Mandy Lifeboats

@A'Villan Thanks for the reply. Much appreciated. I would love to discuss this with you. But "conspiracy theories" cover a wide range of topics. Maybe you could outline one of the "conspiracy theories" that you feel has real merit and we could discuss specific details? I would like to make it clear that I believe 99% conspiracy theories are utter rubbish. But I accept that 1% are well justified. Over to you. What is a high profile conspiracy theory that you can debate?

I have noticed that there are several people on here who are really into their conspiracy theories. I have no doubt that 1% of conspiracy theories might have some truth in them. But I wonder if someone who is into these conspiracies can answer a few questions. 1. Why are they undertaken in the most complicated way possible? Examples - I want to fake a terrorist act to justify a war. I could get 1 man to drive 1 truck full of explosives into a maternity hospital. Or I could place demolition charges on 2 New York tower blocks, hijack 3 planes, fly 2 of those planes into the tower blocks and then detonate the demolition charges a short time afterwards. If I want to discredit a person I could raid their house and plant evidence of child porn on their laptop. Or I could find a group of people from his past who have verifiable contact, persuade them to fake evidence of sexual abuse and hope none of them reveal the plot to frame him. 2. Why are they so badly planned? Examples - I want to murder a British Princess. I arrange for a drunk driver to drive at high speed into a tunnel wall. Of the 4 people in the car 3 died. The one that lived wore a seat belt. Why go to all that trouble when a seat belt could have lead to my target walking away. 911 might not have happened if 2 captains had remained in the cockpit and/or a group of passengers had fought back. 3. What's the point? Examples - I believe the world is a globe. Who is gaining from me not realising its flat? Will Russel Brand stop raising conspiracy theories? Even if he did, what about the million other people saying the same thing?

To be fair, that submarine looks in better condition than their aircraft carrier.

Ah.......I see. Sorry I didn't pick up on that.

No. The laws says that someone is guilty if their crime can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Guilty people get away with it. But that's better than innocent people spending a decade in jail. Sadly rape is very difficult to prosecute. It requires the protection to prove that an event took place AND that one party did not agree to it. There are rarely witnesses to the act itself let alone whether parties agree to the act. But just because a offence is difficult to prove doesn't mean it should be ignored. The Police try to prosecute. They fail most of the time. I'd rather they tried to prosecute 1000 cases with a 1% success rate than 100 cases at a 9% success rate.

1. I was not labelling you as anything on this forum. I stand by my comment. Anyone who thinks most men behave in a criminal way towards women has an incredibly distorted view. I can only conclude that they have used their own behaviour as a perverse benchmark of normality. 2. I accept that your posts may have been out of context, ambiguous, badly worded, mistaken etc. But I truly found your post troubling. I perceived it as a near admission of serious criminality. If all men are at risk of false abuse accusations it's probably not a good idea to post things on a forum that MISTAKENLY suggest you have undertaken such acts.

I find this comment very troubling. I am not sure what the average man is but I'd like to think I am fairly representative of an average man. Have I ever had sex with a woman who said "No"? Definitely not. Have I committed indecent assault, groomed a child or had an abusive relationship? Definitely not. Have I ever hit a woman? Definitely not. In my opinion, anyone who think MOST men behave in a criminal way towards women has a very distorted view. I also wonder whether they are mistaking their own conduct as typical when it's really not.

I predict the Russians will make prolonged attacks on the energy grid as soon as winter arrives.

Let's not forget that David Jason spent time in prison with Ronnie Barker. How did these two stay so popular?

I heard a rumour that David Jason regularly handled stolen goods and once destroyed an antique chandelier.

His speech where he lamented the death of his friend Prigozhin was not a clever thing to do.

It's off topic - but the US "accidentally" destroying the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade is an odd story. The US blamed "a failure in intelligence". The Chinese pointed out that their Embassy address was well know, marked on official maps, listed in the phone book and literally within sight of the US Embassy. I think the Embassy was using some sort of radar or communication device which an American weapon homed onto automatically. I doubt we'll ever know the true story.

I doubt it. There are a few precedents The US accidentally blew up the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. The US accidentally shot down an Iranian Airliner.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66798508 The interesting part of this article is that the US/UK were listening to the conversation between Russian ground control and the 2 Russian jets involved. If that's the level of infiltration we are willing to publicly acknowledge, I wonder how deep our infiltration actually goes. The leaked Pentagon documents did suggest that an order given by the Kremlin is known by the Pentagon before its known by the Russian military.

Good points. But..... When a currency significantly drops in value it tends to recover by itself. Imports become more expensive but exports become dirt cheap. The increase in exports helps the economy and increases demand for the currency. Thereby adding value to the currency. That isn't working with Russia. The currency is tumbling and demand for their exports (however cheap) is very limited. Russia will (and already does) sacrifice state assistance for its population. That's why they have one of the lowest life expectancies in Europe. To wage war you need millions of young fit men who are willing to die for their country or thousands of young fit men using cutting edge weapons and technology. Our sanctions are making Russia take more and more extreme short term measures that will destroy their ability to wage war in the long term. The USSR was bigger than Russia, had more people, a bigger army, more resources and more allies. Decades of sanctions brought it to it's knees. When it fell its "allies" such as Poland, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia and many more joined the west and began distancing themselves from Russia. Can Russia succeed where the USSR failed against a much larger west and maintain an real war at the same time? Maybe. But I think its demise will come much quicker.

As I said. Short term success leading to long term failure. Ten years ago there were 50 ruble to the pound. It hit 125 a few weeks ago. That's not a sign of a healthy and well run economy. It's a long term failure caused by thousands of bad decisions by Putin.

The only way to drive up prices is to reduce production. If Russia reduces production it loses more money (proportionately) than every other oil producing nation. We are fast approaching the peak year for oil/gas usage. Russia has wasted what should be its highest earning years. Russia is the largest country in the world, it has massive stocks of gas and oil. Its got agricultural land, raw materials, ports, a space program, fishery, nuclear energy and a large cheap workforce. It should be an economic super power. Its not. Its economy isn't as big as the tiny UK or a single US state like Texas. Russia can hurt the west economically in the short term. But those short term gains are insignificant when you consider the long term damage it does to Russia. Would you invest in Russia when their currency is in free fall, your assets could be seized by Putin and you might fall out of a window if you refused to sell your assets at a knockdown price? The ruble is crashing against EVERY world currency. Its not just the £, €, ¥ and $.

Sanctions work. There are always ways to circumnavigate them. But Russia income has fallen drastically whilst the cost of imports has risen drastically. The ruble exchange rate shows how bad its got. Even with 12% interest rates and laws to prevent foreigners withdrawing capital from Russia, the ruble has halved in value in only 12 months. It was 60 rubles to the pound. Its now 120.

It was a fake letter. In response to the uproar "we buy any car" offered to pay £10 to charity.

During the missile attacked on Sevastopol it was rumoured that Ukrainian Special Forces were in the city. The Russian Army and Russian Police sent out security patrols. It will come as no surprise that both parties spent most of the night shooting at one another. At least 4 dead.

As an ad-hoc desperation play or a trick play it's fine. The rugby ball holder does not have to worry about an opposing player standing between them and the ball receiver. That player is offside by definition. In the NFL it's a standard tactic to place players there.

Why not make the drone much bigger, reduce the number of rotors but make them much bigger and let the man in the drone control where it goes? What time does the patent office close?

Further to all the other answers. Rugby has an offside rule which prevents defenders being forward of the ball. That rule does not exist in NFL once the play begins, Defenders in the NFL can "mark/cover" players likely to be receiving the ball wherever they are on the pitch. The offside rule in rugby prevents that very close marking.

The round jamming in my sniper rifle during a Status Quo concert.

I love Star Wars. Dr Spock and Professor Snape are the best characters. Revenge of the Jedi was definitely the best film of the 1990s.