Conspiracy Talk Archive December 05 2011

 

Use our posting form to send us conpiracy talk.

05 Dec 2011 23:14:44
Gangsters? Thoughts people!

Believable1 Unbelievable0

A vastly under-used section of society .

Agree2 Disagree0

Cia , some govements , russia as a example , etc etc , the biggest gangsters infact worse , they have no moral code at all.................lfc

Agree2 Disagree0

05 Dec 2011 22:16:24
ed apparently (according to americans) they saved us in ww2, is this true and how? {Ed001's Note - they expedited the victory, but they certainly didn't save anyone. It was more the German failure to knock Russia out of the war that saved us. They were a factor in the Allied victory, but winning the Battle of Britain and evacuating the bulk of the BEF at Dunkirk did more to save Britain.}

Believable3 Unbelievable0

{Ed033's Note - Allegedly the Germans let the British escape at Dunkirk.}

Agree1 Disagree1

Why let us escape ed? {Ed001's Note - Hitler was a known Anglophile and harboured hopes of an alliance to conquer the world together. That is why it is alleged that his tactical error at Dunkirk was done deliberately.}

Agree2 Disagree0

My dad reads a lot of books regarding WW1 and 2, he told me Hitler proposed a peace treaty with Britain saying Britain could have everything west of Berlin while the Nazi's controlled everything east. Has anybody else heard of this?

always a red

{Ed033's Note - I don't we can have a proper informed discussion on here about Hitler because of everything that has been said since WW2

Agree2 Disagree0

True or not would you have trusted him?

True he did order the panzers to stop short of the beaches, can't remember the reaosn given something to do with supplies. {Ed001's Note - I wouldn't trust him, he was clearly delusional.}

Agree1 Disagree0

Well he had previous what with the Munich agreement which is why i think we rejected any offers made.

Agree0 Disagree0

I wasn't suggesting the deal should have been taken, just that it may have been offered. Delusional is putting it nicely ed the man was insane.
Its just with all that happened during that time and more importantly just after its hard to believe the mainstream history books.

always a red

Agree0 Disagree0

The russians ended the war, After pursuing the germany army through Russia and back to germany with hand to hand combat to clear buildings in germany until they got to the building where hitler was, hitler knew what was in store for him so he commited suicide.

Although the Russians are not popular and hollywood has scripted in thousands of movies that america won the war, so we all believe america won the war.

Its a pity the Russians are not in the EU as Germany needs to be stopped yet again.

Agree2 Disagree0

It's ironic that one of the reasons why Germany was allowed to re-arm past the Versailles Treaty restrictions was for Germany to be a buffer to stop Russia expanding and taking control of the whole of Europe

Agree0 Disagree0

It was a joint effort, after all ourselves and later the yanks kept the Russians supplied with materials like radios and trucks. This allowed all Russian production to be focused on tanks and guns and the like.

Bear in mind the early versions of the t34 were horrible and didn't have radio's so tank commanders couldn't communicate with each other and each tank was effectively a single unit on the battlefield. The Germans having radios were more organised and could overwhelm the Russians.

Once we started supplying them with radios they could communicate more effectively and organise into better units. With other imprrovements the t34 vastly improved its performance and the Red Army rolled over everything.

The trucks helped as well, compared to the Germans reduced to carts and horses.

So it was a team effort gents.

Agree0 Disagree0

I can't imagine the yanks supplying the russians with anything.

The russians wanted to buy SAAB and/or Opel a few years back both american owned the sale of either company was blocked to the russians.

Do you stilll think america supplied them with Radio's?

Also most of the technology america has such as HARRP and Remote Viewing were stolen from Russia, your source of information mate is not good.

Russian tanks were no match for the german tanks it was the russians bravery (or stupidity depending on your viewpoint) & weather that drove the germans out of russia then the Russians hunted the Nazis down building by building in hand to hand combat.


What use would a radio have been to the russian tanks since their tanks could not take a shell from the German tanks without being destroyed? {Ed001's Note - that is nonsense, the T34 (and heavier Russian tanks) were far superior to the German equivalents at the time. The Germans made a better tactical use of their equipment, which enabled them to match the Russians, but they did not have better tanks. In fact the T34 was so good that the Germans copied the design, you might know it as the Panther.}

Agree0 Disagree1

The German tanks had heavier plating and bigger canons mounted on them as usual you are confused, here we go again just like the famine! {Ed001's Note - they brought those in because the Russian tanks outgunned and had better armour in the early period of the war. If you actually took the time to read things, you would see that the comment was talking about how the Germans were originally stopped. The bigger guns and better armoured tanks were not introduced until 1943, after the Germans had been stunned by having to face the T34 and other heavier Russian tanks. The Tiger and later German tanks were introduced purely to counter those, too late and in too small numbers to really affect the outcome of the war. It is not me who is confused.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Well it depends who you are reading and what you are reading.

The russian tanks and troops out numbered the german tanks and troops and the the german tanks out muscled the russian tanks. What become the panther after the war is irrelevant, also the engines in the russian tanks were poor and prone to break down unlike the german tanks that were more reliable. Russia won this war by the sacrifice of its soldiers.

If you took the time to read it yourself you would see I have mainly posted on the "fact" by others that that Russia was supplied with Radios by the allies/america so it was a joint effort. Ha ha

Russsia has never accepted any help from any other Country even in "peace Times" its not the Russian way even when their Sailors were lying at the bottom of the bearing sea they sought no help.

And I doubt Russia received any communications equipment from the allies.

Of course you may want to re-write history and you are always right about everything just like sop many issues here I usually stay away from your posts as its impossible to get a point over, why don't I just do that? {Ed001's Note - the Germans were the ones that suffered reliability problems, their tanks couldn't handle the cold. Being petrol engined, rather than diesel, unlike Russian tanks, the petrol and oil would freeze. The Russians were accepting aid, if you knew anything about the murderous Atlantic convoys you would know they were transporting thousands of tons of Allied aid to the Russians. Why are you talking about what became the Panther after the war? Nobody mentioned that, it was about how it was a copy of the T34 during the war, because the T34 was superior to the German tanks. This is simple schoolboy level history, why are you finding it so difficult to understand?}

Agree0 Disagree0

Hi Ed i was the one who put up about the radio's. I'm going to look up a few figures for the other guy.

Agree0 Disagree0

There were 78 convoys between August 1941 and May 1945

About 1400 merchant ships delivered vital supplies to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease program, escorted by ships of the Royal Navy, Royal Canadian Navy, and the U.S. Navy. Eighty-five merchant vessels and 16 Royal Navy warships (two cruisers, six destroyers, eight other escort ships) were lost.

These convoys enabled Russia to keep going whilst they rebuilt all their heavy industry in Siberia.



"I can't imagine the yanks supplying the russians with anything."

Well they did. It was a team effort. Stop being anti american. Briatin was at one point 6 weeks away from starvation so the yank supplies kept us going never mind the Russians.

The russians wanted to buy SAAB and/or Opel a few years back both american owned the sale of either company was blocked to the russians.

Do you stilll think america supplied them with Radio's?"

I fail to see the relevance of something from 60-65 years later. And yes they and us supplied them with food, radio's ammo. trucks etc allowing them to focus on tank production.

"Also most of the technology america has such as HARRP and Remote Viewing were stolen from Russia, your source of information mate is not good."

Really, i'd worry about that paranoia. Also i think your source of information is even worse. Your really saying that EVERY SINGLE book on the war, and there have been a lot are wrong? O well maybe i'd better phone up Kershaw and Bullock and the rest and tell them to retire.

"Russian tanks were no match for the german tanks it was the russians bravery (or stupidity depending on your viewpoint) & weather that drove the germans out of russia then the Russians hunted the Nazis down building by building in hand to hand combat."

You've never heard of the Battle of Kursk? Prokhorovka?

The Germans noted a fundamental flaw in their armored vehicles, particularly the Elefant. Although excellent against any Soviet tank at long to medium range, they lacked secondary armament and were vulnerable to attacks from Soviet slit trenches, once they were separated from the heavy machine gun protection of the lighter tanks, vehicles and infantry.

"What use would a radio have been to the russian tanks since their tanks could not take a shell from the German tanks without being destroyed? "

As i said in my original post if you had bothered to read it, radio'#s allowed soviet tank regiment commanders to better co-ordinate with their squadron commnaders and them to organise their tanks much better, they became more effective units.

Also the t34 was a very good tank, i've read interviews with crew from panzer 4's where they say their shells were just bouncing off unless they were at close range. Thats why they rushed up the Tiger, Panther and Elephant designs.

I know this is from wikipedia but i'm in a hurry and the further eading may help.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34

Agree0 Disagree0

Me again sorry Ed, i brought up the Arctic convoys cos my Great Uncle Alf served on a couple of those and the old boy said it was awful. He never used to wear a coat in winter just walk about in shirt and tie, when asked he said i survived those bloody convoys, english winter is a picnic! {Ed001's Note - I just realised I said Atlantic didn't I earlier? I meant Arctic! Silly mistake to make that, d'oh! They were said to be the worst places to be, an absolute nightmare.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Well to be fair they crossed the Atlantic first.

O Alf had some stories, horrible place to be. Freeze to death in seconds, banned from smoking, had to wrap up. Guys losing skin from touching exposed metal.

Of course we did this just for a giggle, cos the Russians never accepted any help... {Ed001's Note - exactly, was just a holiday cruise really......}

Agree0 Disagree0

Yeah sounds about right ed.

Agree0 Disagree0

The USA turned it's auto industry over to armaments for the allies long before they got involved in the fighting.

Len

Agree0 Disagree0

Were these the same convoys uncle Albert was on when his lighter frose?

Tales from John Sullivan?

Agree0 Disagree1

Well if russia found hitler why did they say they lost his body? how could u loose hitlers body? Russia beat everyone to berlin but tecnically usa ended the war because the dropped two nuked on japan after germanys surrender {Ed001's Note - actually the Japanese had agreed to surrender before the nukes were dropped, the Americans wanted to test them both though.}

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Dec 2011 19:20:55
is it true the americans bombed the moon and for what reason?

{Ed033's Note - The speculation is that either they were removing evidence of some kind or seeing how hollow the moon actually is by detecting the shockwaves.}

Believable0 Unbelievable0

My guess is the former considering how the yanks operate, thanks ed

Agree0 Disagree0

Maybe to see if there is water under the surface?

Agree0 Disagree2

Cheese ! it was really in demand at the time.

Mr Roller Coaster

Agree1 Disagree1

05 Dec 2011 18:02:20
Hi Ed just a quick question about your moon landing convo earlier i have always believed that a portion of the moon landings were real and never really paid much attention to the van allan belt although i did know it was a band of radiation, So is it impossible to pass through it in a space shuttle? would you get Baked by the intensity of the radiation?

Thanks Ed

MJ

{Ed033's Note - Richard Hoagland reckons that they flew so fast through the Van Allen belts that the astronauts were only minimally affected.

There are rumours that built into the capsule around the astronauts was black technology radiation shielding which was light enough in weight to take off which was given to NASA from the secret space program separate from NASA - Anomalies on the Moon - www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK-2N4L5rCA&feature=fvsr}

Believable0 Unbelievable0

{Ed033's Note - The secret space program allegedly encompasses a number of countries including russia and america but at a higher level than the presidential level.

There was a report called the Brookings report which all governments agreed to and that was to hide any evidence of ETs. As there is allegedly evidence of extraterrestrial activity on the moon every government has to keep quiet.

The russians can't mention black technology either so they keep quiet about the moon.}

Agree0 Disagree0

On my flimsy knowledge it would have to have been some sort of tech we don't know about. The amount of lead needed would have doubled the weight of the rocket, which would have needed to have been double in size again, this of course leads to several obvious problems.

{Ed033's Note - Haven't you heard of black technology. Possibly et technology or ancient technology that could be 100s more advanced than you think we have.}

Agree1 Disagree0

Ed thats what i was alluding, some sort of tech that we, ordinary joe public don't know about.

{Ed033's Note - Ok sorry. The Nazi's had some pretty high tech as well at the end of the war with the Bell project.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Yeah thats just odd. Why did they throw so much money, time and effort into all this high end research when they were losing the war?

Ok i know the theory that they just moved underground, but its just odd to me. {Ed001's Note - because they thought it might turn the tide, the right weapon could have turned the tide if it was powerful enough.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Well the bomb certainly would have, but jet fighters and v1's wouldn't have, desperate gambles really.

{Ed033's Note - Allegedly the 2 atomic bombs dropped on Japan actually were stolen from the Nazis by General Patton. The Nazis didn't use the atomic bombs possibly because they had a far greater weapon that wasn't ready at the time which was the technology used in the Nazi Bell project - Joseph Farrell wrote a book on the Nazi Bell - here is an interview with him - www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wJboIFKCFU

Agree0 Disagree0

If there were such a thing as black technology used on space shuttles y is the same material or similar used 40 years later on nuclear submarine to shield from radiation. Instead of using lead

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Dec 2011 15:04:53
Alleged Student Abuse, Pornography Cover-up at Oxford & Cherwell Valley College

tinyurl.com/bw6xfxg

Believable0 Unbelievable4

05 Dec 2011 10:01:59
Having just watched appollo 18, how far from the truth is it and the fact that most of the moon rocks supposedly brought on earth being either missing or unaccounted for. In hindsight, if moon landings were faked, what were those moon rocks or that's why they were lost, to stop truth about fake landing to come out? Or is it just a movie and there is nothing in it?
U.P.

Believable0 Unbelievable1

There are plenty of moon rocks i was in america a month ago and was in a geologic museum and they had several moon rock and they where nothing like you get here on earth you could tell they weren't from earth and if man can send a self functioning robot to mar i think they could send people to the moon ,and there as loads of moon rocks on display across america anyway just most of them are still being worked on i think a more interesting question would be is if the moon was a boring waste land why spend all this time working on its rocks what minerals or materials they have found on the moon that they can exploit i personally believe man was on the moon simply because it was one of the technological and pioneering achievement of our species we finally left our planet for another world cant see why people would try to dirty it up.. its only my opinion {Ed001's Note - how did they shield the craft from the radiation in the Van Allen Belt?}

Agree1 Disagree1

I dont no ed but im sure it would be the same way that they protect our satellites today or the way they protect the satellites that went to mars or the rover that went to mars all of them need protection from the radiation to protect their special components , our satellites orbiting earth need protection but only if their orbit spends significant time in the radiation belts maybe they used the same methods that the ufo's use lol {Ed001's Note - they don't need protecting, radiation is not going to give a satellite cancer is it? Perhaps you should read up about why it is that the Shuttle would only go so far from the Earth, because you will find it is the difficulty shielding it that stops it. The Apollo missions certainly had no shielding capable of blocking it.}

Agree0 Disagree1

I think you should read up more about satellites then my friend as well as your mobile phones your internet would not work with out protecting the satellite that witch it works off the components witch work the satellites today are very complex and very fragile ,, radiation does not jst effect life it also effects technoligie as well my friend {Ed001's Note - not in the same way and check the satellites orbit and you will find they are this side of the Van Allen Belt and never enter it. So your point is irrelevant.}

Agree0 Disagree1

Satellites do cross into it and can be protected against the radiation protection is protection ,, the radiation has to be stopped from damaging the satellites if they can protect satellites they they can protect astronauts {Ed001's Note - if you say so. But you are talking about protecting tiny little parts from radiation damage, not a human being. Obviously you don't understand how much weight that would add to the equation, and that would increase the power needed to launch massively.}

Agree0 Disagree1

Not agreeing/disagreeing but in regards to the Van Allen Belt and Astronauts this is the explanation provided on Wiki, checked the sources quoted "The Apollo astronauts traveled through the Van Allen radiation belts on the way to the moon; however, exposure was minimized by following a trajectory along the edge of the belts that avoided the strongest areas of radiation.[18] The total radiation exposure to astronauts was estimated to be much less than the five (5) rem set by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission for people who work with radioactivity"

Dutch {Ed001's Note - if that was the case, why could they not continue to travel that path with the Shuttle?}

Agree2 Disagree0

Face the facts Ed001 knows alot more about the subject.

Irish Red {Ed001's Note - hard to say, he might know something I don't, but I have read nothing that changes my opinion that something dodgy is going on. What it is I have no idea, maybe he does!}

Agree0 Disagree2

If they did not land on the moon would the Russians who where in space at the time why have they not disputed the american claims that they had not am sure they would have if they had thought they had not

{Ed033's Note - If there is a secret space program separate to NASA that uses non-rocket black technology and other black technology to go to Mars/rest of the solar system etc. then it is possible they could have given NASA radiation shielding for the Apollo missions. The only part of the Apollo missions that could be fake is the pictures/video of astronauts on the moon because they didn't want to show us what's really on the moon. Here is what is probably on the moon - Jose Escamilla's film: Moon Rising, showing the Moon in colour and anomalies on the Moon - www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK-2N4L5rCA&feature=fvsr

Agree0 Disagree1

Any time Russia disputes anything with america who listens?

We are all conditioned in the west to believe America = Good & Russia = Bad

Agree0 Disagree0

I think you'll find America = Bad, Russia = Bad

Agree1 Disagree0

America is always good look at TV programs, hollywood movies etc. So many people believe america is good maybe you don't but you are in a small minority {Ed001's Note - you are joking right?}

Agree0 Disagree0

No I am not joking you may belive america is bad and your fellow ed's may believe america is bad but joe public belives America is good.

Take Ireland where Obama showed up not long ago 50,000 upwards turned out to see him. Shortly before this time the american administration blocked a 20 billion cut in irelands debts, how stupid is that?

Obama told the people of ireland it can repay its debts while on the vist there, he came out with a slogan is Irish - Is Feider Linn which translates to "Yes we Can" so the irish now have their mantra to repay debts.

Of course Ireland can not repay itsd debts but thats another story!

This is repeated in many other countries - now who does you think is joking, you or me?

Agree0 Disagree0