• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

NORAD Tapes

At 102:37:89 you hear Dick say "I have to whiz, keep me informed."

Well, we all know that have is a word indicating posession. And whiz is, of course, a short form of wizard. A keep is another name for a castle, and an informant is a type of spy.

Thus, when translated, we have:
"I hold the wizard, spy castle."

Goin further, it's obvious that wizards today are referred to as illusionists. Holding is another way of saying waiting. And the spy castle could easily refer to the CIA.

Thus, what Dick actually said was:
"I'm waiting with the illusions, what's the word form the CIA?"

See? Proof of conspiracy.
 
Sabrina said:
Not necessarily. Many officers are prior enlisted (I know about twenty or thirty, although I'm not prior enlisted myself); it's entirely possible that they could have gotten married prior to him becoming an officer, which would, of necessity, negate that regulation.

This is assuming they ARE married of course. And it's also extremely likely that they wouldn't be in the same unit regardless, so the chain of command relationship is largely negated in that instance. Once again, assuming they ARE married.
Click to expand...

They way I understood it was that if both are enlisted and in the same unit, that if they married, one of them would be transfered out of the unit. Also that you wouldn't transfer in a person married to someone else in the chain of command.
 
So no "stand down" orders yet? I haven't been researching this myself, even though I have a full copy. Any word from the CT sites? Digest?

"It seems kind of quite Tex. Yea, a little too quiet."
 
I haven't heard squat about this in months.

Surely one of the twoofers must have found that smoking gun by now???
 
Thanks Mike...downloading several of them now (let me know if this will hit you bandwidth wise, and I will stop).

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
Thanks Mike...downloading several of them now (let me know if this will hit you bandwidth wise, and I will stop).
Click to expand...
That's okay, I got tired of rubbish cheap budget hosting, moved somewhere decent, & so now have plenty of bandwidth. As long as you're not trying to download them all at once with a download manager, anyway (10 files by 10 connections each or something probably would stress the server).

But aside from that, there's no problem at all. Get them all if you're interested, we need more people to check them out.
 
well thanks Mike. I will download them all, and over the next ten years wade through them.

TAM;)
 
I've been playing the tape "DRM1 DAT2 Channel 8 ID2 TK"in the background on my computer for the last 1h. At the 57:09 mark there is some interesting stuff about the phantom AA11, but how can you tell when (what time on 9/11) it was said. Is this tape supposedly unaltered, and if so, is there anyway to obtain a timestamp?

TAM:)
 
Last edited:
I played the tape backwards and was instructed to give my life to Satan.
 
DRM1 DAT2 Channel 8 ID2 TK
-----------------------------

In first 1 hour and 10 minutes, only two convos of interest.

0:57:09 - brief discussion about the Phantom AA11.
1:09:03 - brief report of a possible hijack - Delta Flight 1989

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
I've been playing the tape "DRM1 DAT2 Channel 8 ID2 TK"in the background on my computer for the last 1h. At the 57:09 mark there is some interesting stuff about the phantom AA11, but how can you tell when (what time on 9/11) it was said. Is this tape supposedly unaltered, and if so, is there anyway to obtain a timestamp?

TAM:)
Click to expand...


The tapes are time stamped at the beginning with a tone and then computer generated voice reading the time. The lead-in time stamps are given every five seconds (one of them goes on for aaaaaages). They all begin around 12:30 Zulu (or UTC, which is 08:30 EDT).

However I've noticed some breaks in the tapes because I've been synching them to the starting time stamp and two tapes both capture a conversation later on but are not in synch any more.

-Gumboot
 
Well if there are breaks in the tapes, then trying to assign conversations with actual times is probably pointless, as we do not know the duration of the breaks.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
Well if there are breaks in the tapes, then trying to assign conversations with actual times is probably pointless, as we do not know the duration of the breaks.

TAM:)
Click to expand...


Actually on second listening, the conversations happen at the same time, you just get a slight echo effect due to the very slight delay between the speakers and the two microphones (which are obviously in different places). It's just enough to be noticeable.

I haven't synched all the tracks or listened right through so I don't know if there's issues in other places or not.

-Gumboot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom