quote:

Originally posted by 1689:
it is just one of many things.

it always is...

there's no evidence for any plot, conspiracy, secret world cabbal of lizards

there is only the predicatable ordinariness of opportunity, acquisition, corruption, bad judgement, etc. these things don't need or require a conspiracy.

Its not about need or requirement, we dont need or require a conspiracy theory for anything.

The events mentioned above however go beyond what you have just mentioned, it links the same people in the same activities, hence a conspiracy.

Quote:
"theres no evidence for any plot, conspiracy"?????

Operation Northwoods:
An operation set up by the US military and government to bomb US targets themselves and to blame it on the cubans so they can justify invading and getting rid of castro.
At the time there was no evidence but since documents have been found that prove the plan was put together.

quote:

Originally posted by 1689:
And then we come to realise that we can go into war very quickly because the US and UK forces are on a training exercise right next to where they need to be.

Really, I cannot comment on US troop deployments at that time but I certainly know that UK troop deployments in the area were never sufficient nor engineered with any war in plan. Care to tell me what page(s) in the "Blue Book" confirm your claim.

In fact show us your inside knowledge and tell us what the subject of the "Blue Book" is (Clue: It is a MoD classified (Secret - UK Eyes only) document) and why it would therefore confirm or refute your made up nonsense.

i don't doubt that governments or parts of them sometimes do dodgy things, or have crazy ideas, or keep secrets. but in itself that isn't evidence of a wider/grander conspiracy.

northwoods didn't happen. and it was in 1962. i know you're going to tell me that 9/11 was the modern enactment of that conspiracy but i'm not going there, there is absolutely no evidence to indicate that is so.

and lets just get back to the royal blood. i mean confronted with two candidates, both of whom probably have plenty of connections in high places otherwise they wouldn't be candidates, how exactly does the conspiracy work to get us to vote for the 'most' royal?

Is 1689 leafar's new name? There can't be two people who come out with such similar nonsense.

Dont worry bananaman, we're 2 different people. You want proof? 1689 is more articulate than me, and i dont know about operation northwhatever it is. But i know its a conspiracy, i can just feel it.

Quote:
I certainly know that UK troop deployments in the area were never sufficient nor engineered with any war in plan.
Where did you get this inside info from??
I got mine from the news a few days after they said they would invade afghanistan.

Quote:
how exactly does the conspiracy work to get us to vote for the 'most' royal?

Read the link i put in earlier.

Dont want to talk about 9/11.
7/7, witnesses on the train said they saw no man with a bag or anyone matching the plice discription. They also said that metal surrounding the hole in the floor of the train was pushed up as if the bomb was underneath the train.

On 7/7 a guy called peter powell (ex scotland yard) was running a crisis management meeting on a scenario of bombs going off at exactly the same stations at exactly the same times.

Would this headline sell papers? - Yes
Did any of you guys hear about it??

quote:

Originally posted by 1689:
Did any of you guys hear about it??

oh yes. many many many times.

quote:

Originally posted by Heselbine:
Is 1689 leafar's new name? There can't be two people who come out with such similar nonsense.

Oh, I don't know they say there is one born every minute.

"Blue Book" aside. Surely the widely publicised stories of essential equipment shortages, etc. show that there was hardly much early planning for war. I suppose all those equipment shortage stories were merely "spin". As usual when one looks at it with any modicum of critical thought it just gets more and more absurd. Heck, BATUS (BG Trg area in Canada) is probably more geared up for war in that TOO than the BG exercising in the Gulf region was for a war in that TOO.

Once 1689 comes back and admits he doesn't have a clue about what the "Blue Book" is. I'll tell you all and also explain some other factors of TTW. (Likely, he won't understand the abbreviations, oh well, so sad.)

quote:

Originally posted by Heselbine:
There can't be two people who come out with such similar nonsense.

if only

Where?

quote:

Originally posted by 1689:
Where?

you're not the only conspiracy theorist on the planet you know.

Exactly. Maybe theres a reason for that.

quote:

Originally posted by leafar:
Exactly. Maybe theres a reason for that.

yes! its a conspiracy of conspiracy theorists.

No one said they had the entire US and UK forces en situ.
To start the war all they needed was aircraft carriers to deploy and coordinate bombers, it was only until they came to do the ground work that they needed more resources.
Name any war when an army hasnt had a lack of resources...

I know exactly what A blue book is im not certain i know exactly which one you are refering to as blue book is a term not a single blue binded book.

Quote:
you're not the only conspiracy theorist on the planet you know.

Exactly you had to find the information for yourself.

How many people in the general masses heard of that story? If you ask people who arent interested in the matters we are talking about you would find hardly anyone has heard this information.

No my love, its a different kind of conspiracy. Id be very interested to hear what people on here have to say as it plays out. The excuses are going to gradually sound as ridiculous as the conspiracy "theories" do at the moment.

By the way many presidents are not only related to the queen of england and other monarchies, but they are also freemasons. Freemasonry is of course a secret society. But hey thats ok, nothing to worry about. Its all a coincidence you see, and no matter how bizarre the coincidences get, its always nice and cosy to just assume thats all it is.

quote:

Originally posted by 1689:
Quote:
How many people in the general masses heard of that story? If you ask people who arent interested in the matters we are talking about you would find hardly anyone has heard this information.

the question is not how many people had heard of it, but whether it is evidence of some sort of conspiracy. it isn't.

So you dont think it was a story worthy of notable news coverage.

And your going to tell me that this was a coincidence aswell?

And the metal on the train?

Explain how you pass these things off.

quote:

Originally posted by leafar:
No my love.

leafar shall we just not go down this route again.

Instead of quoting me on that, why dont you comment on the main point that i made. Id like to hear what you have to say about it.

quote:

Originally posted by 1689:
Where did you get this inside info from?

Same place where I was deputy custodian of my department's copy of the "Blue Book".

Oh, what the heck, why keep you in your already ignorant state. I served in the Army for over 20 years and I then worked in MoD. All of this I have mentioned over the couple of years I have posted on these fora so I am not just making it up to impress or fool you. Don't delude yourself though I won't be posting anything which contravenes the Official Secrets Act. (I am signed to, and restricted by, both Parts 1 and 2.) Anyone with a few years mil experience could tell you that having some troops on exercise in the Gulf was not an indicator of TTW (Transition to War).

So, would you care to tell us what your experience is that you can assess and infer operational readyness states.

Or is it a case of:

Those who can (myself) can and those who can't (yourself) invent conspiracy.

quote:

I got mine from the news a few days after they said they would invade afghanistan.

Really, that early. So what news programme, date please, I'll check. Let me guess:

1. You can't actually remember the date but you know you heard it then and we'll just have to trust you.

2. Doubtless the conspirators will have wiped out all traces of this news leak by now so my checks with the channel who broadcast it will come up blank.

3. Being unable to verify your remembered news broadcast will confirm your conspiracy theory.

And so we continue with our merry go round of more and more people being involved in the secret. Thankfully, though, such vigil and incisive minds such as yours can see through it all.

quote:

Originally posted by 1689:
So you dont think it was a story worthy of notable news coverage.

not particularly.

major incident drills are relatively common in the post 9/11 world.

as for bombs under trains, this was based on misreportings of comments of passengers who couldn't be expected to know the effects of a bomb blast or have accurate terminology to describe it.

If it was an indicator of TTW how would they have passed it off as a training exercise??

No i cant remember exactly where i heard it, its not secret information you cant hide an armies whereabouts or try and lie about it, when thousands of people will have known where they have been.

Youve been in the army for 20 years, so your not biased on the matter are you.

Again you nit pick on the most ridiculous of grounds, the point is its another convenient coincidence.

How do you explain the neo conservatives plans before 9/11 how do you pass off the strong connection between not only bush and the Bin Ladens but also the CIA and Osama?

Skirting around issues with technicalities doesnt prove anything.

I 'OPE YOU ARE NOT REFERRING TO ME.

i am only idle.