! England 1966 World Cup Shock Exclusive !

[postbaguk]

History would have you believe that on July 30, 1966, Englad beat West Germany 4-2 after extra time to win the World Cup. I have been analysing the evidence for this so-called historic event and believe there are serious inconsistencies in the record which lead me to the only possible conclusion: not only did England did NOT win the World Cup, but there wasn't even a World Cup in that year.

The evidence, o dear and most gentle of readers, speaks for itself.

Photographic evidence.

Jules Rimet trophy stolen - found by dog called Pickles.

Destruction of evidence.

Documentary evidence

And much, much more.

In forthcoming posts, we'll look at the evidence together, and come to the inevitable and shocking conclusion that it was all a complete sham.

ENGLAND DID NOT WIN THE WORLD CUP IN 1966!!!!

[postbaguk]

The "Theft" of the Jules Rimet Trophy

Just a few weeks before the World Cup, 1966, the Jules Rimet Trophy was allegedly stolen from a guarded exhibition

This story has more holes than a Lithuanian prostitute's fishnets. It screams "false flag operation". Let's examine the evidence.

1. The Jules Rimet trophy, made out of solid gold and then worth £30,000, was stolen from an exhibition from Central Hall in Westminster, London - right from under the noses two security guards who were being paid to guard it!

2. While the trophy was stolen, thieves inexplicably decided to leave behind a stamp collection worth £3,000,000. Simple maths means that the stamps were worth 100x more than the trophy. Why take the instantly recognisable trophy worth just 1% that of a stamp collection that would have been far easier to break up and sell on? What would you do?

Look at this picture. It shows two people with $1,000,000, and very happy they look too. Imagine having THREE TIMES that amount. Now imagine that in a real currency, Pounds Sterling, rather than US dollars. Now imagine what that is worth in today's terms. Would you be happy stealing a poxy £30,000 trophy that you'd have to go to the trouble of melting down when you could have a cool £3,000,000 instead, in handy, manageable stamps? No, neither would I.

3. Though the FA had allegedly received demands for money for the safe return of the trophy, it was found a week later by a dog called Pickles, hidden under a bush in Beulah Hill, South London. Does anyone of sound mind really believe that an enterprising thief would risk being spotted or arrested by two security guards when stealing the trophy, make demands for cash to the FA for a week, then simply leave £30,000 of solid gold underneath a bush for some hapless dog to sniff out? This story beggars belief, and quite frankly I'm not buying it. Neither should you, gentle reader.

This story smells worse than a lift full of Plutarkian lawyers, stuck between floors on a holiday weekend.

Here's what actually happened. The FA faked the theft of the trophy in order to raise interest in a competition that had failed to capture the imagination of the English public (ticket sales were negligible prior to the theft). They also wanted to instill a sense of national indignation and pride in the trophy. This would engender feelings of ownership among England fans. They would consider the trophy theirs before they even kicked a ball in anger. It was all part of pre-conditioning to make the gullible English think they already owned the trophy.

What does the innocent little dog Pickles think of this whole sordid affair? TOTALLY BORED!!! If he really had found the Jules Rimet Trophy, he would have been very excited, engaged in ostentatious displays of tail-wagging, perhaps licked the odd passer-by and hoping for the occasional doggy treat. Even the damned DOG is whistleblowing!!!

Oh yes, I verify my sources.

http://www.thefa.com/England/SeniorTeam/Ne...and_Pickles.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/s...000/2861545.stm

Incidentally, the Jules Rimet trophy WAS stolen in 1983, from the headquarters of the Brazilian Football Confederation. Are we really to believe that Brazilians are better trophy thieves than the English?

Oh, there's more. What do we get when we anagrammize "Jules Rimet Trophy"?

"Their Polymer Just". Which equates to "Their plastic truth". How very apt!

Or try this one for size.

"Ripe Motherly Juts". I don't know what that means, but I think it's important.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is only the tip if the iceberg people. Next up, a mountain of photographic evidence form the "final" itself.

Edited December 13, 2007 by postbaguk

[Belial]

[Space Commander Travis]

"Ripe Motherly Juts".

[postbaguk]

PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE

Our dedicated team of football connoisseurs (well, me and my mate Bob from the pub), stayed up well past our bedtime examining the photographic record. Aided by nought but my Grandad's old Sherlock Holmes' style magnifying glass, a keen and discerning eye, and several pots of strong, black coffee with a dash of Irish, and a toke you could rake a garden with, we were able to determine beyond any doubt that the photographic record of the 1966 World Cup, was indeed fabricated.

This photo was supposedly taken when Geoff Hurst scored England's controversial 3rd goal. It is riddled with anomalies!!! So many that I've had to analyse 2

different photos from a similar angle just to be able to highlight a small number of the inconsistencies in this photo. Clearly, this is a deliberate act of

whistle-blowing by someone in the English FA's propaganda department.

Look at this! Would you really have thought that the golden boy of English football, Bobby Charlton, would really have a wooden leg and run like a girl?

More to come people. Stay tuned for further photographic analyses, and the mystery of the Russian Linesman. Not to mention destruction of evidence on a grand scale!

[coughymachine]

As amusing as this all is, doesn't it belong in the Jokes & Humour forum?

I understand what the OP is driving at, but this is, after all, a conspiracy forum. Why mock those who use it to discuss conspiracies?

Edited December 13, 2007 by coughymachine

[Space Commander Travis]

Why mock those who use it to discuss conspiracies?

Gosh, some of the things you see here richly deserve it, surely.

Plus of course, we know that it's impossible to really get to Wembley because they'd all be toasted by radiation before they got past Neasden.

Edited December 13, 2007 by 747400

[Sassages]

Hmmm... that means my dad is in on the conspiracy as he has always claimed he was there at the final!

He has a ticket and photos of him there on the day. Must be fakes?

My dad must be a bad person to have fooled the family all these years! Naughty daddy!

[coughymachine]

Gosh, some of the things you see here richly deserve it, surely.

I can't say I agree with a lot of the theories that are posted here, but it is, by its nature, designed to offer an environment to those who do believe in conspiracies to exchange, challenge and collaborate.

Some people are very serious about their beliefs and to have them mocked in this way is a little insulting.

These boards thrive on user generated content. If users feel their views will be better received elsewhere, this forum will suffer, and the board together with the community it serves will have lost a valuable asset as far as I'm concerned.

[Space Commander Travis]

I think that most, at least those who have been willing to argue their case for what's been, sometimes, a long time, won't be so sensitive that they'd feel insulted. And anyway, the art of satire is one with a fine and historic tradition. Politicians have to put up with a lot worse.

plus, it's funny.

Please, Postbag, I do hope you'll tell us about the mysteriously moving corner flag.

[coughymachine]

plus, it's funny.

Exactly, which is why it belongs in the Jokes & Humour forum. It's a joke, not a conspiracy.

[Belial]

What about the goal that was not a goal, and the complete abscence of jimmy greaves probably our best player at that time?

[punish3ment]

You have to wonder really about who has time to look at these photos. I mean, most of them are clearly not fake. The suspended wires are clearly pillars for a start.

[crtDzyn]

The suspense is giving me an ulcer.

[Belial]

Mines just burst...

[Space Commander Travis]

What about the goal that was not a goal, and the complete abscence of jimmy greaves probably our best player at that time?

and what about the dark secret of the legendary Russian linesman ....

[postbaguk]

and what about the dark secret of the legendary Russian linesman ....

All will be revealed.

The clue is in his name.

More shocking revelations to come in a few days time - secrets as big as this must be drip-fed to an incredulous public.

[Bill Hill]

well one thing we can determine is Postbagsuk must be, Scottish.

[Unlimited]

Exactly, which is why it belongs in the Jokes & Humour forum. It's a joke, not a conspiracy.

agreed..isnt this kinda silly...

[Trinitrotoluene]

After extensive research myself I have found a number of anomalies in regards to the alleged World Cup of 1966. I've listed a few below:

[Bill Hill]

More evidence?

[Porthos1]

I can't say I agree with a lot of the theories that are posted here, but it is, by its nature, designed to offer an environment to those who do believe in conspiracies to exchange, challenge and collaborate.

Some people are very serious about their beliefs and to have them mocked in this way is a little insulting.

These boards thrive on user generated content. If users feel their views will be better received elsewhere, this forum will suffer, and the board together with the community it serves will have lost a valuable asset as far as I'm concerned.

I am so terribly sorry, I thought this was a place where people sought the truth. I should have known though, since not many people here can even differentiate between maybe and definitely.

[coughymachine]

I am so terribly sorry, I thought this was a place where people sought the truth. I should have known though, since not many people here can even differentiate between maybe and definitely.

The OP is simply a p***-take aimed at conspiracy theorists (one it appears you endorse), whose rightful place on these boards is the Conspiracies & Secret Societies forum. If this garbage were to have been submitted to the World Events & Current Affairs forum, it would have been very swiftly moved to the Jokes & Humour forum.

So why exactly does it belong here?

[cheese merchant]

This thread is a deliberate and rather childish attempt at 'humour' by a moon landing 'believer'

Personally I find the bizzare way renowned 'prankster' and 'first man on the moon' Neil Armstrong behaved at a get together with his hoaxing buddies a lot more amusing.

"Buzz and Mike you stand at the front for the photo. Armstrong get to the back"

http://s160.photobucket.com/albums/t173/Mi...1-S78-34135.jpg

http://s160.photobucket.com/albums/t173/Mi...vkdDSCF0004.jpg

Edited December 14, 2007 by cheese merchant

[Waspie_Dwarf]

This thread is a deliberate and rather childish attempt at 'humour' by a moon landing 'believer'

I believe the original poster is trying to make a valid point about conspiracy theories and the methods they employ. If you object to this thread then I suggest you us the report system so that your complaint can be evaluated by moderators. As a "believer" I will not deal with any such report and will leave it up to moderators that are not involved in the debate.

Personally I find the bizzare way renowned 'prankster' and 'first man on the moon' Neil Armstrong behaved at a get together with his hoaxing buddies a lot more amusing.

This is off topic. You are already fully aware of the correct place to post this argument. Please do not hijack threads as this is in violation of the terms and conditions of this site:

3. Behaviour

Any of the following constitutes unacceptable behaviour:

3j. Thread derailment: Do not derail or 'hijack' threads with posts that are either off-topic or designed to draw attention away from what is being discussed. If you'd like to discuss something different either start a new thread or find another existing thread which better suits the area you wish to discuss.