![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Skelton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 00:44:39 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Peter Skelton" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:59:36 -0400, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Peter Skelton" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 17:03:49 +0100, "Keith Willshaw" wrote: snip Go and look at the report on what happened at Flixborough I have, in detail, often, with access to a lot that isn't generally available. Bingo. Another claim of access to information not available to the rest of us--to go along with prior claims of attending sensitive briefings on what US personnel were doing with the contras in Nicaragua, and battle update briefings with a command that had troops engaged in Afghanistan? And you wonder why more and more folks don't believe you? I expalined quite directly why I had deeper knowledge than generally available. Anybody who worked at Maitland or the Texas plant (Victoria?) had the same. As you snipped that, I conclude you're up to your old bull again, removing context so that you can invent some. You've recently proven yourself grossly dishonest three times, isn't that enough? No, Keith has demonstrated quite amply that you are clueless regarding the incident at hand, not to mention of questionable veracity regarding the subject in general, despite your, as he put it "sekret" information... Sounds like just another example of your trying to pad your background a bit too much, and as I noted, it ain't the first time you have been caught out like this. I'm not going to argue about Kieth with you. You've been caught yourself more than once recently, as I said. Please specify. I have a complete list iof your falsifications; the ones you always hate to answer and usually resort to just snipping away before hurling your own utterly baseless allegations. As usual, you have nothing to contribute. Except for the observation that you have again apparently stepped into the trap of claiming you have some sort of restricted "insider" information (about a truly wide ranging field of subjects, too!), and when questioned further on it, this time by Keith, you wilt like a three day old cut-flower on the sidewalk. I have two choices, switch things back to one of your idiot statements, like the bit about artillery hitting without knowing where the target is, or ignoring you. I'll take the second. Give it your best shot--and while you are at it, can you refresh us as to what it was you were supposedly teaching those marines who were part of the spearhead into Afghanistan? You remember--you said quite clearly that your involvement with their preparation over the "past year" (a year where you also acknowledged that in fact you were working in that call center...) would have been "wasted" if they had seen fit to follow the Patton Approach to making the other poor SOB die for his country? Or was that another "sekret" thing? If so, you are not too good at keeping "sekrets", are you, Mr. Mitty? I believe this was all offered shortly before you claimed to have "been there, done that" in regards to your supposedly being fully squared away with the "meeting engagement", having never worn a uniform but having maybe worked for the same conglomerate that produced some kind of simulator? Did you even work in the same division that produced samesaid simulator, or did you make *all* of that up? And speaking of "division", that does remind one of your last (before this one) claim to have been in on "sekret" information, what with all of those briefings you claimed to be attending about ongoing actions in Afghanistan (again, at the same time that you elsewhere acknowledged you were actually working in that call center, though you later tried to claim that you were not doing so concurrently, forgetting that you had made the contradicting claims on *the same day* and both were set in the present tense) given by that "Mountain Division major"--have you figured out which division is known as the "Mountain Division" in the US Army yet? Gee, all them "sekrets", and nary a clue... amazing. Brooks Peter Skelton |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|