U.S. warned people to avoid mystery missile zone

World Net Daily ^ | 12/01/2010 | F. Michael Maloof

[Sprite518]

The Department of Defense is slamming the door on questions about the mysterious contrail filmed Nov. 8 by a KCBS television crew near Los Angeles after questions were raised about a warning from the National Geo-Spatial Intelligence Agency that there could be missiles fired in that area at that time.

[editor-surveyor]

Prescious few ships in that corridor carry any passengers.

The cruise liners usually head south out of San Pedro.

[Sprite518]

Yeah well you are a fraud on free republic and that is why your account has been suspended. Odd how that happened to you??? At any rate, I don’t communicate with suspended accounts that hack into web sites. Get your account fixed and then we will talk.

[dead]

Its not my responsibility to post any link; its yours, since you have made the accusation.

It's my responsibility to show that WND's articles on Ron Brown contained evidence?

LOL! I'll do that right after I post proof that the moon landings were fake.

[DouglasKC]

If you get the right weather conditions, and position yourself in the same spot, you can see this 'test launch' several times a week. I've seen the same thing and I live in the middle of the U.S. Those Chinese missiles have a really impressive thrust time and awesome range. Wish we had some

Me too. I live on the east side of Lake Michigan, pretty close to being under a commercial jet route. Around sunset I can see "launches" almost every day...providing it's not cloudy.

[D-fendr]

Cameramen do not release videos; news directors do.

Then ask the camera man why the news director hasn't , or ask him to ask his boss- or ask the news director to release it yourself. I have.

No response.

[D-fendr]

What some interpret as fire from a missile rocket is better explained as a reflection of a plane fuselage. Note it is the same color as the sun and clouds and that it appears only briefly.

A missile rocket would more likely be white and evident for much more time.

Again, bear in mind, the sum total of evidence we have from the video source is 15 seconds of video repeated and edited into 40 seconds of what they call "raw video." We do not have their coordinates (except as other's have interpolated), their zoom factor, video time codes or the complete shoot.

[D-fendr]

You need to resolve your post with what is visible in the video.

Please read the information at the link again. It answers your questions on direction, course change and perspective effects.

[fso301]

Prescious few ships in that corridor carry any passengers.

Doesn't matter. You are assuming that people aboard ships and boats off the Southern California coast are an insular, uninformed, uncurious and untalkative group of people.

The article you posted only has validity if no one on any of the many ships/boats that would have been off the Southern California coast read the news, watches the news, or talks to anyone who does.

[TXnMA]

I was doing llots of consulting for small manufacturing companies right before Y2K. When they asked me (in a panicked voice( what they should do, I would pull out a nice new pencil and tell them:

"You should already have a printout of anything you can't afford to lose -- and give every employee one of these and a "Big Chief" tablet; I guarantee they will still work"... ;-)

[TXnMA]

"I know jets do that, but like I said it would not have been reported if it was just another jet."

It's SeeBS. They make (as in fabricate) the news. Remember "RatherGate"?

[TXnMA]

"It was traveling northwesterly from a point between 15 and 35 miles away, but the exact distance cannot be determined from the static picture in the video."

Since the area near the California coast was already in darkness, How is it that the "nearby" launch started off in full sunlight?

~~~~~~~~~~

And, BTW, what kind of "surveyor" did you tell us you are?

[editor-surveyor]

I love it when some slobber mouth fool makes an unsupportable comment about WND.

There are over 100 articles in their archives that relate to Ron Brown, and why Clinton had to have him dead, and they are all loaded with damning evidence, as all WND stories tend to be.

Here are a few to play with:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=1213

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7042

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7039

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7040

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7028

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7025

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7014

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7012

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7009

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=6997

.

[TigersEye]

You would think that if the ENTIRE TEN MINUTES OF VIDEO, UNEDITED would prove the case, then CBS would have released it, and would still be printing articles about it.

Here is what Sky2 photographer Gil Leyvas has said to FReeper Dr. Brian Kopp in a private ongoing interview.

Gil said the object creating the contrail was in view for 2 to 3 minutes then was no longer in view. He took ten minutes of video total, and the contrail was in view for an additional ten minutes.

They do not. Ask yourself why.

Because there was only three minutes, maximum, of video of the moving object. The rest was just video of a leftover degrading contrail. What would that tell anybody?

[Fundamentally Fair]

Odd how that happened to you???

Odd that you don't have enough technical knowledge to figure out that I am not suspended...

[TXnMA]

On the subject of "inbound versus outbound," read this graphical explanation and tell us if you still think the object was headed out to sea...

[editor-surveyor]

I’m sure that you can see the well lighted vertical plume, and that as the plume advanced, the lighting improved (in the early portion of the video) thus showing that it was indeed traveling westerly.

[Fundamentally Fair]

Is this what you’re trying to hide:

That which is in plain view?

[D-fendr]

Thanks for your post. But, still..

Why not release the 2-3 minutes, unedited, instead of just 15 seconds?

Why not release the real raw video instead of the edited and mislabeled as “raw” one?

[editor-surveyor]

> “The rest was just video of a leftover degrading contrail. What would that tell anybody?”

.
It should inform the fools that want it to be moving easterly that their “airliner” vanished into thin air, and didn’t even bother to crash.

[D-fendr]

It took me a minute also. The answer is too simple.

:)