http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7492506.stm

<quotes>

Cuba's former President Fidel Castro has called on the Colombian Farc rebel
movement to release all of its remaining hostages.

In June, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called on them to end their
four-decade struggle and release all their hostages.

</quotes>

They'll get little praise for their stance from those who need to keep
demonising those they see as enemies on the left.

"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
news:Xvcck.22108$E41.15793@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7492506.stm
>
> <quotes>
>
> Cuba's former President Fidel Castro has called on the Colombian Farc 
> rebel
> movement to release all of its remaining hostages.
>
> In June, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called on them to end their
> four-decade struggle and release all their hostages.
>
> </quotes>
>
> They'll get little praise for their stance from those who need to keep
> demonising those they see as enemies on the left.

That's quite an amusing statement, hippyboy.  Chavez allegedly tried to 
obtain the release of all FARC hostages all year, but it appeared that all 
he did was make himself look like a fool.  In the end, the Columbians freed 
them with our assistence.  So keep on kissing Castro's ass if you like.  It 
only makes you look even more foolish than Chavez.

George

In message <oseck.15709$CC.4529@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message
>news:Xvcck.22108$E41.15793@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7492506.stm
>>
>> <quotes>
>>
>> Cuba's former President Fidel Castro has called on the Colombian Farc
>> rebel
>> movement to release all of its remaining hostages.
>>
>> In June, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called on them to end their
>> four-decade struggle and release all their hostages.
>>
>> </quotes>
>>
>> They'll get little praise for their stance from those who need to keep
>> demonising those they see as enemies on the left.
>
>That's quite an amusing statement, hippyboy.  Chavez allegedly tried to
>obtain the release of all FARC hostages all year, but it appeared that all
>he did was make himself look like a fool.  In the end, the Columbians freed
>them with our assistence.  So keep on kissing Castro's ass if you like.  It
>only makes you look even more foolish than Chavez.

Given the history and success rate and MO of the US forces in the area I 
would like to know what really happened.  SO far what I have heard does 
not stack up. It sounds like one of those stories where those that 
really did the work are never named and the glory is given to others.

There are others operating in the area who have a far higher success 
rate than the US. However as it is outside my area of interest I have no 
other information on it.


-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:GJZXEPCDkbcIFA6c@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <oseck.15709$CC.4529@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message
>>news:Xvcck.22108$E41.15793@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7492506.stm
>>>
>>> <quotes>
>>>
>>> Cuba's former President Fidel Castro has called on the Colombian Farc
>>> rebel
>>> movement to release all of its remaining hostages.
>>>
>>> In June, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called on them to end their
>>> four-decade struggle and release all their hostages.
>>>
>>> </quotes>
>>>
>>> They'll get little praise for their stance from those who need to keep
>>> demonising those they see as enemies on the left.
>>
>>That's quite an amusing statement, hippyboy.  Chavez allegedly tried to
>>obtain the release of all FARC hostages all year, but it appeared that all
>>he did was make himself look like a fool.  In the end, the Columbians 
>>freed
>>them with our assistence.  So keep on kissing Castro's ass if you like. 
>>It
>>only makes you look even more foolish than Chavez.
>
> Given the history and success rate and MO of the US forces in the area I 
> would like to know what really happened.  SO far what I have heard does 
> not stack up. It sounds like one of those stories where those that really 
> did the work are never named and the glory is given to others.
>
> There are others operating in the area who have a far higher success rate 
> than the US. However as it is outside my area of interest I have no other 
> information on it.
>
>
> -- 
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
> \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who 
were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us know 
who they were.   Oh but of course, it is outside of your area od interest 
(why you comment on it in that case is the real mystery).  What we know adds 
up.  It just doesn't add up to what you want it to add up to.  In addition, 
why did it take Castro six years to call for the release of all hostages? 
Why did he call for it only after this mission was successful in freeing 
hostages?  Is he genuinely concerned for the welfare of Farc hostages, or is 
he merely taking advantage of the situation to do some more Cuban 
grandstanding?

George

In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who
>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us know
>who they were.

KMS

don't know (yet) if they were involved in this instance but they have an 
extremely good track record in S. America.  Especially good at keeping 
their name out of the lime light too.

I think it really only slipped out in the Oliver North debacle. As usual 
it was the US who blew the cover.
-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"George"  wrote in message 
news:ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Chris H"  wrote in message 
> news:GJZXEPCDkbcIFA6c@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <oseck.15709$CC.4529@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
>>  writes
>>>
>>>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message
>>>news:Xvcck.22108$E41.15793@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7492506.stm
>>>>
>>>> <quotes>
>>>>
>>>> Cuba's former President Fidel Castro has called on the Colombian Farc
>>>> rebel
>>>> movement to release all of its remaining hostages.
>>>>
>>>> In June, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called on them to end their
>>>> four-decade struggle and release all their hostages.
>>>>
>>>> </quotes>
>>>>
>>>> They'll get little praise for their stance from those who need to keep
>>>> demonising those they see as enemies on the left.
>>>
>>>That's quite an amusing statement, hippyboy.  Chavez allegedly tried to
>>>obtain the release of all FARC hostages all year, but it appeared that 
>>>all
>>>he did was make himself look like a fool.  In the end, the Columbians 
>>>freed
>>>them with our assistence.  So keep on kissing Castro's ass if you like. 
>>>It
>>>only makes you look even more foolish than Chavez.
>>
>> Given the history and success rate and MO of the US forces in the area I 
>> would like to know what really happened.  SO far what I have heard does 
>> not stack up. It sounds like one of those stories where those that really 
>> did the work are never named and the glory is given to others.
>>
>> There are others operating in the area who have a far higher success rate 
>> than the US. However as it is outside my area of interest I have no other 
>> information on it.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
>> \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
>> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
>
> If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who 
> were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us 
> know who they were.   Oh but of course, it is outside of your area od 
> interest (why you comment on it in that case is the real mystery).

You know nothing, you lie about everything, and none of that has ever 
stopped you from commenting.

>What we know adds up.  It just doesn't add up to what you want it to add up 
>to.  In addition, why did it take Castro six years to call for the release 
>of all hostages? Why did he call for it only after this mission was 
>successful in freeing hostages?  Is he genuinely concerned for the welfare 
>of Farc hostages, or is he merely taking advantage of the situation to do 
>some more Cuban grandstanding?

So you regularly read the Cuban papers? How else would you know what Castro 
says?

George, you are as pathetic as ever. Your strategy of off-thread responses 
fools no one. Except perhaps newcomers who haven't yet worked out that you 
are a troll.

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who
>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us 
>>know
>>who they were.
>
> KMS
>
> don't know (yet) if they were involved in this instance but they have an 
> extremely good track record in S. America.  Especially good at keeping 
> their name out of the lime light too.
>
> I think it really only slipped out in the Oliver North debacle. As usual 
> it was the US who blew the cover.
> -- 
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
> \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you 
should re-read my earlier post.

George

"Bill Again"  wrote in message 
news:g4sqc4$k2t$02$1@news.t-online.com...
>
> "George"  wrote in message 
> news:ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "Chris H"  wrote in message 
>> news:GJZXEPCDkbcIFA6c@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <oseck.15709$CC.4529@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
>>>  writes
>>>>
>>>>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message
>>>>news:Xvcck.22108$E41.15793@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7492506.stm
>>>>>
>>>>> <quotes>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cuba's former President Fidel Castro has called on the Colombian Farc
>>>>> rebel
>>>>> movement to release all of its remaining hostages.
>>>>>
>>>>> In June, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called on them to end their
>>>>> four-decade struggle and release all their hostages.
>>>>>
>>>>> </quotes>
>>>>>
>>>>> They'll get little praise for their stance from those who need to keep
>>>>> demonising those they see as enemies on the left.
>>>>
>>>>That's quite an amusing statement, hippyboy.  Chavez allegedly tried to
>>>>obtain the release of all FARC hostages all year, but it appeared that 
>>>>all
>>>>he did was make himself look like a fool.  In the end, the Columbians 
>>>>freed
>>>>them with our assistence.  So keep on kissing Castro's ass if you like. 
>>>>It
>>>>only makes you look even more foolish than Chavez.
>>>
>>> Given the history and success rate and MO of the US forces in the area I 
>>> would like to know what really happened.  SO far what I have heard does 
>>> not stack up. It sounds like one of those stories where those that 
>>> really did the work are never named and the glory is given to others.
>>>
>>> There are others operating in the area who have a far higher success 
>>> rate than the US. However as it is outside my area of interest I have no 
>>> other information on it.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
>>> \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
>>> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
>>
>> If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who 
>> were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us 
>> know who they were.   Oh but of course, it is outside of your area od 
>> interest (why you comment on it in that case is the real mystery).
>
> You know nothing, you lie about everything, and none of that has ever 
> stopped you from commenting.

Do point out where, anywhere in this thread, I have lied, Bif.

>>What we know adds up.  It just doesn't add up to what you want it to add 
>>up to.  In addition, why did it take Castro six years to call for the 
>>release of all hostages? Why did he call for it only after this mission 
>>was successful in freeing hostages?  Is he genuinely concerned for the 
>>welfare of Farc hostages, or is he merely taking advantage of the 
>>situation to do some more Cuban grandstanding?
>
> So you regularly read the Cuban papers? How else would you know what 
> Castro says?
>
> George, you are as pathetic as ever. Your strategy of off-thread responses 
> fools no one. Except perhaps newcomers who haven't yet worked out that you 
> are a troll.

If you can find another instance where Castro called for the Farc terrorists 
to release their hostages, I'd be very happy to read about it.  Oh, and 
while you are at it, perhaps you could point out how my posts in this thread 
are off-topic.  One last question, Bif.  What side of the bed did you get 
out of this morning?

George

In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>>  writes
>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who
>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us
>>>know
>>>who they were.
>>
>> KMS
>
>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
>should re-read my earlier post.
>
>George


As I said KMS.



-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>  writes
>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who
>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us
>>>>know
>>>>who they were.
>>>
>>> KMS
>>
>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
>>should re-read my earlier post.
>>
>>George
>
>
> As I said KMS.
>
>
>
> -- 
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
> \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS, when, 
how many, and how long had that/those hostage/s been held?  Just throwing 
out an ancronym doesn't tell anyone much.  Also, who, exactly, is KMS, and 
what type of non-profit work do they do?

George

In message <x_xck.22671$3F5.2850@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George
>>  writes
>>>
>>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>>  writes
>>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who
>>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of us
>>>>>know
>>>>>who they were.
>>>>
>>>> KMS
>>>
>>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
>>>should re-read my earlier post.
>>>
>>>George
>>
>>
>> As I said KMS.
>>
>Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS,

I did not say any were. You asked who else other than the Columbian 
Military with US aid could have done the job. The answer is KMS

>when,
>how many, and how long had that/those hostage/s been held?  Just throwing
>out an ancronym doesn't tell anyone much.

It doesn't tell you much.

> Also, who, exactly, is KMS, and
>what type of non-profit work do they do?

You have been here long enough to know that. Try Wikipeadia :-) That 
should tell you a LOT.

I have put more information than Wikipedia  on here in the past. On one 
of the other of  multiple occasions when you were WRONG.

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:Ax$WqyKatxcIFA4P@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <x_xck.22671$3F5.2850@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>  writes
>>>>
>>>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>>>  writes
>>>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance 
>>>>>>who
>>>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of 
>>>>>>us
>>>>>>know
>>>>>>who they were.
>>>>>
>>>>> KMS
>>>>
>>>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
>>>>should re-read my earlier post.
>>>>
>>>>George
>>>
>>>
>>> As I said KMS.
>>>
>>Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS,
>
> I did not say any were. You asked who else other than the Columbian 
> Military with US aid could have done the job. The answer is KMS

No, that is not what I queried about.  I said "If you know of anyone other 
than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who were more successful in this 
instance...", not who "could have done the job".  If you think they COULD 
HAVE done the job, that is not the same as ACTUALLY doing the job, is it?

>>when,
>>how many, and how long had that/those hostage/s been held?  Just throwing
>>out an ancronym doesn't tell anyone much.
>
> It doesn't tell you much.

Exactly.

>> Also, who, exactly, is KMS, and
>>what type of non-profit work do they do?
>
> You have been here long enough to know that. Try Wikipeadia :-) That 
> should tell you a LOT.
>
> I have put more information than Wikipedia  on here in the past. On one of 
> the other of  multiple occasions when you were WRONG.

Umm, Chris.  You made the claim, so I'm asking you who they are.

George

In message <ivGck.12015$1I.8662@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>news:Ax$WqyKatxcIFA4P@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <x_xck.22671$3F5.2850@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George
>>  writes
>>>
>>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>>news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>>> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>>  writes
>>>>>
>>>>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>>>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>>>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>>>>  writes
>>>>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance
>>>>>>>who
>>>>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of
>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>know
>>>>>>>who they were.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> KMS
>>>>>
>>>>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
>>>>>should re-read my earlier post.
>>>>>
>>>>>George
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As I said KMS.
>>>>
>>>Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS,
>>
>> I did not say any were. You asked who else other than the Columbian
>> Military with US aid could have done the job. The answer is KMS
>
>No, that is not what I queried about.  I said "If you know of anyone other
>than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who were more successful in this
>instance...", not who "could have done the job".  If you think they COULD
>HAVE done the job, that is not the same as ACTUALLY doing the job, is it?

The problem is as  both the US military and Government often falsify 
reports and openly lie (and the Colombians are hardly the most reliable) 
you have absolutely Not IDEA who did the job.

It would not be the first time the French or the British have done an 
operation where the credit was given to the US.   In this case the 
details of the operation do not hang together well with a US operation 
(other than on film)

>>>when,
>>>how many, and how long had that/those hostage/s been held?  Just throwing
>>>out an ancronym doesn't tell anyone much.
>> It doesn't tell you much.
>Exactly.

Once again you have been given the answer, that if you knew half that 
you claimed, would be all you needed to know. The fact that KMS does not 
tell youi much shows that you don't have enough knowledge about what is 
going on in S. America to comment on this opperation.


>>> Also, who, exactly, is KMS, and
>>>what type of non-profit work do they do?
>> You have been here long enough to know that. Try Wikipeadia :-) That
>> should tell you a LOT.
>> I have put more information than Wikipedia  on here in the past. On one of
>> the other of  multiple occasions when you were WRONG.
>Umm, Chris.  You made the claim, so I'm asking you who they are.

I am not repeating myself (again) just for you.. I have done that too 
many times before.

Also, as has happened many times before, because you don't know half 
what you claim to know, you don't understand the answers.

You have been wrong so many times before it is not with arguing with 
you.... btw what ever happened to the WMD?

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:TlOS$2Sf$zcIFAar@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <ivGck.12015$1I.8662@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>news:Ax$WqyKatxcIFA4P@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <x_xck.22671$3F5.2850@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>  writes
>>>>
>>>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>>>news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>>>> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>>>  writes
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>>>>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>>>>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>>>>>  writes
>>>>>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance
>>>>>>>>who
>>>>>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of
>>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>>know
>>>>>>>>who they were.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> KMS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
>>>>>>should re-read my earlier post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>George
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I said KMS.
>>>>>
>>>>Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS,
>>>
>>> I did not say any were. You asked who else other than the Columbian
>>> Military with US aid could have done the job. The answer is KMS
>>
>>No, that is not what I queried about.  I said "If you know of anyone other
>>than the Columbians with U.S. assistance who were more successful in this
>>instance...", not who "could have done the job".  If you think they COULD
>>HAVE done the job, that is not the same as ACTUALLY doing the job, is it?
>
> The problem is as  both the US military and Government often falsify 
> reports and openly lie (and the Colombians are hardly the most reliable) 
> you have absolutely Not IDEA who did the job.

No, the problem is that you have based your conclusions on one unverified 
article that was published in Europe, thousands of miles from Columbia.  And 
Chris, you have no idea who did the job, either.  So what's your point?

> It would not be the first time the French or the British have done an 
> operation where the credit was given to the US.   In this case the details 
> of the operation do not hang together well with a US operation (other than 
> on film)

Oh, so the French and British conducted this operation, eh?  Where were they 
in the video that was broadcast of the rescue?

>>>>when,
>>>>how many, and how long had that/those hostage/s been held?  Just 
>>>>throwing
>>>>out an ancronym doesn't tell anyone much.
>>> It doesn't tell you much.
>>Exactly.
>
> Once again you have been given the answer, that if you knew half that you 
> claimed, would be all you needed to know. The fact that KMS does not tell 
> youi much shows that you don't have enough knowledge about what is going 
> on in S. America to comment on this opperation.

The fact that you have no evidence that the KMS (whoever they are) were 
involved in this operation shows that you are once again blowing smoke up 
our arse?

>>>> Also, who, exactly, is KMS, and
>>>>what type of non-profit work do they do?
>>> You have been here long enough to know that. Try Wikipeadia :-) That
>>> should tell you a LOT.
>>> I have put more information than Wikipedia  on here in the past. On one 
>>> of
>>> the other of  multiple occasions when you were WRONG.
>>Umm, Chris.  You made the claim, so I'm asking you who they are.
>
> I am not repeating myself (again) just for you.. I have done that too many 
> times before.

Repeating yourself?  All you did was post an acronym for some unnamed NGO. 
I asked you who they are, and what connection they have to this operation. 
Since you've never told us who they are, nor what connection to this 
operation they may have had, you can hardly be accused of repeating 
yourself.

George

In message <FSHck.22914$3F5.11660@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>news:TlOS$2Sf$zcIFAar@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...

>> The problem is as  both the US military and Government often falsify
>> reports and openly lie (and the Colombians are hardly the most reliable)
>> you have absolutely Not IDEA who did the job.
>
>No, the problem is that you have based your conclusions on one unverified
>article that was published in Europe, thousands of miles from Columbia.  And
>Chris, you have no idea who did the job, either.  So what's your point?

My point is the operation is not one you would have expected the US 
forces to accomplish but one that is well  within the scope of KMS.

The point that everyone else has made is the Official story does not 
hang together.

>> It would not be the first time the French or the British have done an
>> operation where the credit was given to the US.   In this case the details
>> of the operation do not hang together well with a US operation (other than
>> on film)
>
>Oh, so the French and British conducted this operation, eh?

No where did I say that

>  Where were they
>in the video that was broadcast of the rescue?

Idiot. You have no understanding of these sort of operations.

>> Once again you have been given the answer, that if you knew half that you
>> claimed, would be all you needed to know. The fact that KMS does not tell
>> youi much shows that you don't have enough knowledge about what is going
>> on in S. America to comment on this opperation.
>
>The fact that you have no evidence that the KMS (whoever they are)

They do a hell of a lot in S. American as Oliver North commented. (Which 
pissed them off as they don't like publicity for the obvious reasons)

> were
>involved in this operation shows that you are once again blowing smoke up
>our arse?

No it just demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of this sort 
of operation But we have all be saying that for years.

>Repeating yourself?  All you did was post an acronym for some unnamed NGO.

If you knew half the amount you say you do, given the amount of KMS 
involvment in S.America  no more needed to be said.  I doubt any of your 
claims of military experience are true.

>I asked you who they are,

They are KMS.

> and what connection they have to this operation.
That I don't know but this sort of operation bears all their hallmarks 
but not those of the US forces.

>Since you've never told us who they are,

If you need to be told then you have not passed 101 S. American 
Terrorism.  Neither have you enough knowledge of the  situation to 
comment on the current operation.

> nor what connection to this
>operation they may have had,

No idea BUT you have no idea who did the operation as the facts not 
match the official story.

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:HiDnudWrh1cIFA4N@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <FSHck.22914$3F5.11660@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>news:TlOS$2Sf$zcIFAar@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>
>>> The problem is as  both the US military and Government often falsify
>>> reports and openly lie (and the Colombians are hardly the most reliable)
>>> you have absolutely Not IDEA who did the job.
>>
>>No, the problem is that you have based your conclusions on one unverified
>>article that was published in Europe, thousands of miles from Columbia. 
>>And
>>Chris, you have no idea who did the job, either.  So what's your point?
>
> My point is the operation is not one you would have expected the US forces 
> to accomplish but one that is well  within the scope of KMS.
>
> The point that everyone else has made is the Official story does not hang 
> together.

It hangs together.  It just doesn't fit in with your pre-conceived biases 
against the U.S.

>>> It would not be the first time the French or the British have done an
>>> operation where the credit was given to the US.   In this case the 
>>> details
>>> of the operation do not hang together well with a US operation (other 
>>> than
>>> on film)
>>
>>Oh, so the French and British conducted this operation, eh?
>
> No where did I say that

Then why bring them up, since they are irrelevant to the topic at hand?

>>  Where were they
>>in the video that was broadcast of the rescue?
>
> Idiot. You have no understanding of these sort of operations.

I understand that the French and British weren't involved.  Apparently, you 
haven't figured that out yet.  So who's the idiot, Chris?

>>> Once again you have been given the answer, that if you knew half that 
>>> you
>>> claimed, would be all you needed to know. The fact that KMS does not 
>>> tell
>>> youi much shows that you don't have enough knowledge about what is going
>>> on in S. America to comment on this opperation.
>>
>>The fact that you have no evidence that the KMS (whoever they are)
>
> They do a hell of a lot in S. American as Oliver North commented. (Which 
> pissed them off as they don't like publicity for the obvious reasons)

So where is the evidence that they were involved in this operation, Chris? 
Quit beating around the bush.  You made a claim.  It's your claim to prove.

>> were
>>involved in this operation shows that you are once again blowing smoke up
>>our arse?
>
> No it just demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of this sort 
> of operation But we have all be saying that for years.

Again, where's the evidence, Chris?

>>Repeating yourself?  All you did was post an acronym for some unnamed NGO.
>
> If you knew half the amount you say you do, given the amount of KMS 
> involvment in S.America  no more needed to be said.  I doubt any of your 
> claims of military experience are true.

Three years stationed at Fort Hood in the late 1970s hardly makes me an 
expert on NGOs in South America, Chris.  Having said that,  where's the 
evidence that KMS was actually involved, Chris?  Gee, for someone who claims 
to know a lot, you sure can't seem to present any evidence whatsoever to 
back up your claim.  Why is that, Chris?

>>I asked you who they are,
>
> They are KMS.

That means nothing to me.

>> and what connection they have to this operation.
> That I don't know but this sort of operation bears all their hallmarks but 
> not those of the US forces.
>
>>Since you've never told us who they are,
>
> If you need to be told then you have not passed 101 S. American Terrorism. 
> Neither have you enough knowledge of the  situation to comment on the 
> current operation.

Since I am not an American "Terrorist", whatever the fuck that means, I 
could hardly be expected to know anything about "American terrorists".  You 
apparently claim to know a lot about the subject, so, Chris, who are they? 
Who is KMS, and what do they have to do with freeing the hostages in 
Columbia?  And if they are freeing people from terrorist groups, how do they 
qualify as being terrorists themselves? What international list of 
terrorists are they on?

George

In message <InJck.22957$3F5.1322@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George
 writes
>>>Oh, so the French and British conducted this operation, eh?
>>
>> No where did I say that
>
>Then why bring them up, since they are irrelevant to the topic at hand?

What is relevant that both British and French Special Forces have done
similar operations and given the credit to the host country or another
military including the US.

You have no evidence that the same thing did not happen this time other
then the facts that the official story of the operation does not hold
together as an operation conducted by those it is attributed to.

However it is unlikely that in Columbia it would be the French or
British SF therefore the most likely candidate for doing an operation of
this sort is KMS

The fact that you have no idea who they are is irrelevant bar the point
that is shows you have no idea about what is going on in Columbia or,
very clearly, counter insurgency warfare.

>>>  Where were they
>>>in the video that was broadcast of the rescue?
>> Idiot. You have no understanding of these sort of operations.
>
>I understand that the French and British weren't involved.

No you don't know that. Do you have any proof they were not?

For political reasons it is unlikely. However it is for this reason it
is more even likely to be KMS

BTW the US has used KMS in this region quite a lot before as I am sure
you will now miraculously "know"   BTW google is not your friend for
this.
Don't search on KMS but Oliver North and Iran/contra It seems I must do
everything for you...

>>>The fact that you have no evidence that the KMS (whoever they are)
>>
>> They do a hell of a lot in S. American as Oliver North commented. (Which
>> pissed them off as they don't like publicity for the obvious reasons)
>
>So where is the evidence that they were involved in this operation, Chris?
>Quit beating around the bush.  You made a claim.  It's your claim to prove.

OK... FACTS

FACT the Columbians and US have up to this point not been able to carry
out an operation of this sort to and certainly not with this level of
success. Though I suppose miracles do happen

FACT the US lies about operations

FACT KMS have pulled of a lot of operations in this mode.

FACT the US uses KMS in the region

FACT the US has claimed successes that were in fact done by KMS

FACT the French SF have also pulled of a lot of operations in this mode
(and have bases in S.America)

Balance of probability  US/Columbians could not do it but an outfit they
have used before in the area has done this sort of thing before.

Difficult isn't it

Ignore the official story that does not fit.  Though some details do
give hints and the do not point to the US Military.

>>>I asked you who they are,
>> They are KMS.
>That means nothing to me.

Then you do not have even the basic information and knowledge to discuss
this much less call anyone else into question.

The reason why KMS means nothing to George is you can't Goolge them :-)

all it says for KMS is:-
 KMS can mean:
Knowledge Management Solution
Kabuki syndrome, (via Kabuki make-up syndrome)
Kasabach-Merritt syndrome
Keeni-Meeni Services, private military contractor
Kerio MailServer
KMS state
KMS (hypertext), the Knowledge Management System hypertext system
Kriegsmarine Ship
Krueger Middle School, a school in San Antonio, Texas
Microsoft Key Management Service
National Survey and Cadastre of Denmark (Kort & Matrikelstyrelsen)
Khaak Music Studio
Kinnaird Middle School
Kaspersky Mobile Security

So George is left to whining in the corner....

We have discussed KMS here before and you haven't learnt or remembered.

>Who is KMS, and what do they have to do with freeing the hostages in
>Columbia?

As much as they usually do.  Which is often quite a lot.

If you don't know the players why start a long thread showing your
ignorance?

OK.. I give up start with "Control Risks Group" and move on from there.
It will give you some idea of the groups we are dealing with.  However
there is little information that is for the chattering classes...

For more information you have to be at places like Farnborough next week
( I will be there will you? ) or DESI where I also attend. Or the
Military and Aerospace event where we also exhibit.  We also go the main
counter terrorist event in London around November.    I also know people
in Aegis. This is where some of my information comes from.

Yours it appears is Fox news and google.
-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote ...

> In message <x_xck.22671$3F5.2850@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George
>  writes
> >
> >"Chris H"  wrote in message
> >news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> >> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George
> >>  writes
> >>>
> >>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
> >>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> >>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
> >>>>  writes
> >>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance
who
> >>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of
us
> >>>>>know
> >>>>>who they were.
> >>>>
> >>>> KMS
> >>>
> >>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
> >>>should re-read my earlier post.
> >>>
> >>>George
> >>
> >>
> >> As I said KMS.
> >>
> >Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS,
>
> I did not say any were. You asked who else other than the Columbian
> Military with US aid could have done the job. The answer is KMS

To be fair it was, "If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with
U.S. assistance who were more successful in this instance". That it's such a
nonsense challenge is why it's so easy to misinterpret. Who else "were more
successful in this instance"; well patently no one as there were no others
"in this instance".

Even if the entire hostage rescue team had jumped out the helicoptor,
tripped, set fire to themselves, knocked over the helicopter, pulled their
own legs off in blind panic, and started wanking furiously shouting "USA!
USA!" while they were shot one by one by FARC, no one, else by definition,
"were any more successful in this instance" nor could they be.

It's as stupid and as meaningless as asking - who else scored the winning
goal in the 1966 World Cup ?

The only reason to pose such a question in those terms would be to
deliberately create a logical fallacy, to know the answer is "no one" then
try and sell that as therefore no one else could have, which is utter
nonsense.

"Chris H"  wrote ...

> However it is unlikely that in Columbia it would be the French or
> British SF therefore the most likely candidate for doing an operation of
> this sort is KMS

The French have offered FARC members safe refuge in France in the past and
with Betancourt having dual nationality and French backing for getting her
out at the highest level it would not be surprising if France had some hand
in the operation or the lead up to it. I also doubt it were French SF
involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS would be a likely middleman
given their past operational experience.

This deal has been in the making for many months if not years and I doubt
anyone will ever know the full extent of what went on behind the scenes and
who exactly were involved. The only thing we can say is that the operation
was successfully concluded and there are some things which don't at present
add up in relation to the official story of that operation.

In message <jiLck.23044$E41.20972@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy 
Hippy  writes
>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>
>> However it is unlikely that in Columbia it would be the French or
>> British SF therefore the most likely candidate for doing an operation of
>> this sort is KMS
>
>The French have offered FARC members safe refuge in France in the past and
>with Betancourt having dual nationality and French backing for getting her
>out at the highest level it would not be surprising if France had some hand
>in the operation or the lead up to it.

I agree... especially as the new French President promised to do 
something.

> I also doubt it were French SF
>involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS

Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)

> would be a likely middleman
>given their past operational experience.

That was my thoughts.  This sort of operation has their touch all over 
it. However as Geroge can't google KMS you are talking bollox...:-)

>This deal has been in the making for many months if not years and I doubt
>anyone will ever know the full extent of what went on behind the scenes and
>who exactly were involved.

I agree.... it will come out is some one's biography in 10 years time 
and be ignored as false..

> The only thing we can say is that the operation
>was successfully concluded

For which we are all thankful

>and there are some things which don't at present
>add up in relation to the official story of that operation.

Quite.


-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message <D7Lck.23029$E41.7853@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy 
Hippy  writes
>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>
>> In message <x_xck.22671$3F5.2850@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George
>>  writes
>> >
>> >"Chris H"  wrote in message
>> >news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> >> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George
>> >>  writes
>> >>>
>> >>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>> >>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> >>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>> >>>>  writes
>> >>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. assistance
>who
>> >>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest of
>us
>> >>>>>know
>> >>>>>who they were.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> KMS
>> >>>
>> >>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps you
>> >>>should re-read my earlier post.
>> >>>
>> >>>George
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> As I said KMS.
>> >>
>> >Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS,
>>
>> I did not say any were. You asked who else other than the Columbian
>> Military with US aid could have done the job. The answer is KMS
>
>To be fair it was, "If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with
>U.S. assistance who were more successful in this instance". That it's such a
>nonsense challenge is why it's so easy to misinterpret. Who else "were more
>successful in this instance"; well patently no one as there were no others
>"in this instance".

I disagree....  those involved in the official story in this instance 
have no record of [successfully] doing this sort of operation.  The 
official reports don't hang together.

However others in theatre DO have a record  (if not public record) of 
doing this sort of thing.....

>Even if the entire hostage rescue team had jumped out the helicoptor,
>tripped, set fire to themselves, knocked over the helicopter, pulled their
>own legs off in blind panic, and started wanking furiously shouting "USA!
>USA!" while they were shot one by one by FARC, no one, else by definition,
>"were any more successful in this instance" nor could they be.

:-)

>It's as stupid and as meaningless as asking - who else scored the winning
>goal in the 1966 World Cup ?

It were is twin bruver.... do you not know the great Vernons Conspiracy 
story? :-)

>The only reason to pose such a question in those terms would be to
>deliberately create a logical fallacy, to know the answer is "no one" then
>try and sell that as therefore no one else could have, which is utter
>nonsense.

That is Gerorge's level of argument.

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:uiQtetgnk4cIFANs@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <jiLck.23044$E41.20972@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy 
> Hippy  writes
>>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>>
>>> However it is unlikely that in Columbia it would be the French or
>>> British SF therefore the most likely candidate for doing an operation of
>>> this sort is KMS
>>
>>The French have offered FARC members safe refuge in France in the past and
>>with Betancourt having dual nationality and French backing for getting her
>>out at the highest level it would not be surprising if France had some 
>>hand
>>in the operation or the lead up to it.
>
> I agree... especially as the new French President promised to do 
> something.
>
>> I also doubt it were French SF
>>involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>
> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>
>> would be a likely middleman
>>given their past operational experience.
>
> That was my thoughts.  This sort of operation has their touch all over it. 
> However as Geroge can't google KMS you are talking bollox...:-)

Umm:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=kms

There are 44,300,000 hits for KMS.  You decide which one it is.  I've been 
here, done this already, Chrissy.

George

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:6CcoWOhVo4cIFANG@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <D7Lck.23029$E41.7853@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy 
> Hippy  writes
>>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>>
>>> In message <x_xck.22671$3F5.2850@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>  writes
>>> >
>>> >"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>> >news:gx0eaAN3xgcIFAsO@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> >> In message <A4nck.19170$LL4.6118@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, George
>>> >>  writes
>>> >>>
>>> >>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>> >>>news:ot6c9LJN7dcIFA8C@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> >>>> In message <ULkck.22106$Xe.3845@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, George
>>> >>>>  writes
>>> >>>>>If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with U.S. 
>>> >>>>>assistance
>>who
>>> >>>>>were more successful in this instance, by all means, let the rest 
>>> >>>>>of
>>us
>>> >>>>>know
>>> >>>>>who they were.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> KMS
>>> >>>
>>> >>>My query was with regard to freeing Farc hostages, Chris.  Perhaps 
>>> >>>you
>>> >>>should re-read my earlier post.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>George
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> As I said KMS.
>>> >>
>>> >Umm, I'm a little confused, Chris.  Which hostages were freed by KMS,
>>>
>>> I did not say any were. You asked who else other than the Columbian
>>> Military with US aid could have done the job. The answer is KMS
>>
>>To be fair it was, "If you know of anyone other than the Columbians with
>>U.S. assistance who were more successful in this instance". That it's such 
>>a
>>nonsense challenge is why it's so easy to misinterpret. Who else "were 
>>more
>>successful in this instance"; well patently no one as there were no others
>>"in this instance".
>
> I disagree....  those involved in the official story in this instance have 
> no record of [successfully] doing this sort of operation.  The official 
> reports don't hang together.
>
> However others in theatre DO have a record  (if not public record) of 
> doing this sort of thing.....
>
>>Even if the entire hostage rescue team had jumped out the helicoptor,
>>tripped, set fire to themselves, knocked over the helicopter, pulled their
>>own legs off in blind panic, and started wanking furiously shouting "USA!
>>USA!" while they were shot one by one by FARC, no one, else by definition,
>>"were any more successful in this instance" nor could they be.
>
> :-)
>
>>It's as stupid and as meaningless as asking - who else scored the winning
>>goal in the 1966 World Cup ?
>
> It were is twin bruver.... do you not know the great Vernons Conspiracy 
> story? :-)
>
>>The only reason to pose such a question in those terms would be to
>>deliberately create a logical fallacy, to know the answer is "no one" then
>>try and sell that as therefore no one else could have, which is utter
>>nonsense.
>
> That is Gerorge's level of argument.

The problem with hippyboy's argument is that he apparentrly agrees with me 
that "no one else (but the Americans and Columbians) could have done it", 
but the fact is that You, Chris, are arguing otherwise, and so my dear 
Christopher, WHO, in your allegedly considered opinion, conducted this 
operation, and WHAT evidence, EXACTLY, do you have to back up your claim?

George

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:ES1nCIbw32cIFAKz@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <InJck.22957$3F5.1322@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, George
>  writes
>>>>Oh, so the French and British conducted this operation, eh?
>>>
>>> No where did I say that
>>
>>Then why bring them up, since they are irrelevant to the topic at hand?
>
> What is relevant that both British and French Special Forces have done
> similar operations and given the credit to the host country or another
> military including the US.

What is most relevant is that you are wagging this entire conversation, 
since you can't produce one aota of evidence that anyone else but the U.S. 
and Columbian forces carried out this operation.  As usual, you make claims 
but never, ever, back them up with facts.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92236765&ft=1&f=3
U.S. Role Seen In Colombia Hostage Rescue

All Things Considered, July 3, 2008 · The Colombian government told the U.S. 
of the plan to rescue hostages from FARC rebels two weeks ago and asked the 
American military for help, Pentagon sources say.
The U.S. provided aid during the operation in the form of surveillance 
aircraft that have the ability to eavesdrop on guerrilla communications. The 
planes' ability to electronically jam radios used by the rebels was pivotal 
once the operation was under way.

"The essence of the operation was designed obviously to minimize the ability 
of the FARC to communicate at the time the operation was going down," U.S. 
Ambassador to Colombia William Brownfield says. "That was the sort of 
technical assistance that obviously was made available to the Colombian 
armed forces."

More U.S. aircraft, including powerful AC-130 gunships, were on standby, but 
not used. There were no U.S. troops on the ground, Pentagon sources say.

In Miami, Adm. Jim Stavridis, the top U.S. commander for Central and South 
America, closely monitored the events.

Pentagon officials were reluctant to talk about the operational details of 
the rescue mission, fearing it could interfere with future Colombian 
operations. They stressed it was planned and carried out by the Colombians 
and praised Colombian special operations soldiers.

Once the operation was complete, the American hostages were flown to Texas 
aboard a U.S. C-17 aircraft, specially outfitted for medical and 
psychological care. After landing, the three boarded a helicopter and were 
transported to Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, where they were 
undergoing evaluation and treatment before being reunited with family and 
loved ones.

The hostages - Keith Stansell, Marc Gonsalves and Thomas Howes - all worked 
for Northrop Grumman and were captured in 2003 after their light aircraft 
crashed in the jungles during a counternarcotics operation.

The three, along with former Colombian presidential candidate Ingrid 
Betancourt and 11 other hostages, were rescued in a daring operation that 
involved months of intelligence gathering and a ruse in which the guerrillas 
were tricked into loading their captives onto a disguised government 
helicopter.

Betancourt, 46, was abducted in February 2002.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/colombia/2249599/Ingrid-Betancourt-hostage-rescue-Video-shows-audacious-Colombian-raid.html

The film shows the hostages filing soberly and handcuffed towards the 
helicopter that takes them to safety, then embracing one another and crying 
with joy after learning of their release after six years of captivity.

Ms Betancourt described the moment when she learned of her freedom from the 
Chief of the Operation with the words: "We're from the National Army and 
you're free!"

She said: "The helicopter almost fell from the sky because we all jumped, 
shouted, cried and embraced. We couldn't believe it...".

Colombia's Defence Minister, Juan Manuel Santos, said that the video was 
released to dispel doubts about the military's dramatic and bloodless raid.

On Friday, a Swiss radio station, RSR, citing reliable sources, claimed that 
Farc, a rebel army which uses hostages as its most powerful bargaining chip, 
had accepted a $20 million ransom paid by the US and that the allegedly 
audacious rescue, codenamed Check, was in fact a set-up.

The station reported that the wife of one of the hostages' guards was the 
go-between, having been arrested by the Colombian army.

Both US and Colombian officials have vehemently denied the accusations.

General Freddy Padilla, head of the Colombian military, categorically denied 
any payment.

"As the General Commander of the Armed Forces and on my military honour, I 
deny that the Colombian Government has paid a single peso, a single cent," 
he said.

Ms Betancourt also cast doubt on the claims: "Based on what I was able to 
see in this rescue operation, because of the intensity, I don't think they 
could have fooled me," she said. "I don't think that anyone was acting. The 
situation was too intense."

Santos did say, however, that there was a policy of paying for information 
from Farc.

"We have a very aggressive and successful policy of offering awards," he 
said at a news conference in Bogota to display the rescue video.

"We pay for information and we have paid millions of dollars to many people 
for information of all different kinds. If we had paid on this occasion we 
would have been the first to admit it because it is part of our politics."

He also denied reports that Israeli and US agents had been involved in the 
operation, saying it had been "100% Colombian".

More:

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43103

"Chris H"  wrote ...

> > I also doubt it were French SF
> >involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>
> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)

Okay, I admit it, I've got such limited knowledge of US and UK ,ilitary
operations that I have never heard of KMS, and despite their name having
been splashed about in public for many years within the US, UK and elsewhere
I never heard it mentioned, and I can't find KMS on Google because I'm too
incompetent to know what the search criteria needs to be, even though you
have given all the information and KMS plus any number of one word additions
would bring that up as a first hit, so therefore I have to conclude that I
am making it all up. KMS don't exist, you're talking out your arse, you
probably don't even exist yourself, this whole conversation has been
entirely imaginary. I'm pink therefore I'm spam.

There's something delightfully amusing about people who claim something or
other doesn't exist because they've never seen nor heard of it and usually
believe their ignorance trumps reality and fact.

Anyway, you're on a hiding to nowhere because if KMS had done it, and were
happy to pass credit for doing it on to Columbian and US forces, that
Columbia and US now claim they did it must be undeniably true, and any claim
KMS passed credit on therefore absolutely false. The best you'll get from
that is a good chuckle, but it's poor form to mock the afflicted. Enjoyable
though it is, watching people struggle with basic logic.

In message <EnMck.27490$AJ6.18222@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>news:uiQtetgnk4cIFANs@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <jiLck.23044$E41.20972@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy
>> Hippy  writes
>>>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>>>
>>>> However it is unlikely that in Columbia it would be the French or
>>>> British SF therefore the most likely candidate for doing an operation of
>>>> this sort is KMS
>>>
>>>The French have offered FARC members safe refuge in France in the past and
>>>with Betancourt having dual nationality and French backing for getting her
>>>out at the highest level it would not be surprising if France had some
>>>hand
>>>in the operation or the lead up to it.
>>
>> I agree... especially as the new French President promised to do
>> something.
>>
>>> I also doubt it were French SF
>>>involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>>
>> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>>
>>> would be a likely middleman
>>>given their past operational experience.
>>
>> That was my thoughts.  This sort of operation has their touch all over it.
>> However as Geroge can't google KMS you are talking bollox...:-)
>
>Umm:
>
>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=kms
>
>There are 44,300,000 hits for KMS.  You decide which one it is.  I've been
>here, done this already, Chrissy.

As I said look on wikipeadia for controlled risks group and work on from 
there

Do I have to do the research for you?

If you knew anything about S American and the terrorists situation or 
the drugs situation you would know who KMS are....

When we come down to it you rant a lot and quote Fox news etc but you 
dont really know anything else.


-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message <gYNck.23171$E41.15134@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy 
Hippy  writes
>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>
>> > I also doubt it were French SF
>> >involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>>
>> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>
>Okay, I admit it, I've got such limited knowledge of US and UK ,ilitary
>operations that I have never heard of KMS, and despite their name having
>been splashed about in public for many years within the US, UK and elsewhere
>I never heard it mentioned, and I can't find KMS on Google because I'm too
>incompetent to know what the search criteria needs to be, even though you
>have given all the information and KMS plus any number of one word additions
>would bring that up as a first hit, so therefore I have to conclude that I
>am making it all up. KMS don't exist, you're talking out your arse, you
>probably don't even exist yourself, this whole conversation has been
>entirely imaginary. I'm pink therefore I'm spam.

Spam spam spam spam wonder full spam glorious spam....  (bloody Vikings)

>There's something delightfully amusing about people who claim something or
>other doesn't exist because they've never seen nor heard of it and usually
>believe their ignorance trumps reality and fact.

I agree the idiots like George rant and rave over a couple of on line 
news reports and base EVERYTHING on that...   As I have said to George 
and come to that Jesse on many occasions  you would not understand the 
answers.

It took him weeks (despite apparently being in the US military) to 
recognise references to the US military maps and their somewhat 
distinctive preference system.  When challenged he finally came up with 
a google link to prove he knew what they were... (not the link obvious 
to anyone familiar with the maps though)

Most of the information is public though not always in the main stream 
news papers... I often quote the US magazine "Foreign Policy"*. I have 
some other sources so I get information faster but nothing I put out 
here is in any way confidential.

BTW Foreign Policy is a subscription only magazine but I get a free one.

The think you alluded to above  is that that I do give more than enough 
information for anyone whit a brain to check the resources.

>Anyway, you're on a hiding to nowhere because if KMS had done it, and were
>happy to pass credit for doing it on to Columbian and US forces, that
>Columbia and US now claim they did it must be undeniably true,

Of course KMS are not going to go public. It's not the way they work.

> and any claim
>KMS passed credit on therefore absolutely false. The best you'll get from
>that is a good chuckle,
:-)
Not even that. Usually jut a wry smile. BTW a lot of KMS also work for 
Aegis

> but it's poor form to mock the afflicted. Enjoyable
>though it is, watching people struggle with basic logic.

:-))))


-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:4g$Iu2kb07cIFA+M@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <EnMck.27490$AJ6.18222@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>news:uiQtetgnk4cIFANs@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <jiLck.23044$E41.20972@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy
>>> Hippy  writes
>>>>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>>>>
>>>>> However it is unlikely that in Columbia it would be the French or
>>>>> British SF therefore the most likely candidate for doing an operation 
>>>>> of
>>>>> this sort is KMS
>>>>
>>>>The French have offered FARC members safe refuge in France in the past 
>>>>and
>>>>with Betancourt having dual nationality and French backing for getting 
>>>>her
>>>>out at the highest level it would not be surprising if France had some
>>>>hand
>>>>in the operation or the lead up to it.
>>>
>>> I agree... especially as the new French President promised to do
>>> something.
>>>
>>>> I also doubt it were French SF
>>>>involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>>>
>>> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>>>
>>>> would be a likely middleman
>>>>given their past operational experience.
>>>
>>> That was my thoughts.  This sort of operation has their touch all over 
>>> it.
>>> However as Geroge can't google KMS you are talking bollox...:-)
>>
>>Umm:
>>
>>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=kms
>>
>>There are 44,300,000 hits for KMS.  You decide which one it is.  I've been
>>here, done this already, Chrissy.
>
> As I said look on wikipeadia for controlled risks group and work on from 
> there
>
> Do I have to do the research for you?

Yes, you do.  It is your claim, not mine.

> If you knew anything about S American and the terrorists situation or the 
> drugs situation you would know who KMS are....

I don't know anything about the terrorists in South America, Chris.  That's 
why I asked you who KMS is.  Why don't you enlighten us with your 
considerable "wisdom" on the matter?

> When we come down to it you rant a lot and quote Fox news etc but you dont 
> really know anything else.
>

Dude, I didn't post the Fox news article.  I don't even like Fox news.

George

"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
news:gYNck.23171$E41.15134@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> "Chris H"  wrote ...
>
>> > I also doubt it were French SF
>> >involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>>
>> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>
> Okay, I admit it, I've got such limited knowledge of US and UK ,ilitary
> operations that I have never heard of KMS, and despite their name having
> been splashed about in public for many years within the US, UK and 
> elsewhere
> I never heard it mentioned, and I can't find KMS on Google because I'm too
> incompetent to know what the search criteria needs to be, even though you
> have given all the information and KMS plus any number of one word 
> additions
> would bring that up as a first hit, so therefore I have to conclude that I
> am making it all up. KMS don't exist, you're talking out your arse, you
> probably don't even exist yourself, this whole conversation has been
> entirely imaginary. I'm pink therefore I'm spam.
>
> There's something delightfully amusing about people who claim something or
> other doesn't exist because they've never seen nor heard of it and usually
> believe their ignorance trumps reality and fact.
>
> Anyway, you're on a hiding to nowhere because if KMS had done it, and were
> happy to pass credit for doing it on to Columbian and US forces, that
> Columbia and US now claim they did it must be undeniably true, and any 
> claim
> KMS passed credit on therefore absolutely false. The best you'll get from
> that is a good chuckle, but it's poor form to mock the afflicted. 
> Enjoyable
> though it is, watching people struggle with basic logic.

Gee, you people go out of your way to ridicule someone who asks very simple 
questions about a claim that was made by someone else. No wonder no one but 
the twister sisters of the UK (and their one German compadre) ever post 
here.  It's a simple question, Hippyboy.  Who is KMS?  Is that so hard to 
answer?  Apparently it is, since no one has asnwered the question yet, not 
even the person who first brought them up.

George

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:aHQwXtllA8cIFAJv@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <gYNck.23171$E41.15134@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy 
> Hippy  writes
>>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>>
>>> > I also doubt it were French SF
>>> >involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>>>
>>> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>>
>>Okay, I admit it, I've got such limited knowledge of US and UK ,ilitary
>>operations that I have never heard of KMS, and despite their name having
>>been splashed about in public for many years within the US, UK and 
>>elsewhere
>>I never heard it mentioned, and I can't find KMS on Google because I'm too
>>incompetent to know what the search criteria needs to be, even though you
>>have given all the information and KMS plus any number of one word 
>>additions
>>would bring that up as a first hit, so therefore I have to conclude that I
>>am making it all up. KMS don't exist, you're talking out your arse, you
>>probably don't even exist yourself, this whole conversation has been
>>entirely imaginary. I'm pink therefore I'm spam.
>
> Spam spam spam spam wonder full spam glorious spam....  (bloody Vikings)
>
>>There's something delightfully amusing about people who claim something or
>>other doesn't exist because they've never seen nor heard of it and usually
>>believe their ignorance trumps reality and fact.
>
> I agree the idiots like George rant and rave over a couple of on line news 
> reports and base EVERYTHING on that...   As I have said to George and come 
> to that Jesse on many occasions  you would not understand the answers.
>
> It took him weeks (despite apparently being in the US military) to 
> recognise references to the US military maps and their somewhat 
> distinctive preference system.  When challenged he finally came up with a 
> google link to prove he knew what they were... (not the link obvious to 
> anyone familiar with the maps though)

Excuse me?  What the fuck are you blathering on about?

Hey Chris, when are you going to prove your claim that KMS was involved?  In 
fact, when are you going to tell us who they are?  Since you refuse to tell 
us, or prove that they were involved, I can only assume that you don't know. 
Great.  So I can just ignore the claim.

George

In message <d_Sck.19119$CC.18201@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>Hey Chris, when are you going to prove your claim that KMS was involved?

I was not proving KMS were involved.  However you can not prove they 
were not.

There are doubts that the  forces claimed to have done the operation are 
capable of doing anything like it.  OTOH  the opepration fits the KMS 
profile

>  In
>fact, when are you going to tell us who they are?

Tell "us" ??? WE know who KMS are it is just you who does not. Hap was 
also discussing them,

>Since you refuse to tell
>us,

I think they were based on the evidence

> or prove that they were involved,
Apart from some of those involved no one could prove it.

>I can only assume that you don't know.
>Great.  So I can just ignore the claim.

I don't *KNOW* at this point but I do know that you know a LOT less than 
me about it all.

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message <8XSck.19117$CC.10030@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message
>news:gYNck.23171$E41.15134@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> "Chris H"  wrote ...
>>
>>> > I also doubt it were French SF
>>> >involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>>>
>>> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>>
>> Okay, I admit it, I've got such limited knowledge of US and UK ,ilitary
>> operations that I have never heard of KMS, and despite their name having
>> been splashed about in public for many years within the US, UK and
>> elsewhere
>> I never heard it mentioned, and I can't find KMS on Google because I'm too
>> incompetent to know what the search criteria needs to be, even though you
>> have given all the information and KMS plus any number of one word
>> additions
>> would bring that up as a first hit, so therefore I have to conclude that I
>> am making it all up. KMS don't exist, you're talking out your arse, you
>> probably don't even exist yourself, this whole conversation has been
>> entirely imaginary. I'm pink therefore I'm spam.
>>
>> There's something delightfully amusing about people who claim something or
>> other doesn't exist because they've never seen nor heard of it and usually
>> believe their ignorance trumps reality and fact.
>>
>> Anyway, you're on a hiding to nowhere because if KMS had done it, and were
>> happy to pass credit for doing it on to Columbian and US forces, that
>> Columbia and US now claim they did it must be undeniably true, and any
>> claim
>> KMS passed credit on therefore absolutely false. The best you'll get from
>> that is a good chuckle, but it's poor form to mock the afflicted.
>> Enjoyable
>> though it is, watching people struggle with basic logic.
>
>Gee, you people go out of your way to ridicule someone who asks very simple
>questions about a claim that was made by someone else. No wonder no one but
>the twister sisters of the UK (and their one German compadre) ever post
>here.  It's a simple question, Hippyboy.  Who is KMS?  Is that so hard to
>answer?  Apparently it is, since no one has asnwered the question yet, not
>even the person who first brought them up.

A private security company.

I did tell you where to go to get the information and the history of the 
groups involved.

Next you will tell e you have never heard of Aegis and Sandline?

KMS were different though

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:92qp7HGJdFdIFA3d@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <d_Sck.19119$CC.18201@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>Hey Chris, when are you going to prove your claim that KMS was involved?
>
> I was not proving KMS were involved.  However you can not prove they were 
> not.
>
> There are doubts that the  forces claimed to have done the operation are 
> capable of doing anything like it.  OTOH  the opepration fits the KMS 
> profile

The only doubts are within the tiny brain pans which you and Hippy boy 
possess.

George

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:22TrrlGteFdIFAXw@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <8XSck.19117$CC.10030@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message
>>news:gYNck.23171$E41.15134@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>> "Chris H"  wrote ...
>>>
>>>> > I also doubt it were French SF
>>>> >involved in the on-the-day operation but KMS
>>>>
>>>> Who? KMS? Cite! PROOF!  Video!  google..... :-)
>>>
>>> Okay, I admit it, I've got such limited knowledge of US and UK ,ilitary
>>> operations that I have never heard of KMS, and despite their name having
>>> been splashed about in public for many years within the US, UK and
>>> elsewhere
>>> I never heard it mentioned, and I can't find KMS on Google because I'm 
>>> too
>>> incompetent to know what the search criteria needs to be, even though 
>>> you
>>> have given all the information and KMS plus any number of one word
>>> additions
>>> would bring that up as a first hit, so therefore I have to conclude that 
>>> I
>>> am making it all up. KMS don't exist, you're talking out your arse, you
>>> probably don't even exist yourself, this whole conversation has been
>>> entirely imaginary. I'm pink therefore I'm spam.
>>>
>>> There's something delightfully amusing about people who claim something 
>>> or
>>> other doesn't exist because they've never seen nor heard of it and 
>>> usually
>>> believe their ignorance trumps reality and fact.
>>>
>>> Anyway, you're on a hiding to nowhere because if KMS had done it, and 
>>> were
>>> happy to pass credit for doing it on to Columbian and US forces, that
>>> Columbia and US now claim they did it must be undeniably true, and any
>>> claim
>>> KMS passed credit on therefore absolutely false. The best you'll get 
>>> from
>>> that is a good chuckle, but it's poor form to mock the afflicted.
>>> Enjoyable
>>> though it is, watching people struggle with basic logic.
>>
>>Gee, you people go out of your way to ridicule someone who asks very 
>>simple
>>questions about a claim that was made by someone else. No wonder no one 
>>but
>>the twister sisters of the UK (and their one German compadre) ever post
>>here.  It's a simple question, Hippyboy.  Who is KMS?  Is that so hard to
>>answer?  Apparently it is, since no one has asnwered the question yet, not
>>even the person who first brought them up.
>
> A private security company.
>
> I did tell you where to go to get the information and the history of the 
> groups involved.
>
> Next you will tell e you have never heard of Aegis and Sandline?
>
> KMS were different though

So, a private security company can do something that the government of 
Columbia and the U.S. together cannot do?  Like I said - blowing smoke outta 
yer arse.

George

In message <_TYck.27820$AJ6.5806@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>
>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>news:92qp7HGJdFdIFA3d@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <d_Sck.19119$CC.18201@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George
>>  writes
>>>Hey Chris, when are you going to prove your claim that KMS was involved?
>>
>> I was not proving KMS were involved.  However you can not prove they were
>> not.
>>
>> There are doubts that the  forces claimed to have done the operation are
>> capable of doing anything like it.  OTOH  the opepration fits the KMS
>> profile
>
>The only doubts are within the tiny brain pans which you and Hippy boy
>possess.


A silly comment given we both have a far greater knowledge of the 
situation in Columbia than you do by your own admission
>

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message <LVYck.27822$AJ6.19778@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, George 
 writes
>>>the twister sisters of the UK (and their one German compadre) ever post
>>>here.  It's a simple question, Hippyboy.  Who is KMS?  Is that so hard to
>>>answer?  Apparently it is, since no one has asnwered the question yet, not
>>>even the person who first brought them up.
>>
>> A private security company.
>>
>> I did tell you where to go to get the information and the history of the
>> groups involved.
>>
>> Next you will tell e you have never heard of Aegis and Sandline?
>>
>> KMS were different though
>
>So, a private security company can do something that the government of
>Columbia and the U.S. together cannot do?  Like I said - blowing smoke outta
>yer arse.

:-)   You have no idea who or what KMS are or where they came from.  Or 
why they were set up.

KMS can do a LOT more than the Columbians and US together. This is why 
the US uses them in S. American Ask Oliver North.  He used them.

Don't you have a cousin in the military? Working with Special Forces? He 
will tell you who KMS are.

BTW when you work out what KMS stands for it should become obvious.

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote in message 
news:y0QKblMh6FdIFAXK@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
> In message <_TYck.27820$AJ6.5806@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, George 
>  writes
>>
>>"Chris H"  wrote in message
>>news:92qp7HGJdFdIFA3d@phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>>> In message <d_Sck.19119$CC.18201@bignews9.bellsouth.net>, George
>>>  writes
>>>>Hey Chris, when are you going to prove your claim that KMS was involved?
>>>
>>> I was not proving KMS were involved.  However you can not prove they 
>>> were
>>> not.
>>>
>>> There are doubts that the  forces claimed to have done the operation are
>>> capable of doing anything like it.  OTOH  the opepration fits the KMS
>>> profile
>>
>>The only doubts are within the tiny brain pans which you and Hippy boy
>>possess.
>
>
> A silly comment given we both have a far greater knowledge of the 
> situation in Columbia than you do by your own admission

Not really.  You just think you do.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25596254/

By Juan Forero

BOGOTA, Colombia - For months before a group of disguised Colombian soldiers
carried out a daring rescue of three American citizens and a prominent
Colombian politician from a guerrilla camp, a team of U.S. Special Forces
joined elite Colombian troops tracking the hostages across formidable jungle
terrain in the country's southern fringes.
The U.S. team was supported by a vast intelligence-gathering operation based
in the U.S. Embassy in Bogota, far to the north. There, a special 100-person
unit made up of Special Forces planners, hostage negotiators and
intelligence analysts worked to keep track of the hostages. They also
awaited the moment when they would spring into action to help Colombian
forces carry out a rescue.

That moment came in June after a Colombian army major hatched an
unconventional plan. Further developed by Colombian intelligence agents, the
plan abandoned the idea of a military raid and relied instead on tricking a
rebel group notorious for killing hostages into simply handing over 15 of
their most prominent captives. Those included three U.S. Defense Department
contractors who had been imprisoned five years in remote jungle camps, as
well as Ingrid Betancourt, a politician of French-Colombian citizenship
whose plight had become a cause celebre in Europe.

As Colombian planners made last-minute preparations June 30, the U.S.
ambassador in Bogota, William R. Brownfield, briefed Vice President Cheney,
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other Bush administration officials
in a videoconference call. Two days later, Colombian commandos scooped up
the Americans, Betancourt and 11 Colombian soldiers and policemen, receiving
praise from around the world for a plan deftly executed.

Years of clandestine work
U.S. troops did not participate directly in the operation, but behind the
rescue in a jungle clearing stood years of clandestine American work. It
included the deployment of elite U.S. Special Forces in areas where rebel
fighters roam, a vast intelligence-gathering operation against the
guerrillas, and training programs for Colombian troops and communications
specialists in how to intercept and subvert rebel communications.

"This mission was a Colombian concept, a Colombian plan, a Colombian
training operation, then a Colombian operation," Brownfield said in an
interview Monday in which he recounted details of the U.S. role. "We,
however, had been working with them more than five years on every single
element that came to pass that pulled off this operation, as well as the
small bits that we did on this operation."

Just months before "Operation Check," Brownfield promised the families of
the three Americans, whose single-engine plane had crashed over rebel-held
territory in 2003 while on an aerial reconnaissance mission, that he would
never recommend that the Bush administration approve a Colombian rescue that
would put their loved ones at risk. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of
Colombia, or FARC, has killed hostages rather than permit their rescue.

The Bush administration had an understanding with Colombia's government that
any operation to rescue the Americans required U.S. approval, meaning an
American rejection of the plan could have scuttled it. But Brownfield and a
team of 15 American strategists -- including intelligence agents and
military officers -- thought the Colombian plan could succeed.

The complex operation included infiltrators in the FARC's highest echelons,
a team of Colombian commandos playing the parts of relief workers and
guerrillas, and an elaborate scheme to intervene in the rebels' radio
communications network. The sting was directed at the leaders of guerrilla
units who were responsible for moving hostages through the jungle but who
communicated infrequently with the FARC's seven-man directorate.

Brownfield explained to Cheney, Rice and the others how Colombian officials
would ensure that a fake radio message -- purportedly from the unit headed
by the FARC's supreme leader, Alfonso Cano -- would be sent to the guards.
The order would be to prepare the hostages to be picked up by a relief
agency and then flown by helicopter to the rebel high command.

Unease
Members of Bush's Cabinet were uneasy, the ambassador recalled.

"I was pressed fairly hard, as I would expect to be, as I would hope to be,
to justify, to explain my recommendations, to offer the basis for my having
reached the conclusions that I'd reached," Brownfield said in an interview
in his office. "At the end of the day, I felt that I had been forced to
offer up a very clear explanation as to how all of us down here -- Team
Bogota -- had come up with this particular set of positions."

The White House officials agreed with Brownfield and his team. As
participants stood up from the meeting, one of the Americans listening to
Brownfield in Washington said: "Good luck. In fact, good luck to all of us."

The U.S. assistance to Colombia, part of more than $5 billion in aid since
2000, has come into sharp focus this year as an intense military campaign
weakened the FARC, killing seasoned commanders and prompting 1,500 fighters
and urban operatives to desert.

Colombian officials have said the American assistance, especially in
intercepting FARC communications, has been essential. And Sergio Jaramillo,
vice minister of defense, said the Americans have been instrumental in
creating "a professional Special Forces culture" in Colombia's elite jungle
units.

The Americans, as well as their Colombian counterparts, kept close tabs on
the FARC's internal crisis. They gleaned important information from former
guerrillas and hostages who had been released or escaped, especially Jhon
Pinchao, a policeman who made a remarkable dash to freedom last year. The
embassy also noted with interest how FARC guerrillas were becoming sloppy,
returning to the same camps they had long used or traversing the same jungle
routes again and again.

Aware of the danger of a conventional rescue, U.S. and Colombian planners
developed a general plan that called for the FARC unit holding the Americans
to be encircled, with no escape route. A high-flying plane would then drop
leaflets to assure the FARC that a rescue operation would not be mounted,
and helicopters outfitted with loudspeakers would tell the rebels what radio
frequencies to use to communicate with military forces.

Though U.S. policy bars negotiating with hostage-takers, Brownfield said the
idea behind the strategy was to have Colombian and FBI hostage negotiators
"try to make it in their interest to let the hostages go."

In January, U.S. and Colombian officials believed they would soon have a
chance to put that plan into action. Colombian reconnaissance teams
discovered the FARC team holding the Americans and two other hostages along
a river in southern Guaviare province.

Twelve of the reconnaissance units, some of which included elite U.S.
troops, were positioned along the Apaporis River, a route officials believed
the FARC would take. But tailing the guerrillas through terrain they knew
well was challenging.

The guerrillas used canoes, swiftly moving down rivers. The soldiers
trudged. In jungle so dense that visibility ended after 25 feet, the special
forces troops would move at a rate of only two or three miles a day.

But hiking was the only choice because helicopters would cause the
guerrillas to panic. On four days in February, Colombian forces came so
close that they saw the American hostages bathing in a river just a few feet
away. Nearby stood rebel guards, their assault rifles slung from their
shoulders.

Then, just before the group could be encircled, the rebels and their
hostages disappeared into the vast jumble of forest and waterways.

"At this point, they're on to us," Brownfield recalled thinking.

Although the Americans and Colombians work together closely, Colombia's
Defense Ministry does not always tell the American Embassy what plans are in
the works. U.S. officials discovered on their own that a rescue plan was
taking shape.

Fears of being deceived
In June, the Americans noted that three FARC units, all of them known for
holding hostages, began moving together into a region southeast of the
Guaviare capital, San Jose.

Brownfield said he and his team deduced that the Colombians, using fake
communications, were executing a deception plan aimed at freeing the
hostages. Later that month, Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos told
Brownfield about Operation Check, as in checkmate.

"One worry was, in fact, was the FARC here in Guaviare falling for this?"
Brownfield recalled. "Or were they in essence playing us, when we thought we
were playing them?"

Brownfield said that he also thought to himself, "We're not dealing with a
bunch of bozos here in FARC-land."

In the frantic days before the operation, Colombian and U.S. officials
discussed details of the operation at length, troubleshooting and
considering all possibilities.

Brownfield said the opinion among U.S. officials was that the risk to the
American hostages -- key leverage in the FARC's negotiations to win the
freedom of guerrillas in Colombian jails -- would be low. Should the FARC
discover the deception, the ambassador reasoned, they would simply disappear
into the jungle with their trophy prisoners.

The Americans also thought that the Colombians were well prepared, ready to
make it work.

"So we took a deep breath," Brownfield recalled, "and said, 'Proceed.' "
=======
Gee, no mention of KMS.

George