Andy Mcnab
Forum
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 ... 297
AIB, as I said I haven't exactly read them in the right order, I haven't read Remote Control yet, nor Liberation Day as I haven't got it yet, but it is on order..
No I haven't had chance to have a look on that site, but as soon as I get chance I'll have a browse around.
UF was very good, a must see.
Well catch you all later..
Good look with those Exams Christina.
>>By Ste (Monday, 9 Jun 2003 20:07)
Just a drop in quickie...
I've read Direct Action by Johnny (Two Combs) Howard.
The difference between AM's writing and J (TC) H, is much like the difference between Scotch whisky and Lambs navy rum!
One is literary "correct" the other is Enid Blyton with "knobs" on. As in, one has to read JH, while AM is more your Comic Strip whizz-bang rubber-band sherbert dip-sticks = easy read...
About to tackle The Decline & Fall of The Roman Empire - how's that for classical reading?
As for UF - hmm, can't stand Ross Kemp = equals wannabe hero, and such an ugly mug with it. Thank God Chris R was in last outing of UF. Hope he's around on this run...
>>By buddy
>>By buddy (Monday, 9 Jun 2003 20:34)
argh buddy your confusing me again stop doing that must go now!
simpler terms please buddy write here and dean francis as i may understand it better written twice
also thanx ste
study study study
did anybody go on that website i posted its a must see soo funny (nothing to do with anything on this site though)
must go bye
>>By christina (Monday, 9 Jun 2003 20:39)
You're right Christina, it is a very funny site.. made me laugh.
For some reason I am very careful of what I type... I wonder why??
>>By Ste (Monday, 9 Jun 2003 21:02)
We have talked about Andy vetting other author's,
there's an article on the site of the Telegraph (UK) but it's
very old (1996).
If you're interested reading it anyway:
ANDY McNAB, the former SAS sergeant who earned millions from his bestseller Bravo Two Zero, has been recruited to vet similar books by Servicemen......
Site:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?
html=/archive/1996/10/06/nsas06.html
(paste together without open spaces)
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 10 Jun 2003 16:59)
Nice one, Lynn! And I see it mentions the Jenny Simpson book, too....
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 10 Jun 2003 17:24)
does he still live in france i lost touch with him the divorce and everything it was upsetting. lynn was it upsetting for you?
yeah finished all my exams accept one tommorow which doesn't need studying for i am free until the 24 of june when i have one more. then thats it until next year.
yep ste i always check what i have typed too but somtimes not enough times and it just sounds stupid.
does anybody know when UF is on yet because i have decided to watch it?!
>>By christina (Tuesday, 10 Jun 2003 17:36)
Christina,
RE:: UF - See page 37 - July/August
>>By Sheba (Tuesday, 10 Jun 2003 18:14)
Just watched Clive Owen in "The Bourne Identity." He was a CIA hitman who was out to hunt down Bourne. Cool character.
I can't make up my mind if he'd make a good Nick Stone though.
Any opinions?
>>By ShadowRaptor (Tuesday, 10 Jun 2003 19:27)
i saw that film really boring but thats my opinoin i dont hink he will make a good nick stone but i have already talked about him on this site dont know what page though
but i still know who should play kelly!
>>By christina (Tuesday, 10 Jun 2003 19:52)
Hi ShadowRaptor, nice of you to mention Clive Owen
since we did talk about him before - looong ago
(page 3) so it's funny he's mentioned again.
As I recall right not everyone agreed with me but he is one of my favorites for 'the job'
This made me realise something else... we talked about this on page 3, maybe before, how many more pages must we
fill till they 'put us out of our misery' and reveal who will play
Nick??? Now doesn't that sound like we're desperate for some news?? Well that's because we are I guess ;-)
One other thing: Scouse honey, if you come back I promise I will not ask you for pictures or whatever.... will this do the trick? I hope so because I'm worried about you.. ;-)
>>By Lynn (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 17:00)
Hey ppl
so i see you got over the divorce with AM quickly then. its still very upsetting for me. but i have a warm family thankyou lynn. boris kind of left when we welcomed him into the family how rude.
so how is everybody you all doing good?
>>By christina (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 17:43)
I never said I got divorced Chrissy..
>>By Lynn (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 20:19)
so your the women in his life now are you how dare you take him from me.
>>By christina (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 20:23)
after we had beautiful children (not sheba that must have been sombody else) im gunna cry agian now i need some counselleling
>>By christina (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 20:25)
Well, I'm back from gone. Christina unfortunately I don't have much time to spend at home 'cause of my work. And I haven't been on the board 'cause I'm not reading anything from AM as I can't find any of his books and as for the moment I'm short of money.
Where is aib, haven't heard from him lately.
Any news from AM except that his new book is due out in november? Where is he going on holiday? Maybe he's going where I'm going... and stop it you women fighting over AM. I think he's had enough of women for now after all the girlfriends and wives he's had. Let's hope he sticks to this new wife Gerry, the pilates teacher. Good luck to both of them.kissy kissy
>>By boris (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 20:48)
hi boris you appeared when i said your name freaky!
so lynn thats your real name eh gerry eh!
>>By christina (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 21:01)
Well, we do have a saying in Holland
"Hokus Pokus Pilatus Pas" but that's all I know about Pilates.
On to a totally different subject. Has anyone read
SAS Gulf Warriors by Steve Crawford? Or heard something about it? On the cover it says 'the story behind Bravo Two Zero' (but the book is from 1995 so I guess, using especially Bravo Two Zero on cover, that Andy's succes had anything to do with present cover)
Anyone??
>>By Lynn (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 21:49)
what does that saying mean?
>>By christina (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 22:07)
Christina, sorry, I know of Steele's book but I have way too many others I'm trying to get through before that one rises to the top of my list. Also, I'm afraid you are way too new here to appreciate how fast this board is actually moving! Pg 1 actually spans from August 2002 [my first post before Boogle] through February 3, 2003! Now we're sometimes doing a page a day! Amazing really!
Lynn, from what I found, Steve Crawford has about five SAS-related books, but I can't even begin to look at any of them yet. His books are also listed among recommended "British Forces and Wars - Special Air Service (SAS)" books and seem to be considered worthwhile reading...
My prob always boils down to too many books, too little time! And practically none on unabridged audios! I love unab'd audios! I just "read" Immediate Action again (for the umpti-umpth time) in two days!
Funny aside about IA -- a few weeks ago we got embroiled in the issue of AM's height -- so I was particularly struck by how many times AM mentions how tall various fellas are and gives indications of his own height as well....
Boris, I'm crushed! I'm only 9 postings ahead of yours and you didn't see me? Granted it was only one line, and brevity is not my usual modus operandi....
Also, since Boris piped up when called, could we do a little roll call for some of our other newer posters who seem to be MIA lately -- Scouse, jaffagib5rgj, cpm, Hoarwithy, FB now just plain Paddy, pacemaker -- are you still with us? Maybe just hanging out on the sidelines?
>>By am-i-binned (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 23:13)
You know on the back of some of McNab's books you can see a dark face? Is that AM?
On the Bravo Two Zero dvd there's an interview with the man himself, but I hear it's just a silhouette so you can't see him.
He was on the Discovery Channel before doing an interview - I think it was something to with the the war on Iraq - but I missed it. (tragic, I know)
So I've never actually seen AM before.
Can anybody help me out?
>>By ShadowRaptor (Wednesday, 11 Jun 2003 23:43)
Hi, ShadowRaptor....
Don't know about a Discovery Channel program, but the History Channel aired "Bravo Two Zero: Behind Iraqi Lines" in March and then had two online chats, one with Andy and one with Chris Ryan:
http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/_mainsite_flash/
index.php?subpage=%20chat_live&action=LoadContent
(remove hard return where hyperlink wraps)
Search on "Bravo Two Zero" or "Andy McNab" and the program and chats will come up.
(That reminds me -- we haven't heard from Johno either since he gave us the heads-up [ref pgs 6-7] on the History Channel program!)
No prob, ShadowRaptor, that you haven't seen Andy McNab before; more important would be to have seen him after! (vbg, vbw) Some of us have gathered pictures from various sources, all with varying degrees of obscuring. We could probably send you something offboard if you're that interested.
>>By am-i-binned (Thursday, 12 Jun 2003 01:28)
hi people
i have the film bravo two zero and have watched the interview many times you dont get to see the whole of his face but you do get to see his hand, shoulder, foot and side of face but thats it. and in the background there are really horrible curtains!
hi AIB could you also send those pictures to me please.
>>By christina (Thursday, 12 Jun 2003 17:37)
i have been thinking about this all day because i do not own a copy of last light what was carries husband called plz help
>>By christina (Thursday, 12 Jun 2003 17:44)
Christina,
Carries husband is called Aaron. (Thursday, 12 Jun 2003 19:30)
Quickie word of caution on AM pic swap front,
Well, I must say, one or two old-time postees were utterly disbelieving of insider information, (not so long ago) in respect of: "Andy Mcnab to vet SAS books by fellow servicemen". Amusingly, Lynn's location of ancient archived newspaper article is indisputable evidence of AM's involvement with select Whitehall vetting committee - YES or NO (?).
Is it any wonder, then, that those who have put in appearances here on Gnod, (those with insider knowledge of AM and SAS associates, not to mention ex-SAS servicemen) felt somewhat under attack on occasion of their pointing out a few home truths about AM / the reg/ the system?!!! Unfortunately, a few of you saw fit to react to serving SAS /ex servicemen/other, on occasion, with misplaced arrogance and objection out of misguided loyalty to AM.
Believe it, SAS men are cold, calculating, mercenary, and would kill one of their own if they had to!!! Summarise that as you wish but remember AM's not a paragon of virtue, as in holy man full of goodwill offering beggars his last crusts of bread! Accept him for what he is: human...Accept that humans change coats/allegiance, even to those who at one time were thought of as the enemy...Accept that it's a dog eat dog world, and accept that he's a top dog (meant in nicest possible way), and remember top dog's rule by killing off or driving opponants out of the pack!
Genuine SAS personnel who drop by here will either dodge round the block or completely vanish as soon as any one of you starts demanding validation of military service via e-mail correspondence...Think about it, seriously! Any one of you could be the enemy, the real enemy of specific ex SAS personnel, more importantly, their whereabouts and that of wives, ex wives, and children!!!! Where better to glean information than through people who are obsessed and spend their days researching their idol and ever news item relating to that idol?
>>By buddy (Friday, 13 Jun 2003 00:49)
Hi, Buddy --
I have read and re-read your post very carefully, as I always do whenever you speak. While I can appreciate some of your issues, there are a few points I'd like to address:
Re: Whitehall / AM Vetting of SAS-related books
First and foremost, Chiefbear's posting is not "insider" information. Chiefbear's post is actually a regurgitated cannibalisation of the old article Lynn found. But before verifying that the post was a rehash, I was one of the "old-time postees" who asked Chiefbear two questions:
(1) I asked if Chiefbear thought it was late-breaking (surprising) news to any of us that Soldier 5 might paint an unfavourable picture of AM; and
(2) I asked (in sincerity with no challenge) is Andy McNab a member of "a Whitehall committee" with a single vote, or is he a committee of one with absolute final say ("judge and jury")?
Chiefbear never answered either of my questions, and Chiefbear dropped off the board. Are we to believe that Chiefbear was an "insider" and chose to vanish because these two questions were threatening attacks? Or isn't it more likely that Chiefbear was a simple plagiarist pretending to be an insider?
(When Chiefbear did not answer, I searched my files for a few key phrases which sounded familiar. When Lynn was successful in finding the actual article, she found the evidence I had been looking for.)
Re: AM picture swap front
I am not so fortunate as to have access to "insider" unobscured personal pictures! The pictures I have offered are all available in books or on the internet. I am willing to provide a shortcut and share -- nothing more than that.
Re: Where better to glean information...
As to using us (this messageboard) as a means of gleaning endangering information, if this is true, then I have to question the intelligence of these "enemies". Wouldn't such up-close and personal enemies have access to far more "personal" facts on which to do far more expansive research? We can only search on limited public information, so what personal secrets could we possibly unearth? Or are these enemies so lazy they can't be assed to do more extensive homework?
Re: Genuine SAS personnel who drop by here
As to genuine SAS personnel visiting here and feeling threatened, then I must ask: If so concerned for personal safety/security, why post anything at all that would indicate "insider"? Doesn't the "grey man" rule always apply? Why set yourself up to be singled out as special when it would be very easy to blend in here and chat away about characters, plotlines, casting, etc.? Who would be the wiser? Where would the threat be then? Why come to this board to talk "insider" if you do not want to be identified as an "insider"? Why not just join in and talk about AM, NS and less volatile/risky topics? Surely SAS types are clever enough to be discrete and not reveal anything potentially jeopardizing. In B20, Andy said, “We’re all big boys, we know the rules.” If so afraid of getting shot at, why put your head up in the first place?
So, the way I see it -- we have a plagiarist poster, publicly available obscured pictures, dumb or lazy enemies of the SAS, and non-covert but easily intimidated SAS visitors…
>>By am-i-binned (Friday, 13 Jun 2003 05:04)
HOT NEWS!
I have through sources I cannot reveal obtained INSIDE information that members of the SAS are to be forced to sign a confidentiality contract forbidding them from publicising their work without permission !!!
The contract applies to serving and future members of Britain's special forces but it does not apply to former members. This contract involves a lifelong obligation under civil law not to disclose any unauthorised information about the activities of the special forces. Anyone who breaks the terms of the contract could be served with a writ for damages by the Ministry of Defence. If a member or future member of the special forces refuses to sign the contract they will be dismissed from special forces and returned to their original unit.
Please keep this news between us.. I don’t know what happens to my sources if it becomes known this news leaked out.
;-)
>>By Lynn (Friday, 13 Jun 2003 09:59)
Damn, Lynn! You always get the good stuff !!! (vbsag)
>>By am-i-binned (Friday, 13 Jun 2003 10:40)
Sorry Lynn, It's not HOT NEWS. It's been discussed as actuality here on the message board with links to military message boards, but maybe the posts were deleted unread by most here - RE: Coburn!!!
There are times when it s very hard not to say, am-i-binned: "you talk a load of whitewashed b******s at times."
You said as a last passing shot to my latest post, Am-i-binned :
So, the way I see it -- we have a plagiarist poster, publicly available obscured pictures, dumb or lazy enemies of the SAS, and non-covert but easily intimidated SAS visitors…
Nah, you just got a problem with people posting items of interest that you haven't had a chance to vet, right? Oooh, lordy lordy, that smacks of intimidation by illative veto.
As to Chiefbear's plagiarised post. Such action probably would not even (in court of law) pass as copyright infringement on the basis newspapers become public domain the minute they hit the streets. In truth, much of their typescript is oft biased infringement of individuals' privacy!
You didn't mention follow-up or pre-posts to Chiefbear's ref to Whitehall Committee: as is more common around here on favoured subject matter. Unfortunately I don't have the time to trawl previous pages (inclusive deleted material) in search of evidence to prove for or against Chiefbear as credible or not. Does it matter? Is it such a big deal? He certainly wasn't/isn't alone on the score of who makes for interesting reading, right?
However, if you want to posture politically correct tactics!!! Let's assume you wrote the original article, which probably would have caused your hackles to rise, YES?
If you didn't write it, what's your problem with Chiefbear having quoted an article in whole or in part content, other than the fact that you recognised said article by familiarity or default of keyword search! Do I or others give a damn either way about Chiefbear and what he posted? NO on the scale of whether he was right or wrong, YES on the scale of interesting article!
Bully for Lynn, who finally tracked down undisputable evidence of Whitehall Committee. Oh, and by the way, for those who might be interested and don't know the Whitehall system, Whitehall committees oft consist of no more than one or two members, which constitutes "vacant chair" of senior ministerial officiated civil servant " whom signs on dotted line at prompt from "seated investigative source".
You have, am-i-binned, on numerous occasions, quoted "word for word" articles, in part, sometimes whole AM articles. Are you then saying you wrote all the original articles, or did you plagiarise AM news copy?
As to your comment "gleaning information": you cease to amaze me with your doctrinaire of "close-up personal enemies" - Who mentioned close-up enemies?
What has happened to the broader mind-set that I know exists between your eyes? If the enemy happened to work in the intelligence network yes they could collate sufficient info for a successful kidnap operation by third party sell-back, but that's not the case for those out of the Int network.
Unless wouldbe kidnappers can acquire personal information via a celebrity's lit agent/publicist, etc, (not so difficult, I suppose, if one adopts a Saaf London accent and postures a journalist persona.) However, the latter is most unlikely for East European gangsters with unsavoury connections, and even if they could cyber hack into Hereford/GCHQ/The bridge, etc., they'd pretty much draw a blank on peoples real identities and whereabouts of their family/ex family, while at the same time they'd alert the Int network to covert cyber activity!
That aside, you're underestimating the amount of info collated in a collective sense back stage here. Any feedback to apparent naive inquisitives', is all grist to the mill for students of new world fundamentalist persuasions.
I don't recall saying SAS personnel felt "threatened" upon putting in an appearance here. I was pointing out that a precedence of charging people with "prove who you are" is as rampant now, at Gnod as was before at Allreaders. Should any one so much as post any thing that appears to be inhouse SAS info, they're bombarded with accusatory attacks of prove it!
If person/s decline invitation to offboard by definition of no interest to do so, it isn't long before they are successfully ostracized (singled out) on credibility issues, and you, am-i-binned take the offensive, sometimes overt umbrage if you feel AM is under attack: yourself slighted by proxy.
I said: Genuine SAS personnel who drop by here will either dodge round the block or completely vanish as soon as any one of you starts demanding validation of military service via e-mail correspondence. What is wrong with my saying that?
I said it, because when off-boarding the "trust issue" immediately comes into play and in many cases imposition upon persons' privacy levels will reach a NO GO zone!!! Do you accept that as fact, do you accept that you hounded me for every finite detail you could possibly glean?
You've lost some excellent boarders, interestingly controversial at times, but nonetheless, interesting as opposed to the mundane "hello", "goodbye", "it's raining here, no it's sunny here today", and "ooooh I'm so enamoured by your charmed c**p" = pages of nonsensical blabberings...
Predictably, once again you've posted one of your Andy said quotes: “We’re all big boys, we know the rules.” If so afraid of getting shot at, why put your head up in the first place?
Touche!!!!
But truth will out in the end, it always does!!!
>>By buddy (Friday, 13 Jun 2003 12:49)
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 ... 297
The discussion board is currently closed.
|
DISCOVER NEW BOOKS