Message posted by Perplexium on June 30, 2010 at 11:52:07 PST:

I think you are missing the point that this invalidates the "national security" status used as a catchall for everything Area51 related. If a staggering amount of foreign craft are allowed over the area, then it calls into question the necessity to hide it from the American public.

In Reply to: Re: Open skies treaty posted by blade75769 on June 30, 2010 at 11:48:19 PST:

Replies:

• Re: Open skies treaty olowy 07/10/2010, 23:10:34 PST (1)
  • Re: Open skies treaty olowy 07/10/2010, 23:16:43 PST (0)
• Re: Open skies treaty Travis 07/01/2010, 14:19:06 PST (0)
• Re: Open skies treaty Tim 06/30/2010, 12:52:35 PST (9)
  • Re: Open skies treaty Perplexium 07/01/2010, 7:05:41 PST (1)
    • Re: Open skies treaty Matthew Ruch 07/01/2010, 14:27:49 PST (0)
  • Re: Open skies treaty psiuh88 06/30/2010, 18:44:54 PST (6)
    • Re: Open skies treaty AJ 07/01/2010, 21:45:13 PST (5)
      • Re: Open skies treaty Aurora 07/14/2010, 17:17:26 PST (4)
        • Re: Open skies treaty Polemodel 07/17/2010, 10:30:52 PST (2)
          • Re: Open skies treaty Andre' M. Dall'au 07/17/2010, 13:06:47 PST (1)
            • Re: Open skies treaty Polemodel 07/17/2010, 16:13:11 PST (0)
        • Re: Open skies treaty Polemodel 07/17/2010, 10:22:52 PST (0)