Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire IV

[Vixen]

Your attempt to rehabilitate your claim is to admit you weren't there to witness the facts you allege? Wow, you really aren't the smartest person in the room.

My father sent me his various papers, including said memo marked Confidential, 1945, from H.Q.27 Group.

How else would I have known?

What's with the 'smartest person in the room'?

 

[Vixen]

Here's a fable.

In a country farm is a pen for turkeys. None of the turkeys become curious after seeing some bigger turkeys vanish just before Christmas, because rearing turkeys takes less than a year.

Shortly before Christmas, a lorry is seen reversing towards the pen. The turkeys are concerned about what this might mean.

Curious Turkey reports that some of the turkeys posting in the comments section of the Daily Mail website have been speculating that the lorry may be powered by battery chickens who will invade their pen. When the lorry is inspected by a turkey who, being outside the pen, is able to get close to it, he reports that it appears to be a diesel-powered lorry.

CT says that it looks like a chicken-powered lorry, and that some of the turkeys posting about it on the Mail website claim to be used chicken dealers, so must be experts.

Outside Turkey points out that the lorry is producing diesel fumes. CT says they are fumes produced by chickens. OT points out that CT is too far away to be able to smell them. Curious Turkey says that they look like chicken farts, and asks what the make and model of the lorry are. OT says, "how the **** should I know, I'm a turkey."

CT claims that the make and model are being hushed up by Big Farmer because he has investments he doesn't know about in battery chickens. OT says that this is clearly nonsense, and the important issue is what the lorry is there for. He will investigate this and report back. Meanwhile, he has confirmed that the lorry is diesel powered, and not fitted with any form of chicken power, whether from batteries or otherwise.

CT says that this statement has actually been made by Jenny From Communications Turkey, who is just repeating what has been said earlier while pretending to be OT. OT points out that everyone saw him making the statement. CT claims that OT, along with JFCT and every other turkey outside the pen, is in on Big Farmer's plot to cover up the make and model of the lorry.

Realising from this that CT is a genius, all the other turkeys in the pen start clamouring for the make and model of the lorry.

While they are doing this, Big Farmer rounds them all up, herds them into the lorry, and sends them off for slaughter.

Come Christmas, what is the moral of this story?

OT <fx holds up megaphone> : What do we want?!

All the Turkeys (bar CT): CHRISTMAS!

OT: When do we want it?!

All: NOW!!!

 

[JayUtah]

My father sent me his various papers, including said memo marked Confidential, 1945...

Which you then seem to have assumed was a classification marking equivalent to "top secret" and about which you seem to have spun a charming—but completely improbable—tale as an apparent face-saving exercise.

How else would I have known?

First, since you lie habitually, we have no reason to suspect that any such documents exist. Second, you could learn about U.K. classification markings and practices throughout history by consulting any number of people or sources instead of just making stuff up. Third, it's clear you don't actually know; you simply suggest that classification markings had a different meaning for your father's military unit than they did for the entire rest of the U.K. government. These are the facts you allege, but weren't there to witness.

What's with the 'smartest person in the room'?

It's what you seem to aspire to be. You even concocted a little fable casting yourself as "Curious Turkey" in a barnyard drama, thereby insinuating that you are the only participant in this thread who knows what's going on despite all evidence to the contrary. I have yet to see any participation on your part in this forum which is actually interested in resolving the question at hand, and is not apparently aimed at proving how much smarter you are than everyone else.

Your attempt to revive this thread came with no new information. Instead you made an observation, suggested a conspiracy theory to explain why the observation didn't meet your expectations, and tried to explain how much you know about the nondisclosure of information. As usual, you've fallen short of the mark.

 

[EHocking]

As Jay has repeatedly said, no, you are not the smartest person in the room.

Who said I was?

. . .

Originally Posted by Vixen
… I am very flattered to be considered 'the smartest guy on [sic] the room', to be the cause of such insecurity, …

 

[Craig4]

UK tax payer. Transparency.

As a UK tax payer, why is the fact that it was a conventional diesel not sufficient? Are you not now sufficiently armed to make informed decisions about parking lot fires?

 

[catsmate]

Aren't Irish bar men great?

Some, there's a grumpy ****** in Fagans who should be avoided.

Isn't County Cork great?

I'm not permitted to comment.

Aren't free pints of stout great?

Murphys, Guinness or Beamish?

 

[Vixen]

. . .

For goodness sake, don't you recognise sarcasm? In future, please quote me in full and in context (to include what I was replying to, together with thread title, so we know the topic).

(Sorry if you are going through a hard time - I hope you feel happier soon.)

 

[Cosmic Yak]

For goodness sake, don't you recognise sarcasm? In future, please quote me in full and in context (to include what I was replying to, together with thread title, so we know the topic).

(Sorry if you are going through a hard time - I hope you feel happier soon.)

Interesting. It appears that, in Vixenland, 'sarcastic' or 'sardonic' mean 'things I said that I wish I hadn't'.

 

[Vixen]

Interesting. It appears that, in Vixenland, 'sarcastic' or 'sardonic' mean 'things I said that I wish I hadn't'.

"I am very flattered to be considered 'the smartest guy on [sic] the room'" doesn't strike you as obvious sarcasm? Sheeee-eesh!

Do note the quotation marks, as this will guide you.

 

[Vixen]

Which you then seem to have assumed was a classification marking equivalent to "top secret" and about which you seem to have spun a charming—but completely improbable—tale as an apparent face-saving exercise.



First, since you lie habitually, we have no reason to suspect that any such documents exist. Second, you could learn about U.K. classification markings and practices throughout history by consulting any number of people or sources instead of just making stuff up. Third, it's clear you don't actually know; you simply suggest that classification markings had a different meaning for your father's military unit than they did for the entire rest of the U.K. government. These are the facts you allege, but weren't there to witness.



It's what you seem to aspire to be. You even concocted a little fable casting yourself as "Curious Turkey" in a barnyard drama, thereby insinuating that you are the only participant in this thread who knows what's going on despite all evidence to the contrary. I have yet to see any participation on your part in this forum which is actually interested in resolving the question at hand, and is not apparently aimed at proving how much smarter you are than everyone else.

Your attempt to revive this thread came with no new information. Instead you made an observation, suggested a conspiracy theory to explain why the observation didn't meet your expectations, and tried to explain how much you know about the nondisclosure of information. As usual, you've fallen short of the mark.

What lies? And before you respond, you might like to reflect on whether it is immoral to spread lies about another person. (See novaphile's post for examples of this, to which you leapt in to defend.)

 

[Vixen]

As a UK tax payer, why is the fact that it was a conventional diesel not sufficient? Are you not now sufficiently armed to make informed decisions about parking lot fires?

I was referring to the make, model and year of the vehicle.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

Murphys, Guinness or Beamish?

In that instance it was Murphy's.

A later incident, involving half of the Irish navy, a bunch of students down from Cork and the singing of a whole lot of rebel songs, saw free pints of both Guinness and Murphy's donated to us.

Beamish wasn't available in the area at that time.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

What lies? And before you respond, you might like to reflect on whether it is immoral to spread lies about another person. (See novaphile's post for examples of this, to which you leapt in to defend.)

How long have you got?

 

[Cosmic Yak]

"I am very flattered to be considered 'the smartest guy on [sic] the room'" doesn't strike you as obvious sarcasm? Sheeee-eesh!

Do note the quotation marks, as this will guide you.

Quoting yourself, in quotation marks to show you're quoting, is not an indicator of sarcasm. Sheeeeeeesh!

 

[JayUtah]

For goodness sake, don't you recognise sarcasm?

Yes, including the cases where it's inappropriately claimed as a way of backpedaling out of a gaffe.

In future, please quote me in full and in context (to include what I was replying to...

There was a link. You were replying to me. The full context was your lengthy attempt to prove you were the only one who knew the correct way to use primes notation.

...together with thread title, so we know the topic).

Will Her Majesty also be requiring a table of contents, index, and a bibliography?

"I am very flattered to be considered 'the smartest guy on [sic] the room'" doesn't strike you as obvious sarcasm?

Not in the context of you crowing about how no one else recognized ″ as the "correct" symbol for minutes. There was an entire thread that was mostly you praising yourself for your cleverness over and above your critics.

What lies?

You falsely claimed I had been contemptuously scornful of Carol Vorderman having a degree in Engineering. I did no such thing. As usual, you resisted all the initial attempts to hold you accountable for that lie. When you decided to address it, it was to add additional accusations.

...you might like to reflect on whether it is immoral to spread lies about another person.

Does that include spouting baseless conspiracy theories accusing people of lying to protect the former Prime Minister's business interests?

You're not the smartest person in the room, and you do not hold the high moral ground.

 

[JayUtah]

I was referring to the make, model and year of the vehicle.

Yes, and the question was why you need to know those, rather that simply the fuel type of the initial vehicle, in order to make informed decisions as a U.K. taxpayer about the safety of parking structures.

For page after page you've postured this as the sine qua non of a legitimate investigation. You've insinuated that the responsible agencies have no reason to keep this information from you, although you've failed to address the reason they gave you. You've lately claimed the information is "classified," although it's now clear you don't know what that means. In Vixenworld, the entire investigation hinges upon those minutiae, while it has almost no import in the real world. You can't seem to explain the difference.

 

[Vixen]

Yes, and the question was why you need to know those, rather that simply the fuel type of the initial vehicle, in order to make informed decisions as a U.K. taxpayer about the safety of parking structures.

For page after page you've postured this as the sine qua non of a legitimate investigation. You've insinuated that the responsible agencies have no reason to keep this information from you, although you've failed to address the reason they gave you. You've lately claimed the information is "classified," although it's now clear you don't know what that means. In Vixenworld, the entire investigation hinges upon those minutiae, while it has almost no import in the real world. You can't seem to explain the difference.

I was wondering why we can't be told. Whether it's a 1973 Grey Cortina or 2014 Range Rover Sport, what is the problem, given it is not under criminal investigation?

So if in the USA you are regularly informed as to who your election candidates are, surely you'd be curious enough to want to understand if one of them is deemed 'not for public information' and their name protected under some section of 'exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act'.

So anyone asking why, in your view, is a conspiracy theorist.

 

[JayUtah]

I was wondering why we can't be told.

The reason was given in the published response to the Freedom of Information Act queries.

So if in the USA you are regularly informed as to who your election candidates are, surely you'd be curious enough...

Irrelevant straw man and question-begging.

So anyone asking why, in your view, is a conspiracy theorist.

No. Substituting your imagination for the published reason makes you a conspiracy theorist.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Did you actually want a list of those lies Vixen? Because we can provide them.

 

[Steve]

Did you actually want a list of those lies Vixen? Because we can provide them.

They were sarcasm. All of them. Retroactively. Because Vixen only much later came to the realization that they were actually sarcasm.