single person left on this forum that believes you are who you say you are.

[AJM8125]

It is so easy and fun to prove you wrong with facts and evidence. There are two levels of KFCSECRETRECIPE. I happen to have read both original and extra crispy compartments. Thanks for admitting that you don't know anything about how us sooper-sekrit gman spooks operate.

[ULTIMA1]

You fail to follow your guidelines from the NSA you pretend you work for.

Wrong again, i have not failed to follow guidlines. I have posted more then enough information to prove who i work for

[ULTIMA1]

First you admit that you're not allowed to discuss the contents of this CRITIC....then a few posts later you make a statement regarding the contents of said CRITIC.

No i made a statement about what the internet states is in the Critic, nowhere have i discussed the contents of the actual critic.

[fitzgibbon]

No i made a statement about what the internet states is in the Critic, nowhere have i discussed the contents of the actual critic.

So, is it fair to say that any comment you've made about the 'internet CRITIC' is a wank?

Just askin'.

[ULTIMA1]

NO. This has aleady been proven.

Wrong again.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Abt_NTSB/invest.htm
once it has been established that a transportation tragedy is, in fact, a criminal act, the FBI becomes the lead federal investigative body, with the NTSB providing any requested support.

So who has the equipment to do the investigations for the 9/11 FDR and CVR, the FBI or the NTSB?

[ULTIMA1]

You don't have a clearance you don't know the rules!

Prove that i do not have a clearence. I have proven that i there is a TS/SI clearence so prove that i do not have a clearence or admit you are wrong.

[ULTIMA1]

I'm not sure how close you've been following this but awhile back there was a poster here by the name of No Such Agency who pretty much blew U1 out of the water.

No he did not blow me out of the water, in fact he left when i asked for a face to face meeting.


But just as with the others who have shredded him when he's blabbered his way into their feilds of expertise, the song remains the same even when he's been caught dead to rights.

I have posted more then enough infomration to prove who i work for its not my fault if you cannot figure it out.

[ULTIMA1]

But hasn't someone else already seen the document and posted the contents on the public internet?

No the actual contents of the document are not posted on the internet.

You also say that the wording is slightly different between the two versions. How did that come about?

The actual document is classified so the infomration on the public internet cannot be word for word.

[ULTIMA1]

I'd report him myself, but I know at least one other poster has said he called the NSA about him.

You do not even know what to report. I have not posted anything that is a securtiy breach.

If for some reason it turns out he is an NSA employee, I think someone in U1's Security office needs to be fired.

I have posted more then enoug information to prove who i work for and again have not made any security breach.

[ULTIMA1]

AFTER Sabrina nearly beat him over the head with information. This change in attitude only occurred quite some time after he initially argued about it.

She did not beat me over the head with information. I have proven and will keep proving that there is a TS/SI clearence.

I just hope you can be mature and sane enough to admit to the facts i have and can show.

[ULTIMA1]

If Ultima1 really is who he claims he is, an NSA analyst, working for the DoD, would he need to file an FOIA request to get an UNCLASSIFIED/DECLASSIFIED version of a document?/quote

Gee, you really so not kno whow to read do you.

I have psoted now for the hundredth time that i filed an FOIA request on hotmail so i could post it online.

I suggest in the future you read post or get someone to hwlp you read post.

[quote]I mean according to the letter he showed us, did the woman responding to the request, tell him as much?

Please read the cooment so you know what it states. I stated that i di dnot need to post a exteranl FoIA request but i did so i could show it to you immature and closed minded people.

[Mince]

Mods:

After over over 7 months, 2,000 posts and 42 pages, I think this thread's usefulness has expired, or at least seriously decayed. Perhaps it should be put into hybernation and, if the OP ever does receive the elusive document referenced in the OP, he can link to this thread in a new one. The key, however, is that the document has to have been received. As it is now, we're just wasting 1s and 0s. The biggest (only?) debate for a long time and many pages has been the veracity of ULTIMA1's claim of working for the NSA. It's a textbook scenario for thread closure and I know you've closed many other threads sooner and for lesser transgressions. The OP clearly cannot or will not provide the promised document. Being so, there is nothing to discuss or debate in this thread. It has become a random post clearing house serving no usefull function.

I apologize to anyone (except ULTIMA1) who might be having fun here. Anyway, that's how I feel about it.

[ULTIMA1]

And one more question, a serious one. Today you have posted 21 times to this thread. So, did you take the day off from work, or are you misusing government property?


Well if you knew anything at all (which its clear you do not) you would know that i cannot gain acces to the internet form work since i am on a secure intranet.

[lapman]

Wrong again.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Abt_NTSB/invest.htm
once it has been established that a transportation tragedy is, in fact, a criminal act, the FBI becomes the lead federal investigative body, with the NTSB providing any requested support.

So who has the equipment to do the investigations for the 9/11 FDR and CVR, the FBI or the NTSB?
Try again. From you're very own link:
The Safety Board does not investigate criminal activity
What part of that do you not understand?
Also from the same link that you refused to read:
More recently, on September 11, 2001, the crashes of all four airliners were obviously the result of criminal actions and the Justice Department assumed control of the investigations. The NTSB provided requested technical support.
In the English language, requested is not the same as required. Learn this and you will see where you are so completely wrong. There is nothing in the law that states that the NTSB is REQUIRED to investigate all crashes. As far as your Flight 800 fantasy, you're very own link specifically states:
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) began two separate investigations into the tragic and unexplained accident.
So, it is proven conclusively that the NTSB is not required by law to investigate all accidents. The NTSB can be called upon to help the lead investigative agency to help, but that is at the discretion of the NTSB board.

[fitzgibbon]

No the actual contents of the document are not posted on the internet.

So that's a non-answer answer to my question. To whit, all your posts on ATS and here about said internet CRITIC are a wank. Not worth the phosphors to display them. Thank you for your inadvertent honestly.

Whattagoof! :boggled:

[ULTIMA1]

Can you figure out where you're going wrong with this here, or are you going to obfuscate some more?

Can you figure out that i have been posting facts. Do you know about codewords?

By the way if there is no such thing as TS/SI clearence why do companies in ads ask for a TS/SI clearence?

Software Test Engineer
Digital Receiver Technology, INC (drt) - Germantown, MD
TS/SI clearance is preferred, but not required. BS in Computer Science or Electrical Engineering or equivalent work experience is required. Applicants selected may be subject to a government security investigation and must meet eligibility...

Oracle Database Developer Career Opportunity Top Secret SCI Lifestyle Polygraph
Design Staffing - Ft Meade, MD
PL/SQL, Java, J2EE. 5) Looking for an Oracle database designer/developer who has an interest in expanding their capabilities further. Skills required would be Oracle and SQL. 6) Location is central Maryland 7) Clearance is TS/SI LS Poly...

Program Control Officer
L-3 Communications - Fort Meade, MD
Officer shall have a minimum of ten (10) years experience involving administrative and management control over large ($5M or more) Cost Reimbursable Type contracts. The PCO must be a U.S. citizen and possess a NSA TS/SI/TK clearance...

Project Control Officer
McNeil Technologies - Ft Meade, MD
Due to the nature of the contract, must be currently TS/SI Cleared with full scope polygraph and have at least ten years of Program Control experience with a language services/support background. Cryptology or related experience is...

Business Development Mgr
ITT - Annapolis Junction, MD
in program meetings and reviews Experienced with project estimating, scheduling, and WBS preparation Familiar with Windows and MS Office tools Applicant selected must have an active TS//SI with full-scope polygraph. Candidate must have a...

Program Manager
McNeil Technologies - Ft Meade, MD
Due to the nature of the contract, must be currently TS/SI Cleared with full scope polygraph and have at least ten ... Job Requirements Qualifications for Candidates: TS/SI Cleared with full scope polygraph Ten (10) years experience...

Business Devel 6
Harris - Annapolis Junction, MD
* This position requires a current TS/SI with Full Scope Poly Security Clearance ... of the organization This position requires a current TS/SI with Full Scope Poly Security Clearance By submitting...

[beachnut]

You do not even know what to report. I have not posted anything that is a securtiy breach.

I have posted more then enoug information to prove who i work for and again have not made any security breach.
You have broken the rules and by admitting you think you have not you have proved you have no clearance or you can't figure out the rules and how you broke them.

... This document will show that Flight 93 was intercepted by
fighters and possibly shot down.
Not really as stated i have read the document.
I have authorization to read it. ...
Well i do work for NSA and can post documents to prove it.
There is nothing wromg with me stating i work for NSA. Please see the public NSA forum,
http://www.nsa.gov. You can even file FOIA through the site.
First off the document states that Flight 93 was intercepted (which
contridicts the official story that no planes were near Flight 93).
Second their are reports of a follow up document which states one of the fighters came back
without a missile.
... i have read the document.
... I have read the document thats why i filed an FOIA request to get
a declassified copy so i can post it to show an official contridiction to the official
story. ...
I was quoting from the internet, i have read the Critic but cannot
quote from it since it is classified. ...

... As far as the TS clearence with SI (TS/SI) it is what i hold
...


... This document will show that Flight 93 was intercepted by
fighters and possibly shot down.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/ultima-1sm.jpg
And you change your story from possibly to was shot down.... i have read the
document. I was quoting from the internet, i have read the
Critic but cannot quote from it since it is classified. ...
Wrong; you can't say anything about what you see on the Internet and how it matches what you
see in a classified message; everyone with a clearance is briefed about this and you have
broken the rules or you are a fraud.
Which is it? Are you telling a lie, or are you breaking the rules?

[ULTIMA1]

So, it is proven conclusively that the NTSB is not required by law to investigate all accidents. The NTSB can be called upon to help the lead investigative agency to help, but that is at the discretion of the NTSB board.

Wrong again the NTSB must invastigate all accidents.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Abt_NTSB/invest.htm
The National Transportation Safety Board was established in 1967 to conduct independent investigations of all civil aviation accidents in the United States and major accidents in the other modes of transportation.


Why did you fail to answer the following?

So who has the equipment to do the investigations for the 9/11 FDRs and CVRs, the FBI or the NTSB?

[beachnut]

Wrong again the NTSB must invastigate all accidents. ...

Accidents! Not crimes!

[ULTIMA1]

Which is it? Are you telling a lie, or are you breaking the rules?


Well its clear you no nothing about clearances and what i can or cannot post.

I have not lied and have not broekn any rules.

[T.A.M.]

[QUOTE=T.A.M.;4666639]If Ultima1 really is who he claims he is, an NSA analyst, working for the DoD, would he need to file an FOIA request to get an UNCLASSIFIED/DECLASSIFIED version of a document?/quote

Gee, you really so not kno whow to read do you.

I have psoted now for the hundredth time that i filed an FOIA request on hotmail so i could post it online.

I suggest in the future you read post or get someone to hwlp you read post.



Please read the cooment so you know what it states. I stated that i di dnot need to post a exteranl FoIA request but i did so i could show it to you immature and closed minded people.

Have you had several of your fingers removed or something. I hate to comment on spelling mistakes and poor typing, but this is ridiculous. Please take more time with your posts, or read them over for errors prior to posting.

TAM:)

[Tbone]

Wrong again the NTSB must invastigate all accidents.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Abt_NTSB/invest.htm
The National Transportation Safety Board was established in 1967 to conduct independent investigations of all civil aviation accidents in the United States and major accidents in the other modes of transportation.

So you admit that the NTSB is not required to do criminal investigations.

[ULTIMA1]

Accidents! Not crimes!

So you admit that the NTSB is not required to do criminal investigations.

The ony differnce between an accident and a crime is that the FBI is put in charge of the criminal investigation.

The NTSB still has to do an investigation because they have the the expertise and equipmet to investigate a crash.

So please tell me who has the equipmet to do the investigations into the 9/11 FDRs and CVRs the FBI or the NTSB?

[fitzgibbon]

So U!,

All your posting referencing said "internet CRITIC" is a complete wank? BS? Waste of time? Electronic masturbation?

Yes or no will suffice.

[ULTIMA1]

[QUOTE=ULTIMA1;4669912]I hate to comment on spelling mistakes and poor typing

I hate to comment on people that talk about spelling and typing because they do not have any infomration to debate what is posted.

[Tbone]

The ony differnce between an accident and a crime is that the FBI is put in charge of the criminal investigation.

The NTSB still has to do an investigation because they have the the expertise and equipmet to investigate a crash.

So please tell me who has the equipmet to do the investigations into the 9/11 FDRs and CVRs the FBI or the NTSB?

The CVR and FDR's are simply data recorders. You don't investigate them, you take the data off them.

[ULTIMA1]

Yes or no will suffice.

NO

[ULTIMA1]

You don't investigate them, you take the data off them.

Then the data is used in the investiagtion, correct?

I mean i have the FDR from Flight 77 that i received from the NTSB through FOIA. It was used in a investigation of the 9/11 crimes.

[Tbone]

NO

And it isn't because the "internet" copy says what is in the classified report, correct?

[T.A.M.]

Can you figure out that i have been posting facts. Do you know about codewords?

By the way if there is no such thing as TS/SI clearence why do companies in ads ask for a TS/SI clearence?


The details that follow are way too structured and detailed for you. So I went a googling...


Software Test Engineer
Digital Receiver Technology, INC (drt) - Germantown, MD
TS/SI clearance is preferred, but not required. BS in Computer Science or Electrical Engineering or equivalent work experience is required. Applicants selected may be subject to a government security investigation and must meet eligibility...

and looky what I found...


Software Test Engineer
Digital Receiver Technology, INC (drt) - Germantown, MD
ORIGINAL JOB LISTING Software Test Engineer (Job Code STE02) Primary job duties and responsibilities are to perform software testing for DRT Software releases, triage software defects and maintain the Software lab. Familiarity with the workings of radio communications equipment and for software definable radios is strongly desired. Understanding of wireless protocols (IS-136, IS-95, cdma2000, WCDMA, GSM/EDGE) is a strong plus. 2- 4 years experience in software testing in an environment of GUI, Real-Time Embedded, and DSPSoftware development is required. TS/SI clearance is preferred, but not required. BS in Computer Science or Electrical Engineering or equivalent work experience is required. Applicants selected may be subject to a government security investigation and must meet eligibility requirements... See job listing >

http://www.simplyhired.com/job-id/trnv5skjed/software-test-jobs/

It is against the forum rules to post another persons work without quoting them...


Oracle Database Developer Career Opportunity Top Secret SCI Lifestyle Polygraph
Design Staffing - Ft Meade, MD
PL/SQL, Java, J2EE. 5) Looking for an Oracle database designer/developer who has an interest in expanding their capabilities further. Skills required would be Oracle and SQL. 6) Location is central Maryland 7) Clearance is TS/SI LS Poly...

Once again...


Job Description:
Oracle Database Developer career opportunity.

1) Will have the opportunity to be part of the Company Solutions Knowledge Management Center of Excellence.

2) Will be partnered with several Senior Software engineers focused on data mining/data fusion projects.

3) Initial project is part of an architecture, design and development team focused on creating a new capability which might incorporate a data warehouse, metadata integration, and real-time data mining capability fusing 4-5 disparate signal collection systems together. Team is contemplating different neural network algorithms and products to assist with filtering, extraction, and dissemination.

4) Technologies will include Oracle 11g, PL/SQL, Java, J2EE.

5) Looking for an Oracle database designer/developer who has an interest in expanding their capabilities further. Skills required would be Oracle and SQL.

6) Location is central Maryland

7) Clearance is Top Secret SCI Lifestyle Polygraph

http://www.net-temps.com/job/rf3f/DSMASTXXOR/oracle_developer_top_secret.html

Ultima, you should produce links when posting material from somewhere else on the net.

TAM:)

[ULTIMA1]

And it isn't because the "internet" copy says what is in the classified report, correct?


NO it does not say word for word whats in the classified document. How many times must i post this?

[ULTIMA1]

Ultima, you should produce links when posting material from somewhere else on the net.

NO problem.

http://jobs.usnews.com/a/all-jobs/list/q-TS%2FSI

Now can you be mature and sane enough to admit that there is a TS/Si clearence?

Bye for now, more research to do and truth to find.

[Tbone]

NO it does not say word for word whats in the classified document. How many times must i post this?

Hostility is not required, I didn't ask if it was a copy. I asked if this "internet" copy states what the classified document states.

[T.A.M.]

NO problem.

http://jobs.usnews.com/a/all-jobs/list/q-TS%2FSI

Now can you be mature and sance enough to admit that there is a TS/Si clearence?

Bye for now, more research to do and truth to find.

could you give up using the words mature/immature. It makes you sound simple minded when you use it so often, especially when 90% of your usage of the word is incorrect.

Thanks

TAM:)

[lapman]

Wrong again the NTSB must invastigate all accidents.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Abt_NTSB/invest.htm
The National Transportation Safety Board was established in 1967 to conduct independent investigations of all civil aviation accidents in the United States and major accidents in the other modes of transportation.

False. Key word is "accident." I have already proven you wrong with your own links over and over again. Requested is not required. One day, when you grow up, you will understand that concept.
Why did you fail to answer the following?

So who has the equipment to do the investigations for the 9/11 FDRs and CVRs, the FBI or the NTSB?
That has nothing to do with the NTSB having any requirement to investigate all crashes. The NTSB was requested to help with the criminal investigation. The NTSB chose to help, but there was no requirement for them to do so. Again, by your very own link:
The Safety Board does not investigate criminal activity
Please explain how that statement makes investigating crashes caused by a criminal act a requirement?

[fitzgibbon]

No the actual contents of the document are not posted on the internet.



So U!,

All your posting referencing said "internet CRITIC" is a complete wank? BS? Waste of time? Electronic masturbation?

Yes or no will suffice.
NO

Bit of a disconnect there when you're commenting on and referencing documents that haven't a whit of veracity, eh? How do you account for this which at the first view appears to be a bare-faced lie?

[fitzgibbon]

Bye for now, more research to do and truth to find.

Does that read to anyone else like a 'ta-ta, you' ne'er see the likes of me again'?

[AJM8125]

If U1's attendants are reading this, please be sure that he's actually swallowing the meds and not hiding them under his tongue. I know it's an old trick but U1 isn't that bright, now is he?

[Mr. Skinny]

You do not even know what to report. I have not posted anything that is a securtiy breach.



I have posted more then enoug information to prove who i work for and again have not made any security breach.
We shall see, but that decision will be made by people in the security/investigations business at the DoD.

I'll let them rule on whether or not you have violated NSA security protocols.

[Sabrina]

Mods:

After over over 7 months, 2,000 posts and 42 pages, I think this thread's usefulness has expired, or at least seriously decayed. Perhaps it should be put into hybernation and, if the OP ever does receive the elusive document referenced in the OP, he can link to this thread in a new one. The key, however, is that the document has to have been received. As it is now, we're just wasting 1s and 0s. The biggest (only?) debate for a long time and many pages has been the veracity of ULTIMA1's claim of working for the NSA. It's a textbook scenario for thread closure and I know you've closed many other threads sooner and for lesser transgressions. The OP clearly cannot or will not provide the promised document. Being so, there is nothing to discuss or debate in this thread. It has become a random post clearing house serving no usefull function.

I apologize to anyone (except ULTIMA1) who might be having fun here. Anyway, that's how I feel about it.

I would like to echo this sentiment; this thread has gone on long enough. It's become a farcial version of itself with nothing new or useful being posted. All we have is U1 over here frothing at the mouth with glee every time someone engages him. It needs to stop. We all need to stop it. Mods, I would also like to respectfully request that this thread be closed unless and until U1 and 16.5 receive the contents of their respective FOIA requests. And if at all possible, an injunction placed upon posting in any other threads, new or otherwise, on this subject until the information arrives. I don't think that will be a hardship for anyone; we'd all like to see exactly what it is that has been requested via the FOIA request, but this useless bickering in the meantime is serving no purpose to anyone. Would this be at all possible?

[No Such Agency]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance.
So I haven't read the last 20 or so pages of this thread, but I popped over here today to see what was going on and I saw this.

U1 has done it again, this is hilarious. He's quoting a page which was McConnell listed as Director of the NSA. McConnell was director until 1996 so that page is at LEAST 13 years old. Hardly "up-to-date" information.

The section about badges wuoted by U1 here hasn't been true for 8 or more years. So good job U1, you work were you say but didn't notice the information you were quoting to prove a different point happened to be incorrect and out of date by over a decade? And we should believe you?

Why does anyone keep talking to him?

[T.A.M.]

Why does anyone keep talking to him?

A morbid mix of pity and cruelty.

TAM:)

[Sparky]

Why does anyone keep talking to him?

We like the sound of his voice. It reminds us of children in a schoolyard.

[ElMondoHummus]

A morbid mix of pity and cruelty.

TAM:)

Yeah, no kidding. Seriously, folks, Sabrina is right. This thread's turned into the forum equivalent of clubbing a baby seal. A lame, whiny, repetative baby seal. Really, let's let the thread go moderated or outright locked. When 16.5 gets a reply, then we can revisit, but kicking a guy when he's down - even when he's the one asking for it - just gets pathetic after a while. I actually feel a little dirty for having helped pile on earlier. And for some odd reason, Ultima seems to enjoy getting pummeled, so why enable that? This may not have the length yet, but in terms of outright lunatic denial, this thread's approaching Realistice proportions. The last thing we need is yet another one of those.



:mad: Ps. If anyone bumps that thread just because I mentioned it here, I will find some ninja somewhere to deliver painful, extended retribution. So beware!

[AJM8125]

:mad: Ps. If anyone bumps that thread just because I mentioned it here, I will find some ninja somewhere to deliver painful, extended retribution. So beware!

We're not falling for your obvious attempt to have the last word.

[LashL]

"Will the Leafs take a Cup in the 21st Century?".
Of course, they will. SHILL!

That aside, why anyone continues to discuss the subject matter of this thread with the likes of ultima is quite beyond me. It is apparent that the lad is in dire need of intervention, and it's not nice to make fun of the mentally impaired. Seriously.

[JimBenArm]

Of course, they will. SHILL!

That aside, why anyone continues to discuss the subject matter of this thread with the likes of ultima is quite beyond me. It is apparent that the lad is in dire need of intervention, and it's not nice to make fun of the mentally impaired. Seriously.
You finally going to make everyone quit picking on me?

[LashL]

You finally going to make everyone quit picking on me?I will gladly smite anyone who is picking on you. Just say the word.

[Hokulele]

:mad: Ps. If anyone bumps that thread just because I mentioned it here, I will find some ninja somewhere to deliver painful, extended retribution. So beware!


That thread was closed and is now unbumpable.

[ElMondoHummus]

That thread was closed and is now unbumpable.

Oh, thank GOD!... That thread was epic for all the wrong reasons.

[AJM8125]

Of course, they will. SHILL!

That aside, why anyone continues to discuss the subject matter of this thread with the likes of ultima is quite beyond me. It is apparent that the lad is in dire need of intervention, and it's not nice to make fun of the mentally impaired. Seriously.

Hmm. RLK taking the time away from her more pressing duties to deal with a troll like ULTIMA1, when clearly he was destroyed by you in post #247 of this thread. Something very fishy going on here, and I'm not talking about piscavore.

Ignore: ULTIMA1

[Lupie]

Ultima 1,

You totally ignored my earlier post about people who have a compulsion to be someone they are not. I've met your type before. You pretend to be someone you are not, and unfortunately for you, could never be. You claim to be a member of a well educated, patriotic, and absolutely professional group of people who give far more to their job, and to their country than they could ever get back in return.

Yet you come here, and display an attitude and lack of knowledge that is the polar opposite of what an educated, patriotic, and professional person of your position should, and in my experience, does have.

I personally know a few people who actually are a part of the small community you claim to belong to. You sir-are NOT one of them. You are a sad, and pathetic fraud. If you were simply pretending to be a shoe salesman, I wouldn't care. But you are pretending to be one of the people who do incredibly difficult, and sometimes dangerous things that need to be done in the interest of national security. People who sacrifice so much, and sometimes, sacrifice it all, for so very little.

You are a disgrace, coming here, claiming to be a member of this brave, and dedicated community of professionals. I would suggest that you give it up, but after reading 54 pages of your garbage and lies, I guess that's not an option for you.

[BCR]

Thought I'd stop by and see if after 53 pages there was an actual document yet. Did I miss it somewhere? Was UAL93 shot down by a super-duper stealthy plane using super-nano-thermite missiles?

[Gavron]

Nope. Nothing new. Actually the replies by U1 are exactly the same as replies dated 2007 or older.

Obviously he hasnt found anything new.

Check back again in a few years. :D

[ElMondoHummus]

We're not falling for your obvious attempt to have the last word.

Ninja's are silent. It's not words they deliver.

;):D

[ElMondoHummus]

Thought I'd stop by and see if after 53 pages there was an actual document yet. Did I miss it somewhere? Was UAL93 shot down by a super-duper stealthy plane using super-nano-thermite missiles?

No, but I think I've read more about classified clearances than I ever wanted to know. :boggled:

----

You know, folks, there is an positive to this thread: New folks don't have to read the massive middle so as to guarantee they don't miss anything important. All they need are the first few pages and whatever the last one is, and they'll see 1. How Ultima posts, 2. That he's got nothing, and 3. All the relevant information they need to get the gist of the thread. It ends up being a great lesson in truther obsession combined with conspiratorially addicted lunacy for them.

[Hokulele]

No, but I think I've read more about classified clearances than I ever wanted to know. :boggled:

----

You know, folks, there is an positive to this thread: New folks don't have to read the massive middle so as to guarantee they don't miss anything important. All they need are the first few pages and whatever the last one is, and they'll see 1. How Ultima posts, 2. That he's got nothing, and 3. All the relevant information they need to get the gist of the thread. It ends up being a great lesson in truther obsession combined with conspiratorially addicted lunacy for them.


I would go further and suggest that new folks don't have to read this thread. Period.

[AJM8125]

I would go further and suggest that new folks don't have to read this thread. Period.

And if they really must read anything, they should be advised that reading beyond post #2 isn't necessary because WildCat nailed it.

Here is a letter from the NSA FOIA office that they have the NSA "Critic" that i asked for that states that Flight 93 was intercepted.

This contridicts the official story that no planes were near Flight 93.

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/phixer6/911/FLI93-2.jpg?t=1222974166

Uh, no it doesn't...

/THREAD.

[desertgal]

Thought I'd stop by and see if after 53 pages there was an actual document yet. Did I miss it somewhere? Was UAL93 shot down by a super-duper stealthy plane using super-nano-thermite missiles?

If it was, then I'd have to ask what is the point of making an operation super duper stealthy if the NSA is going to keep a record of it? Kinda defeats the purpose. :D

[nicepants]

No i made a statement about what the internet states is in the Critic, nowhere have i discussed the contents of the actual critic.

See quote below:


The actual Critic does not contain word for word whats the internet states.

Key words bolded for you.

[Dog Town]

For the love O' Pete, people, let this thread DIE!

[Metullus]

Like, now?

Just let it die? Right now?

[JimBenArm]

(You know, if you keep posting in it, it never dies)

[Metullus]

It doesn't?

[Mince]

(You know, if you keep posting in it, it never dies)

I don't get it. What do you mean?

[JimBenArm]

I don't get it. What do you mean?
It means if you keep sticking a post in it, it revives it. The heart starts beating again, it crawls from its musty grave and seeks brain tissue of forumites to survive.
So put the post down, for god's sake. Just put it down, or we'll all die!

[AJM8125]

I don't believe in zombie threads.

[Metullus]

I do. I've seen 'em.

Scared my **** plug right out.

[ULTIMA1]

I asked if this "internet" copy states what the classified document states.

As stated the internet does not state word for word whats in the Critic.

If it did it would be a security violation since the Critic is classified.

[ULTIMA1]

could you give up using the words mature/immature.

Well if people would simply act mature, like admitting when facts are posted then i would not have to use that word.

[ULTIMA1]

The NTSB was requested to help with the criminal investigation.

Thanks for admitting the NTSB does assist with criminal investigations.


Please explain how that statement makes investigating crashes caused by a criminal act a requirement?


As stated the NTSB is the only agency with the expertise anda equipment to investigate crashes.

[ULTIMA1]

Mods, I would also like to respectfully request that this thread be closed unless and until U1 and 16.5 receive the contents of their respective FOIA requests.


Why is everyone so afraid to talk about the NSA Critic?

Are you guys really that afraid of the truth?

[ULTIMA1]

Why does anyone keep talking to him?

I was just showing poeple facts that there is a TS/SI clearence. Like the employment ads for people that had a TS/SI clearence.

Why did you leave when i asked to have another face to face meeting?

Are you afraid to admit that i am who i say i am?

[ULTIMA1]

Ultima 1,

You totally ignored my earlier post about people who have a compulsion to be someone they are not. I've met your type before. You pretend to be someone you are not, and unfortunately for you, could never be. You claim to be a member of a well educated, patriotic, and absolutely professional group of people who give far more to their job, and to their country than they could ever get back in return.




Its not my fault you do not have the common sense or intelligence to figure out that i am who i say i am .

The only disgrace is people like you who spread the lies of the media and wil not accept facts when shown.

[lapman]

Thanks for admitting the NTSB does assist with criminal investigations.I never said they didn't. You are the one claiming that they have to by law. That is a lie.
As stated the NTSB is the only agency with the expertise anda equipment to investigate crashes.Which is irrelevant to you claim that they are required by law to investigate all crashes. If the data from the CVR and/or FDR are relevant to the case, the lead agency puts in a request for assistance. It is up to the NTSB board to decide whether or not they will assist.

[beachnut]

You can't talk about or try to talk around classified. By around I mean use double talk or code to talk around the subject. By comparing the Internet chatter with a Critic Ultima1 said he read, he is breaking the rules about handling classified.

Ultima1 broke the rules when he talks about the Critic; he can't talk about classified even if it found on the Internet and give credence to it due to your knowledge of a classified document. He broke the rules due to ignorance or he is just making up lies about who he is?


You can't talk about classified period. Ultima1 said the Critic he read was classified, he said it has proof of 93 being intercepted and 93 was shot down; he says he can say this because it is on the Internet! Wrong; he has violated COMSEC.

[ULTIMA1]

See quote below:



Key words bolded for you.


So where did i discuss the contents?

[ULTIMA1]

I never said they didn't. You are the one claiming that they have to by law. That is a lie.

No its not a lie. By law when a crash is considered a crim the FBI becomes the lead investigating agency WITH ASSISTANCE FROM THE NTSB. (since they are the only agency with the expertise and equipment to investigate crashes)


If the data from the CVR and/or FDR are relevant to the case, the lead agency puts in a request for assistance. It is up to the NTSB board to decide whether or not they will assist.


But the NTSB made a animation of Flight 77s FDR data to investigate what happened.

[ULTIMA1]

Ultima1 broke the rules when he talks about the Critic; he can't talk about classified even if it found on the Internet. He broke the rules due to ignorance or he is just making up lies about who he is?

Thanks for showing again that you have no clue what you are talking about.

[beachnut]

But the NTSB made a animation of Flight 77s FDR data to investigate what happened. The NTSB made an animation for the FBI to investigate. Zero investigation by the NTSB. Zip.

An investigation by the NTSB only is done for accidents; 911 was on purpose.

An animation may be used to understand a failure; but on 911 the animation done by the NTSB was given to the FBI and the FBI had to do the investigation, not the NTSB. The NTSB made zero conclusions based on the FDR or the animation. NTSB - Zero investigation, NTSB used to present products the FBI ordered. The NTSB was part of the FBI investigation, but the NTSB did not do the investigation. FBI investigates crime, the NTSB investigates accidents; the 4 flight on 911 were not accidents, no NTSB investigation.

But great tangential tripe fueled by the OP author.

[fitzgibbon]

Die, zombie! Die! (Until you actually have information in the form of a FOIA document that is).

'Til then? STFU!

[ULTIMA1]

The NTSB made an animation for the FBI to investigate. Zero investigation by the NTSB. Zip.

WRONG, the NTSB made and reviewed the animation. I have the CD form the NTSB with the animation that they made as part of their investigation.

An investigation by the NTSB only is done for accidents; 911 was on purpose.

But the NTSB is needed to assist because they have the expertise and eqipment that the FBI does not have.

THE NTSB IS THE ONLY AGENCY WITH THE EXPERTISE AND EQUIPMET TO DO A CRASH INVESTIGATION, THEY ARE NEEDED TO ASSIT IN THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

END OF STORY.

[ULTIMA1]

die, zombie! Die! (until you actually have information in the form of a foia document that is).

'til then? Stfu!

oh my what a scared kid you are, so afriad of a document.

[lapman]

No its not a lie. By law when a crash is considered a crim the FBI becomes the lead investigating agency WITH ASSISTANCE FROM THE NTSB. (since they are the only agency with the expertise and equipment to investigate crashes)100% false. There is no requirement that the NTSB to assist the FBI. Request # requirement. Learn the difference.
But the NTSB made a animation of Flight 77s FDR data to investigate what happened.It was not a requirement by law.

[Metullus]

oh my what a scared kid you are, so afriad of a document.I think that his point is that since there is not yet presented any such document, nor is there any indication that the document even exists, it is pointless to post further in this thread.

No one, to my knowledge (and I have read this miserable thread), has expressed fear of any document. You might try reading the thread if you doubt me in this.

[lapman]

WRONG, the NTSB made and reviewed the animation. I have the CD form the NTSB with the animation that they made as part of their investigation.



But the NTSB is needed to assist because they have the expertise and eqipment that the FBI does not have.

THE NTSB IS THE ONLY AGENCY WITH THE EXPERTISE AND EQUIPMET TO DO A CRASH INVESTIGATION, THEY ARE NEEDED TO ASSIT IN THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

END OF STORY.
It is not a requirement by law. END OF STORY.

[Mr.Herbert]

Roger.... shut us up.

Scan a copy of your paycheck. Then of your ID.

Thank you.

Ball is in your court schmedly.

[fitzgibbon]

Die, zombie! Die! (Until you actually have information in the form of a FOIA document that is).

'Til then? STFU!

[fitzgibbon]

oh my what a scared kid you are, so afriad of a document.

'Til you have the feckin' document to actually parade around, STFU! How hard is it for you to get that simplistic notion through your skull?

[Mince]

It means if you keep sticking a post in it, it revives it. The heart starts beating again, it crawls from its musty grave and seeks brain tissue of forumites to survive.
So put the post down, for god's sake. Just put it down, or we'll all die!

Hmmmmm. I still don't get it. Could ya maybe dumb it down a little for me?

[Jonnyclueless]

oh my what a scared kid you are, so afriad of a document.

Oh do you have the document now? Please do share.

[AJM8125]

Retracted. (For now.)

[Sabrina]

Guys.

Let.

The thread.

DIE.

PLEASE. I'm begging here. If/when 16.5 and U1 get the document, we will revive it then. The rest of this bickering serves NO USE. Please. Let it die... a merciful death... and rest in peace.

[AJM8125]

Guys.

Let.

The thread.

DIE.

PLEASE. I'm begging here. If/when 16.5 and U1 get the document, we will revive it then. The rest of this bickering serves NO USE. Please. Let it die... a merciful death... and rest in peace.

OK, if everyone else will pipe down, then so will I. Is it a deal, ladies and gents?

ETA: Post #2160 retracted.

[fitzgibbon]

Done like dinner

[Sabrina]

Thank you.

U1, is that acceptable to you? That we table all discussions until if/when you receive the document in question? Because for us, talking about it before you have it is utterly pointless.

[Reheat]

U1, is that acceptable to you?

Thanks for porving you dont now waht your talking about. Your just afriad of the truth. :boxedin:

[Sabrina]

Not helping, Reheat. Seriously not helping. :(

[ULTIMA1]

I think that his point is that since there is not yet presented any such document, nor is there any indication that the document even exists, it is pointless to post further in this thread.

Call the NSA FOIA office of you want to verify the documents existance.

No one, to my knowledge (and I have read this miserable thread), has expressed fear of any document. You might try reading the thread if you doubt me in this.


People keep stating the document does not exist (without proof) and want to stop this thread becasue they are afraid of the document, afraid of the truth.

[ULTIMA1]

Roger.... shut us up.

Scan a copy of your paycheck. Then of your ID.

Thank you.

Ball is in your court schmedly.


Just too bad several better people then you have tried to shut me up and failed when they could not prove me wrong.

Well i will PM you a copy of my transcripts and other information that i legally can and thats unclassified..

So now the ball is in your court so prove (with facts and evidence) the information is not mine or is not real.

[ULTIMA1]

PLEASE. I'm begging here. If/when 16.5 and U1 get the document, we will revive it then. The rest of this bickering serves NO USE. Please. Let it die... a merciful death... and rest in peace.

I guess i will table the discussion if i can get an answer to the following.

Why are the people on here afraid to talk about this document. Does it really scare you that much that this document will make you wake up to the reallity that something else happened that day then what you were told or that you believe happened?

[ULTIMA1]

More proof that the NTSB is providing assisitance to the FBI in the criminal investigation of 9/11 (just like flight 800 and all other aircraft crashes that were considered crimes). So again where are the reports we should be seeing?

http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2001/010913.htm

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The National Transportation Safety Board is providing technical assistance to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which is the lead agency investigating the terrorist attacks of September 11.

At the request of the FBI, the Safety Board has sent investigators with knowledge of aircraft structures and flight recorders to the crash sites in New York, Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon. They are assisting in the search for the cockpit voice recorders and flight data recorders - the so-called “black boxes” - and helping to identify aircraft parts.

[Homeland Insurgency]

I guess i will table the discussion if i can get an answer to the following.

Why are the people on here afraid to talk about this document. Does it really scare you that much that this document will make you wake up to the reallity that something else happened that day then what you were told or that you believe happened?

Not really Ultima. Look at what all the debunkers were saying about WTC-7 for years. Oil tanks, collateral damage, 10 story gashes. But when their New Testament report finally came out though the cause of the collapse wasn't anything the debunkers had claimed for years.

But that's okay with the debunkers. Their Lord and Savior had spoken. And they dare not question it no matter how ridiculous it sounds.

If this document you speak of comes out and paints a drastically different picture then what they have all been shooting their mouths off about for years it won't matter to them. They will spin like a top. They will be full of apologies and excuses to defend whatever happened and why it was covered up. Because you see it won't really be a cover-up. It will just be an honest mistake. Nothing to see here folks. Just move along.

[tsig]

I do. I've seen 'em.

Scared my **** plug right out.

Realistcey

[No Such Agency]

I was just showing poeple facts that there is a TS/SI clearence. Like the employment ads for people that had a TS/SI clearence.


But you posted wrong information that, if you worked where you say, would know it isnt even close to being true. Why don't you prove me wrong by telling us all what is untrue about this statement:

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance.

This should be easy.... I won't hold my breath for you to take a couple days to find this information from someone who actually knows it (or for you to do internet research).


Why did you leave when i asked to have another face to face meeting?

Are you afraid to admit that i am who i say i am?
I left because I'm tired of going 'round and 'round with you. I already went to one "face to face meeting" which you didn't show up for. I'm not going to waste my time with more of them.

[desertgal]

I guess i will table the discussion if i can get an answer to the following.

Why are the people on here afraid to talk about this document.

Not afraid to talk about this document. Show it to us and we'll discuss. Since you haven't, it's a moot subject.

[FineWine]

Not really Ultima. Look at what all the debunkers were saying about WTC-7 for years. Oil tanks, collateral damage, 10 story gashes. But when their New Testament report finally came out though the cause of the collapse wasn't anything the debunkers had claimed for years.

But that's okay with the debunkers. Their Lord and Savior had spoken. And they dare not question it no matter how ridiculous it sounds.

If this document you speak of comes out and paints a drastically different picture then what they have all been shooting their mouths off about for years it won't matter to them. They will spin like a top. They will be full of apologies and excuses to defend whatever happened and why it was covered up. Because you see it won't really be a cover-up. It will just be an honest mistake. Nothing to see here folks. Just move along.


And yet you true believers have been raving for years about an imaginary conspiracy. Nothing turned out the way you claimed it would. Not a single claim you people made panned out. Your side has made many mistakes, most of them dishonest ones. What mistakes have the engineers, the rescue workers, the air traffic controllers, and the forsensic examiners made?

If this document comes out, if the red paint had been thermite, if the explosion in the basement had anything to do with the collapse of the building, if, if, if.

It's 2009. What do you actually have?

[fitzgibbon]

Dandruff and bad breath if you really must know :)

[Mince]

Guys.

Let.

The thread.

DIE.

PLEASE. I'm begging here. If/when 16.5 and U1 get the document, we will revive it then. The rest of this bickering serves NO USE. Please. Let it die... a merciful death... and rest in peace.

Ok.

Even though I have to violate your wish to make this post, I promise this will be my last post either directly to ULTIMA1 or even in an ULTIMA1-initiated thread (though I won't put him on ignore). Even without your appeal, it is quite obvious, I believe, that he is incapable of, or unwilling to, have reasoned, intellectual debate.


ETA: I'd also like to renew my original call to close this thread, for obvious reasons. I don't believe any case needs to be made: I believe the reasons are self-evident. And I'm not concerned that some idiot, whoever that might be, will think I'm somehow "afraid" of something because I call for the closing of one of the most idiotic threads in the history of the internet.

[Reheat]

Not helping, Reheat. Seriously not helping. :(

Well, do you really except to get a reasoned reply by asking him something directly? That won't happen. The only way this thread will die is if the Moderators close and lock it. Otherwise, it will continue ad nauseum forever.

[Mr.Herbert]

Just too bad several better people then you have tried to shut me up and failed when they could not prove me wrong.

Well i will PM you a copy of my transcripts and other information that i legally can and thats unclassified..

So now the ball is in your court so prove (with facts and evidence) the information is not mine or is not real.


This will be my last post in this thread unless Ultima brings the goods.


Ultima1 sent me copies of transcripts of a Roger Misner The sames ones he posted 2 years ago on EBaums world. The same ones he sent to me last year.

Military transcript.
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1241274608 (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/phixer6/scan3.jpg?t=1241274608)

National Cryptologic School transcript.
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1241274661 (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/phixer6/scan1.jpg?t=1241274661)

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1241274717 (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/phixer6/scan2.jpg?t=1241274717)

Federal law Enforcement Training Center certificate.
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1241274777 (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/phixer6/scan.jpg?t=1241274777)

The shows a person by the name of Roger Misner completed some basic classes in the military.

That's all.

He failed to scan his paycheck or his ID Badge.

Ultima, you are a fraud and a liar.

[T.A.M.]

I think you mean "Misner".

TAM:)

[Mr.Herbert]

omg... what an insult to Mr. Maris.

Edited!

[DGM]

I guess i will table the discussion if i can get an answer to the following.

Why are the people on here afraid to talk about this document. Does it really scare you that much that this document will make you wake up to the reallity that something else happened that day then what you were told or that you believe happened?
What would scares me is that you are who you claim to be. You (and people like you) my friend are the reason we were attacked in the first place. Why are you so afraid to blow the whistle on all this? Why do you have to wait for a "declassified" version? You say you know the truth, so why are you so scared to put this to rest? You are the person "truthers" say are too afraid or chicken to lose their jobs to do the right thing (like FDNY firefighters not reporting what they saw).

Actually I don't believe this, I just think your a fraud. Mainly because I can't imagine anyone covering up such an important thing like you (claim) to have.

[Sabrina]

I'm violating my own principles by posting this, but Ultima had a legitimate question that I'd like to answer regarding why we seem, to him, to not want to the discuss the document in question.

It's simple, Ultima. Right now, the document doesn't exist because you have not received it and ultimately do not know WHAT, if ANYTHING, it says in regards to your original contention that Flight 93 was shot down. And that is your original contention; don't try to dance around that. People have posted the proof of that numerous times. Setting that aside, however, until you actually have received the document and we know exactly what it says, discussing it is pointless. For all we know it could say the moon is made of green cheese, for Pete's sake! The speculation on the internet about what it says does not count because you and 16.5 are the only individuals who have actually, as far as I can tell, made a concerted effort to request an unclassified copy of the document; the person you keep linking to who discusses it on the internet is involved in mere speculation as to what it says because he does not have the physical document. He only has what someone else SUPPOSEDLY said about it. I will happily discuss the contents of the document WHEN YOU AND 16.5 HAVE ACTUALLY RECEIVED IT, but speculating on what it says serves little or no purpose right now because we quite simply DON'T KNOW what it actually says. All I'm asking is that you, me, and the others in this thread table this discussion completely until the document is in hand, either yours or 16.5's, preferably both, and we can discuss it then. But everything else in this thread after about the first two pages (and that's being generous) are discussing areas that have little or nothing to do with the document in question and are, quite simply, pointless. I include my posts in that estimation, just so you know.

You are constantly accusing others of being immature, Ultima, in this very thread. So do you care to show that you can act mature enough to table a useless discussion until the physical evidence is in hand or not?

[Unsecured Coins]

I'm violating my own principles by posting this, but Ultima had a legitimate question that I'd like to answer regarding why we seem, to him, to not want to the discuss the document in question.

It's simple, Ultima. Right now, the document doesn't exist because you have not received it and ultimately do not know WHAT, if ANYTHING, it says in regards to your original contention that Flight 93 was shot down. And that is your original contention; don't try to dance around that. People have posted the proof of that numerous times. Setting that aside, however, until you actually have received the document and we know exactly what it says, discussing it is pointless. For all we know it could say the moon is made of green cheese, for Pete's sake! The speculation on the internet about what it says does not count because you and 16.5 are the only individuals who have actually, as far as I can tell, made a concerted effort to request an unclassified copy of the document; the person you keep linking to who discusses it on the internet is involved in mere speculation as to what it says because he does not have the physical document. He only has what someone else SUPPOSEDLY said about it. I will happily discuss the contents of the document WHEN YOU AND 16.5 HAVE ACTUALLY RECEIVED IT, but speculating on what it says serves little or no purpose right now because we quite simply DON'T KNOW what it actually says. All I'm asking is that you, me, and the others in this thread table this discussion completely until the document is in hand, either yours or 16.5's, preferably both, and we can discuss it then. But everything else in this thread after about the first two pages (and that's being generous) are discussing areas that have little or nothing to do with the document in question and are, quite simply, pointless. I include my posts in that estimation, just so you know.

You are constantly accusing others of being immature, Ultima, in this very thread. So do you care to show that you can act mature enough to table a useless discussion until the physical evidence is in hand or not?

marry me and bear my children.

[A W Smith]

Well,

You know, there are many people who, for whatever reason, need to pretend to be something they are not. You see them in bars. The fellow who claims to be a Vietnam Veteran who, when asked his age, ends up being in gradeschool at the wars end. Or the person who pretends to be a member of Special Forces, who when asked where the mess hall is located at one of the many posts they supposedly trained at, gives you a blank look and the B.S. excuse-"oh, what I did was classified".

This person who claims to be an "NSA Agent", or employee, is one of these people. He/she is a sad, and typical example of a fraud who needs to use, and lay claim to the hard work and intelligence of others in order to boost their nearly non-existent self worth to a point where they somehow, some way, can get the approval they so desperately need, yet never have. But in the end, this futile charade still boils down to one word-FRAUD.

No, iwas quoting formf the public internet about what i supposed to be in the Critic.

I cannot quote form the Critic since it is classified.



No, and I have not discussed the contents of the Critic, only whats stated about it on the public internet.
:dl:

[JoeyDonuts]

I would be all for tabling this discussion, but damned if Sabrina isn't hot when her hair turns into fire and the ground beneath her starts cracking in all directions. If it gets her to go Super Saiyan a couple more times, let the bickering continue, I says!

:duck:

[Audible Click]

I,painfully, read every post in this thread and all i can say is : Give it up. U1 don't post until you can provide the document you requested under the FOIA. May this Thread Of Doom RIP.

[lapman]

More proof that the NTSB is providing assisitance to the FBI in the criminal investigation of 9/11 (just like flight 800 and all other aircraft crashes that were considered crimes).Nobody is disputing that the NTSB assists in providing requested assistance in a criminal investigation. However, there is nothing in the law that states that they are required to do so.
So again where are the reports we should be seeing?They have reports that are available. Try looking again. Other than that, the reports that the made for the FBI have to be obtained from them. Please provide a NTSB report of a criminal investigation. Flight 800 is not one of them and the NTSB was not assisting the FBI. Your own link specifically states that they were parallel investigation. FBI, criminal, NTSB, accident. The NTSB does not do criminal investigations.

http://www.ntsb.gov/Pressrel/2001/010913.htm

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The National Transportation Safety Board is providing technical assistance to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which is the lead agency investigating the terrorist attacks of September 11.

At the request of the FBI, the Safety Board has sent investigators with knowledge of aircraft structures and flight recorders to the crash sites in New York, Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon. They are assisting in the search for the cockpit voice recorders and flight data recorders - the so-called “black boxes” - and helping to identify aircraft parts.Key word is request. There is nothing about a requirement by law that you have lied about.

[jaydeehess]

I guess i will table the discussion if i can get an answer to the following.

Why are the people on here afraid to talk about this document. Does it really scare you that much that this document will make you wake up to the reallity that something else happened that day then what you were told or that you believe happened?


Discuss WHAT?

The doc that is coming has not been delivered yet so again I ask, discuss what, the internet chatter about what may or may not be contained in a docuement?

We would better spend our time pondering angels and pin heads.









(Oh the apt-ness of what I just wrote, just hit me...)

[ULTIMA1]

Ultima, you are a fraud and a liar.


I see you failed to show that you are intelligent or mature enough to admit that the information i sent proves thast i have a background in the following areas.

1. Aviation

2. Law Enforcement

3. Data Collection and Analysis

I have posted my LES before and it was not accepted just as you did not accept the information that i posted to you.

WHY ARE YOU AND OTHER SO AFRAID TO ADMIT THAT I AM WHO I SAY I AM?

[ULTIMA1]

Why are you so afraid to blow the whistle on all this? Why do you have to wait for a "declassified" version?

What is there to blow a whistle on?

Well if you knew anything at all you sould know that i cannot post a classified document to anyone, that would be a security breach.


You say you know the truth, so why are you so scared to put this to rest? (like FDNY firefighters not reporting what they saw).

I never stated i know the truth (unlike most believers). I stated i am looking for the truth through research and FOIA request.

Firefighters were the first group to demand a REAL investigation into 9/11.


Actually I don't believe this, I just think your a fraud. Mainly because I can't imagine anyone covering up such an important thing like you (claim) to have.

I hate to tell you but the government covers up stuff all the time. Wake up to reallity.

[T.A.M.]

I see you failed to show that you are intelligent or mature enough to admit that the information i sent proves thast i have a background in the following areas.

1. Aviation

2. Law Enforcement

3. Data Collection and Analysis

I have posted my LES before and it was not accepted just as you did not accept the information that i posted to you.

WHY ARE YOU AND OTHER SO AFRAID TO ADMIT THAT I AM WHO I SAY I AM?

Stop being so immature and childish, and provide the proof that you are an NSA analyst. You originally claimed you were one, yet like a child you fail to produce any valid evidence of that very specific claim. Any immature child can post someones transcripts with a name on it. That does not, in anyway, prove you are an NSA analyst. Grow up, be mature, and provide us with DEFINITIVE PROOF that you are an NSA analyst.

TAM:)

TAM:)

[ULTIMA1]

The speculation on the internet about what it says does not count because you and 16.5 are the only individuals who have actually, as far as I can tell, made a concerted effort to request an unclassified copy of the document;

Which tells me others are afriad to do a FOIA request for the document.

You are constantly accusing others of being immature, Ultima, in this very thread. So do you care to show that you can act mature enough to table a useless discussion until the physical evidence is in hand or not?

Well i gues i can table it for a little while and post more facts and evidence that questions the official story.

[ULTIMA1]

Nobody is disputing that the NTSB assists in providing requested assistance in a criminal investigation. However, there is nothing in the law that states that they are required to do so.

Thanks for admitting that the NTSB does assist with criminal investigations.

Yes, they are required be law to assist when requested.


The NTSB does not do criminal investigations.

Well you just stated above that the NTSB does assist in criminal investigations.


Where are the FBI and NTSB joint crime scene reports?

I mean the FBI only spent 5 days on the Pentaogn crime scene after taking over.

[chillzero]

Thread placed on moderated status and two derail moved together to AAH. Do not personalise threads - discuss the topic.

[ULTIMA1]

But you posted wrong information that, if you worked where you say, would know it isnt even close to being true. Why don't you prove me wrong by telling us all what is untrue about this statement:

I started working for the agency under GSA in 1986. We statarted out with blue badges untill we got our TS/SI clearence and got Yellow badges, just like the information i posted states.

Edited for moderated thread.

[ULTIMA1]

Stop being so immature and childish, and provide the proof that you are an NSA analyst.

The NCS transript proves i am a analyst, its not my fault if you cannot figure that out.


Edited for moderated thread.

[Calcas]

The NCS transript proves i am a analyst, its not my fault if you cannot figure that out.

No they don't. IF they are legitimate, they only show that you took some classes. I imagine any analyst "wannabe" would take them too.

I took numerous aviation classes while employed by the FAA and yet, I'm not a pilot. See the similarity?

[beachnut]

The NCS transript proves i am a analyst, its not my fault if you cannot figure that out. ... Why don't you know the rules about classified as you said these things which are violations.
... This document will show that Flight 93 was intercepted by fighters and possibly shot down.
... i have read the document.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/ultima-1sm.jpg
I have authorization to read it. ...
First off the document states that Flight 93 was intercepted ...
... reports of a follow up document which states one of the fighters came back without a missile.
... i have read the document.
... I have read the document ... so i can post it to show an official contridiction to the official story. ...
I was quoting from the internet, i have read the Critic but cannot quote from it since it is classified. ...
You have clearly broken COMSEC rules when you said you read the CRITIC and compared it to Internet chatter and talked about the contents; have you reported yourself?

If you did your superiors or unit security tell you?

You can't talk about classified documents and what the documents do and don't contain. You broke the rules. Now explain why you don't understand you broke the rules and post the rules you are suppose use for classified?

[DGM]

What is there to blow a whistle on?

Well if you knew anything at all you sould know that i cannot post a classified document to anyone, that would be a security breach.

Did you not read my post? How can you keep quite about something this important? You did claim to know what the "critic" said. Am I wrong?




I never stated i know the truth (unlike most believers). I stated i am looking for the truth through research and FOIA request.

You said you read the "critic" in question. Does it not contain the "truth"?
Firefighters were the first group to demand a REAL investigation into 9/11.

And they got it. I don't hear them saying otherwise. Do you?



I hate to tell you but the government covers up stuff all the time. Wake up to reallity.

Your not telling me anything. I asked you why are you covering up for them? Afraid to lose your job bringing them to justice?

[jaydeehess]

What are we supposed to discuss here U1? What are we supposedly afraid to discuss?

The contents of a docuement that has not yet been supplied?

[TjW]

I guess i will table the discussion if i can get an answer to the following.

Why are the people on here afraid to talk about this document. Does it really scare you that much that this document will make you wake up to the reallity that something else happened that day then what you were told or that you believe happened?

Okay, let's discuss it. First things first. What, exactly, does it say?
Not a paraphrase of a rumor that someone repeated on the Internet.
What, exactly, literally word-for-word, does it say? Not your interpretation of your memory of having looked at something. What are the words on the document?

Until we have that, there's not much to discuss.

Frankly, I don't trust your interpretation of anything. Your interpretation of the reply to the FOIA seems naive. Your interpretation of various posts in this thread has been simply wrong.

[AJM8125]

As this thread is again moderated, I'd like a long overdue response from ULTIMA1 to this post from Forum Member LashL (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4101350&postcount=247) that is relevant to the FOIA request itself. If you don't wish to follow the link, I've pasted her response below. For those that would like to read the whole exchange, it begins at post #191 and ends at post #251.


So, why is it that your post includes a cut and paste from the NSA online request webpage information which only comes up in a pop up window when one attempts to submit an online request via the Privacy Act - not the Freedom of Information Act - and which does not come up at all if one submits an online request pursuant to the FOI Act, and which does not come up at all if one submits a request via e-mail?

I am curious as to why you would copy and paste the wrong submission information into your alleged e-mail to the NSA, particularly since you claim to work for the NSA.

I am also curious as to why you would cut and paste the Privacy Act submission information from the pop-up window that comes up online when one attempts to submit a request via that Act, since a request pursuant to the Privacy Act is for information held by a government agency about oneself, and not for information held by government agencies about others/government actors, which is clearly explained on the site.





You have shown part of a letter that indicates a request was made by someone at some time for something, pursuant to the FOIA.

Please understand that I am not saying that you did not send some kind of request to someone. What I am saying is that (a) you have not yet provided sufficient evidence that you sent the request that you claim to have sent; and (b) the partial letter you posted does not verify that you sent the request you claim to have sent.

It really should be a rather trivial matter for you to establish that you have done so but, so far, you have not, and you appear to be vigorously resisting posting complete evidence of having done so. Perhaps it is just laziness on your part and you couldn't be bothered to post the actual request and the complete response, but if you want to have any hope of convincing a room full of skeptics of something, you should come prepared with sufficient evidence.



As I said from my first post on the subject, a copy of the actual request and the complete response received (both with your personal information redacted, of course). In light of the fact that you have since posted the text of a pop-up window that comes up only when one submits an online request via the Privacy Act rather than the FOI Act, I suppose I will also require an explanation for why you would have included the contents of that pop up window in your alleged e-mail request.



No, it has not. You are leaping way too far ahead of yourself here. You keep claiming that you have seen a classified document in the past and that the response you've cited somehow "verifies" the existence of the classified document you claim to have seen. You take this even further and suggest that the response you've cited also "verifies" your interpretation of the classified document that you claim to have seen.

This is completely wrong. All the letter says is that the agency has identified documents responsive to a request received, and that the request will be processed in due course on the "Non Personal Easy Cases" track. That does not mean - in any way, shape or form - that the responsive documents say or mean what you seem to think they say or mean. That does not mean - in any way, shape or form - that the responsive documents "state that flight 93 was intercepted" or that they "will show that Flight 93 was intercepted by fighters and possibly shot down", etc., as you claim.

You are grossly overstating things here.



I have it. What a weird question.

ULTIMA1 replies:

Well if you read the letter is states my name (which i blocked out) the date of the request i made, and the information i requested.





Well for 1 i asked for very specific document, in fact the only Critic posted by NSA that day.

The letter verifys the specific document i requested was identified and will be processed.


That's all you have to say about a very well thought out and relevant post from somebody highly qualified to speak on the subject?

Call me old fashioned Roger, but if a lady has gone to the trouble of paying that much attention to me then I'd be a cad not to return the favor.

Oh and Roger? If you intend to respond with any other than a point by point refutation, please save yourself the time and don't bother. I won't be reading it.

[Cuddles]

The thread has got rather long, and has therefore been closed. Please continue the discussion in this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=142065).