Kibkom North Cyprus Forum

The UK government’s presentation on the Salisbury incident, which was repeatedly cited in recent days as an “ultimate proof” of Russia’s involvement into Skripal’s assassination attempt, was made public earlier today.

This 6-paged PDF is a powerful evidence of another intellectual low of British propaganda machine. Open it and you can tell that substantially it makes only two assertions on the Skripal case, and both are false:

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03- ... to+zero%29

I am no fan of Russia-or Mr Putin and his corrupt government. However I think it could have been several other organisations/governments-we'll probably never know.
It was seized upon by the UK government as a diversion from all the bad news about Brexit-uniting the country against a common enemy.
I am very pleased that one of the injured people appear to be making a good recovery.

Yes Rosehillgirl - the article discusses the other possibilities. You might find the other interview I posted on Kibkom with ex french officer in the police very topical too.

Aaaah, poor Mr Putin might be getting the blame for something he didn't do (which I don't believe). Considering all the atrocities he is undoubtedly responsible for. including gunning down his main opposition leader in earshot of the Kremlin, who gives a toss?

Getting a taste of his own medicine, no doubt. I really feel for him.

Yes Mr Davidson you have totally lost your mind

Keep em coming... I love the way stalwart died in the wool types don't offer any critique or any links to their 'beliefs' and then even more amusing go on to attack the poster rather than the information Poised and watching for the next post... cognitive dissonance comes to mind

If you get your beliefs from the internet there is no hope for you... as for providing links to conspiracy theorists and misinformation.... well you might as well be a creationist or holocaust denier. If you repeat a lie often enough it will gather its own momentum. Just please don't ask us to join your parade.

Just for future reference I won't be responding to personal insults on here when I post something - but I will respond to intelligent discussion about postings and look at any references or links that may be provided....each to their own path and thank you to my fan club

Well, we all get a lot info from the internet... incl this forum.
To “extract” the good from the rubbish is often not that easy.
The more it is important that we strengthen an independent, of course not gov controlled, public media to get information which has a “best rating” (compare to others which, eg, only want to generate clicks ) to lead us all through a djungel of information.
Additional info might be helpful, but often is not worth a thought.. and definitely not worth to post.

İf someone is willing to make interesting knowledge public, then i would suggest that they contact, eg, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internati ... ournalists
İam sure that they are more then happy to make a nice story out of it.

Kibsolar - it should be clear to everyone that whilst the internet provides a fantastic source of information it is also demonstrably being used by powerful lobbies as a source of, at best obfuscation and at worst, deliberate disinformation whose purpose is to seek to muddy the waters of the perceived reality.

I now take everything with a salutary pinch of salt.

Again Cui bono and use Occums razor.
The problem with conspiracy theories is they are only worthwhile if they try to explain something that doesn't quite ring true. The JFK magic bullet might be an example.
When they are more convoluted and ludicrous than the original theory they become untenable.
9/11 is a good example. Rather than believing what happened we get the most outlandish theories forwarded.
Rather than the Pentagon being hit by flight 77 it was hit by a missile.
OK what then happened to Flight 77?
The twin towers were bought down by a controlled explosion.
OK what explosive? It had to some special explosive not to be set off by all that burning plane fuel. When were the charges set? It must have been quite an undertaking to place that many explosives unseen. etc etc

Quite agree. Of course an explanation as to which aircraft actually had two different types of engine fitted may have helped clarify the Pentagon issue along with what happened to Flt 77 after all - as far as I know aircraft do not simply vanish just because they crash, there is always the remains to be found? I don't think the twins were brought down by controlled explosion mind you, then again the fire department itself provided proof that the structures would not have failed due to a fire. Maybe the twins were built with poor quality or less steel than first thought? The JFK magic bullet? Was that the one fired by the mystery gunman on the mound? Many world class snipers have stated they could not have made the shot from the library so I expect that good old Lee was better than them, or just lucky? All tongue in cheek but for fun.

waddo wrote:Quite agree. Of course an explanation as to which aircraft actually had two different types of engine fitted may have helped clarify the Pentagon issue along with what happened to Flt 77 after all - as far as I know aircraft do not simply vanish just because they crash, there is always the remains to be found? I don't think the twins were brought down by controlled explosion mind you, then again the fire department itself provided proof that the structures would not have failed due to a fire. Maybe the twins were built with poor quality or less steel than first thought? The JFK magic bullet? Was that the one fired by the mystery gunman on the mound? Many world class snipers have stated they could not have made the shot from the library so I expect that good old Lee was better than them, or just lucky? All tongue in cheek but for fun.

Fair few pictures of plane wreckage around the Pentagon if you look for them.
As for these theories crediting governments with the nous to do these black ops? The US and UK governments couldn't plant/hide a few WMDS in the Iraqi desert to justify the war remember, and it's nearly 65,000 square miles.

Enjoying the Sun:

You are very out of date with at least your Q.s above about 9/11. Did you really think that those questions have never been answered or considered several times over - often drawing different conclusions.

One account is Dr Judy Wood who is a Bio physicist who wrote a book called 'Where Did the Towers Go'... she proposed it was an advanced energy weapon and actually defended and won a case on this in court.

Also there is the website Architects and Engineers for Truth who consider your questions above...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architect ... 9/11_Truth

on this site you can click on evidence and listen to their accounts...and challenges to the evidence ...https://www.ae911truth.org

Now... you may not want to look or read it but this will only fuel your outdated information that no-one has questioned it further than the mainstream account.

Personally I feel it is not 'settled' and continue to look at it... just like the police do when something seems incredible - those pesky conspiracy theorists

Mr Davidson,

I agree I am not up on the latest theories, who could be, a new one comes out every week.

So as the controlled explosion theory doesn't fly, an advanced energy weapon?
Seriously?
I haven't seen the new Star Wars either, is it on the Death Star? Is that where Flight 77 landed?
Dr Wood is a classic example of the whole truther movement. Come up with some unsupported speculation and then demand that someone debunks it.

Well this is Dr Judy Wood... and I think she is better placed than we are to judge... you would need to read the book - rather than making assumptions. I would also suggest you are way behind if you think advanced technology does not exist and is not out there... have you looked at any of the Quantum Physics stuff that is coming out ... did you know we now have Quantum computers that operate outside of our 3D reality - yes thats a fact too!

Dr. Wood received her

B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),
M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and
Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.
Her dissertation involved the development of an experimental method to measure thermal stresses in bimaterial joints. She has taught courses including
Experimental Stress Analysis,
Engineering Mechanics,
Mechanics of Materials (Strength of Materials)
Strength of Materials Testing

http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-sect ... hypothesis

well that’s your architects and engineers for truth blowing her theory out of the water so who are you going with?

I am hoping to patent my idea for a new cocktail,The Novi Skripal,just one will render you unconscious but a quick and full recovery with no lasting after effects guaranteed.I hope it is infinitely more successful than a previous effort,The Lethal Litvinenko.

Enjoying the sun... if you read my post correctly above I say there are several versions of what happened - I never said they were in agreement and I also said in my opinion it is not settled... so I am not currently going with anyone - however what I would say is that all of them disagree with the mainstream explanation as being correct and hence there is more to know....

So whats your point EJ the Sun?

artic monkey wrote:I am hoping to patent my idea for a new cocktail,The Novi Skripal,just one will render you unconscious but a quick and full recovery with no lasting after effects guaranteed.I hope it is infinitely more successful than a previous effort,The Lethal Litvinenko.

Well it is Easter after all Arctic M... and its always good to have a 'resurrection'

Mr Davidson wrote:Enjoying the sun... if you read my post correctly above I say there are several versions of what happened - I never said they were in agreement and I also said in my opinion it is not settled... so I am not currently going with anyone - however what I would say is that all of them disagree with the mainstream explanation as being correct and hence there is more to know....

So whats your point EJ the Sun?

My point is it is fine to challenge a mainstream theory if you can point out a simpler solution.
As in the example I gave earlier with the JFK magic bullet. Is it more likely that rather than have a bullet cause that many injuries could it be more likely that there could be more than one shooter? Yes that is a theory worth advancing.
Death ray machines or explosives that are resistant to burning plane fuel? Let’s stick with the mainstream theory it is the most likely.

No lets not... lets keep asking the question Mainstream theory is a farce and even the architect that designed the twin towers said 2 planes would not bring them down. .... lets do some research instead of being told what to think. Ok thats me out now nothing much else to say except goodnight

"....and even the architect that designed the twin towers said 2 planes would not bring them down..... "
- and of course this must be believed because of course he anticipated the possibility of/calculated/designed for precisely this eventuality (not possibility) and therefore provided a written guarantee.... Can this be produced?
I assume that Neville Chamberlain's statement of "Peace in our time" must also be believed, and the alleged World War 2 has never happened, while the Holocaust is yet another fantasy concocted by certain governments and secret powers?

Apparently tests were done Jofra...see here...

http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/655-faq ... lanes.html

Mr Davidson wrote:Apparently tests were done Jofra...see here...

http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/655-faq ... lanes.html

Two points.
Theoretical tests are always theoretical and the quoted tests were carried out in 1964. The Towers weren't even built yet.

Mr Davidson wrote: even the architect that designed the twin towers said 2 planes would not bring them down. .

I assume you are talking about Minoru Yamasaki? He died 15 years before the attacks.

Mr Davidson wrote: One account is Dr Judy Wood who is a Bio physicist who wrote a book called 'Where Did the Towers Go'... she proposed it was an advanced energy weapon and actually defended and won a case on this in court.

Ok took your advice and had a look at this woman. Yes she seems very credible!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYAw3U0AaIU

I'm not finding any evidence of any case she won in court, evidence of a fair few she lost.

Even the other truthers write her off as a nutcase and think she is a plant to discredit them.
That's quite a clever tactic of theirs which they have used before. Once a theory get totally destroyed they accuse it's originator of being a plant to discredit them.

The court case is in one of her interviews... there is more than one with Richard D Hall... so if its not this one you might find another with here talking about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFfZWjDvtHo

Just for the record she doesn't consider herself a 'truther'.... to my knowledge she doesn't get in to pointing the finger or saying why 9/11 occurred just analyses it from her scientific training.

Any potential testing or something has to be on a model basis, logic, computer analogy and hypothesis - thats how mainstream science works

If you are interested there is also a pilots for truth movement too....

Quote: Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe who have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day based on solid data and facts -- since 9/11/2001 is the catalyst for many of the events shaping our world today -- and the United States Government does not seem to be very forthcoming with answers or facts.

We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report -- a Commission admittedly "set up to fail" according to the Chairman himself, nor "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the continued gross violation(s) of the United States Constitution being committed by Government agencies, and the sacrifice every American has made and continue to make -- some more than others.

We stand with the numerous other growing organizations of Firefighters, Medical Professionals, Lawyers, Scholars, Military Officers, Veterans, Religious and Political Leaders, along side Survivors, family members of the victims -- family members of soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice -- including the many Ground Zero workers who are now ill or have passed away, when we ask for a true, new independent investigation into the events of 9/11.


Thank you for taking the time to inform yourself....endquote

http://pilotsfor911truth.org

Ok EJ the sun... I am 9/11'd out for now as having been looking at aspects of it for the last 10 years at least! I am sure you can do your own research and thank you for the discussion.

Go and enjoy the sun!

Mr Davidson wrote:The court case is in one of her interviews... there is more than one with Richard D Hall... so if its not this one you might find another with here talking about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFfZWjDvtHo

Just for the record she doesn't consider herself a 'truther'.... to my knowledge she doesn't get in to pointing the finger or saying why 9/11 occurred just analyses it from her scientific training.

Any potential testing or something has to be on a model basis, logic, computer analogy and hypothesis - thats how mainstream science works

Like I say I can find no court case that she won, bringing a court case is a world away from winning one.
Well she is pointing the finger that the mainstream theory is wrong and all she seems to offer is a ludicrous theory.
There is mainstream science and junk science. She has gathered qualifications by learning others theories unfortunately that doesn't mean hers have any validity.

Mr Davidson wrote:
If you are interested there is also a pilots for truth movement too....

The possibility of the manouveres that were carried out has long been proved as do-able by anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of flying a plane.
I have a nine year old granddaughter who I might not be able to teach to start a car, pull away and park but feel confident in the course of an afternoon I could teach her how to steer a car into a wall.

I don't doubt that you can find a crank qualified in anything to say something inane to get 15 minutes of fame. A fair proportion of Americans believe they have been abducted by aliens.


I am a fairly cynical person and have no doubt that Governments have pulled some stunts in their time but how many thousand people would you estimate would have been needed to pull this off?

Give me a break. Does any of this get Mr Putin off the hook? Methinks not.

frontalman wrote:Give me a break. Does any of this get Mr Putin off the hook? Methinks not.

Nope he did it, who else would have.
But even if you had film of him personally doing it, some would discredit it as forged.

The question 'why would Putin do such a thing what would he gain' is very naive... Of course he would gain massively by sending out a strong and very clear message. That is - nobody is beyond his reach - so think on it. The Russian people understand this message very well - even if we find it lacking in logic - it's not diplomacy it's a ruthless reminder that individuals are subject to state sponsored sanction.

It's not mean't to show finesse - otherwise the message would be watered-down.. He must be wetting himself with laughing at the conspiracy theorists in the rest of the world running about like headless chickens trying to blame 'others' for the deed...

Groucho wrote:Of course he would gain massively by sending out a strong and very clear message. That is - nobody is beyond his reach - so think on it.

Playing devil's advocate. If the intention is to show nobody is beyond his (Putin's) reach then selecting a target that was living under some kind of ongoing active 'protection' in the west rather than one living openly and without any special security in a sleepy Salisbury village might have been more effective. Managing to terminate the target rather than 'just' placing them in hospital might also have meet the suggested objective somewhat better as well.

The jury's out on that one Erol. It'll be a surprise if the smitten Dad regains full health, judging by reports so far.

erol wrote:

Groucho wrote:Of course he would gain massively by sending out a strong and very clear message. That is - nobody is beyond his reach - so think on it.

Playing devil's advocate. If the intention is to show nobody is beyond his (Putin's) reach then selecting a target that was living under some kind of ongoing active 'protection' in the west rather than one living openly and without any special security in a sleepy Salisbury village might have been more effective. Managing to terminate the target rather than 'just' placing them in hospital might also have meet the suggested objective somewhat better as well.

For that there would need to such an individual... Bill Browder? His security might be due a re-think. But as I said it is not about finesse... those who need to get the message know who they are and their own vulnerabilities... it is their unstinting loyalty that Putin wants and fear will do that to Russians whose oppression by the state has them almost genetically conditioned to deliver total obedience.