NSA Document Flight 93 intercepted coming soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
ULTIMA1 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Do not attempt to use "double-talk" in order to discuss classified information
Click to expand...

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.
 
lapman said:
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.
Click to expand...

Baby steps.

By law dose the NTSB have to investigate every aircraft crash scene, YES or NO?
 
ULTIMA1 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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).
Click to expand...

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.
 
Sabrina said:
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
nicepants said:
Are you permitted to discuss the contents of classified documents with people who do not have the appropriate clearances?
Click to expand...
No, and I have not discussed the contents of the Critic
Click to expand...

See below

ULTIMA1 said:
The actual Critic does not contain word for word whats the internet states.
Click to expand...

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.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
So does it state encouraged or must not?

No problem with comprehension.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
When have i used doubletalk?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Mr. Skinny said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Yes, enough to prove my point about the official story, and to hopefully get a real investigation into 9/11 going.
Click to expand...


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?
 
AJM8125 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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! :)
 
Mr. Skinny said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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:)
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Thanks for shoiwng that you completely avioded the facts and that i have proven my point.
Click to expand...

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?
 
ULTIMA1 said:
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?
Click to expand...

What's more important to you. Your job or your country?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom