That's your assumption! You have to remember gworld, I'm not trying to sell people on the idea that al qaida stopped by the local Eckerds drug store to pick up mouthwash and that 80,000 people don't mean anything. Like I said before, pretend twenty tons of chemical wmd and vx nerve agent was found in Bush's backyard. Let's see how fast you spring into action But these guys are just terrorists. They deserve the benefit of all your doubts
vs your comment that they had no evidence? You bet! Bottom line is and still is, you misqoted these to fit your agenda. And apparently are still doing so with the VX. He said what he said, not what you said he said. Thanks for all those "opinions!"
No actually that's not an assumption, that is the only proof you've linked for the VX claim you continually bring up. It is not proof at all, the expert 'believes' it to be you have yet to show any proof that it was. If this is honestly what you are using for your debate you might as well give up as it is not proof, it is only speculation until it is proven or you post the proof. Nobody is saying it was 'mouthwash' there however is a huge difference from actual proof that it was VX and one right wing nut saying he believes it to be VX now isn't there? Yes of my hours and hours of research yesterday trying to figure out how you got your info not one other expert, major news source, government agency stated VX. Any rational thinking person by now would have given up on the argument that it is without a doubt VX, you for some reason however can't for some reason. Do you have a complex or something when you are proven wrong, to still rely on unproven statements for fact? Nobody is giving terrorists the benefit of the doubt, I don't care if it was VX or as you keep saying mouthwash. If it can kill then kill them, the VX however is where you are trying to link them to Saddam which you have NO proof of! This is a big difference and your twisting and squirming does not change that fact. --edit Find me the proof to back up the statement that is indeed VX and Saddam did give them the VX and I will start leaning to support the war. Instead of trying to use bogus info use good info and you may actually change a few minds. This is exactly the reason I am against the war and how it was carried out, with your statements are you sure you weren't part of the CIA who had such a dismal intelligence failure?
Hmm might be however you also misquoted as you stated 'strong' even though it states 'sufficient' so you change it to fit your agenda? Not to mention that the only lines supporting your position for the most part in the article was the top, 90% of the rest of the article goes against your position, I was basing my statement on the whole of the article not a one liner. Again you are totally incorrect, take the statement word for word as he said it, it still DOES NOT prove it is VX! It might be, but the info and statements given by your quoted expert does not prove it was VX!
Yes, it is an assumption and an opinion. Your opinion is that he is wrong. Doesn't have to be a reason, apparently. What I'm using for the debate are the articles that show al qaida members were arrested in Jordan in a chemical wmd plot that could kill 80,000 people and that one claimed that it was VX. These men admitted to working for zarqawi, are terrists and were working for al qaida. What I'm up against, are people trying to trivialize terrorists intentions, what they were using and how many people could have and would have been killed if they carried out their operation by saying these are nothing more than every day chemicals that could be picked up from the local drug store or hospital. In other words, do not want there to be an grip behind this story. In your case, you seem upset that someone it was VX because it's the only chemical could could be mixed in the field. To twist that around, you claimed he said it was the easiest in the field. I do not have an issue with his statement, you do. That is your problem. Does it necessitate misquoting (part of a consistent overall pattern that has been established)? I agree, gworld is a nobody. And he did suggest these nice young men just had some mouthwash. It was the best laugh of the day, yesterday and I had a great time with it! You also noted it was the guys opinion that it was VX. I guess he's a right wing nut? I don't know, I'm not arguing he's right wing, left wing, communist or anything else. I'll let you argue that, if it's important to you. The article said he was a terrorism expert and he said it was VX because it was the only chemical that could be mixed in the field. You said it was because it was the easiest. What am I arguing here? I never said it was without a doubt VX. Again, more assumption, more opinion. You have not proven me wrong. In fact, you have not proven the person who claimed it was VX wrong. Is that really how you see it? Since you can't prove him wrong, he must be wrong? How does that work? Did you put gworld on block? I believe I mentioned once, that VX was produced by Saddam and not Syria. An important aspect when you consider that zarqawi is in Iraq, saddam produced VX (in which gworld promptly posted in defense of his buds they didn't, and I corrected him as usual), the terrorists admitted to working with zarqawi. This is important, because the truck was coming in from Syria, which if they were working for/with zarqaqi in Iraq, where we know VX was produced, would be a strong indicator of where the VX or materials that would mix to make VX in the field (not because it's the easiest) comes into play. You'll also note that I mentioned that once. It's not something I've insisted or continued to use as my argument, as you suggest. In summary, a lab test could confirm it was VX. But some would continue to dismiss it as mouthwash, some would then demand that it be tested and proved it was actually from something that saddam produced. And when that was proved, would demand to know where saddam got it, what it was comprised of, then insist that it was probably just some chemicals that could be picked up at the local hospital that accidentally fell into a vat together and no one ever knew. It's a viscious circle that never ends, because some just don't want anything to exist and others will go out of their way to defend a terrorist at all costs. You gotta love it!
Nope, I simply got the words wrong. Strong, sufficient...they just don't equate to "none" no matter how you look at it. It proves you misquoted him, intentionally by saying it was the easiest to mix in the field. I don't content his statements do prove it was VX. It's what he said. You are trying to prove it wasn't VX, but you can't. Are you trying to fault me with your inability to prove it wasn't VX?
See, we're going no where here. It's now reduced to he said/she said. If you had not been intentionally misleading in post 585 (I think that was it) by trying to quickly dismiss everything by saying articles said something they didn't, this probably wouldn't be an issue. The important part of the article for me was, and still is, that al qaida tried to use twenty tons of chemical wmd that could have killed 80,000 people. zarqawi admitted to this, the terrorists are on trial (including zarqawi in absentia) and it's not because they stopped off at a local hospital or drug store to pick up some supplies in a humanitarium effort. The fun part of this, for me, is watching a few try to dismiss it or discredit it. We all know zarqawi routinely ships twenty tons of mouthwash over to Jordan because the summer heat parches their lips and gives them that "not so fresh feeling" of the mouth. It's all just one big misunderstanding on the part of the terrorists, as usual
Totally wrong. I'm not saying he is wrong now am I? I am simply stating what he thinks it was without actually testing it or reports from the government officials themselves stating it was VX does not prove it was VX. Totally wrong again. I was not misquoting, I was typing a generalized statement from my readings, I then gave the exact quote and then links to the quotes. You continually try to go back to anything you can to try to back up your argument no matter how flimsy it is don't you. 'consistant overall pattern' of which if you accuse me of you are guilty as well. My typing my opinion is not a quote, nor did I say it was a quote now did I? Talk about misquoting I see at least one from you right now, if you wish to be that trivial than fine here we go! could be safely mixed and you state he said Wow looks like a 'misquote' to support your agenda. These are terrorists who are known to carry out suicide attacks, do you realy think they are worried about safey. Thank you for misquoting in your attack of misquoting I appreciate it. I will from now on diseminate your posts as you do mine, but will also rely on fact to back up my arguments not simply attack someone elses posts. I You have not proven him to be correct, wouldn't the burden be on proving this one right wing nobody nut job correct before even taking what he says with any merit? You have also stated in many posts they had VX, are you now claiming it 'might' not be VX? That maybe the case, and as I've already stated proof that it was VX and came directly from Saddam and I would support the war a bit more 'at least how it was carried out.
Gtech I'm not even going to try to diseminate your previous posts, you have been proven wrong, used right wing wackos with unproven statements as facts, one line out of an article, misquoted yourself etc, etc yet you have the nerve to call me 'misleading'
But you just said: I am simply stating what he thinks it was without actually testing it or reports from the government officials themselves stating it was VX does not prove it was VX. That's quite a contrast. How did we go from that, to "one right wing nobody nut job?" Which one were you *really trying to say?* I don't know that he is a right wing nut job, a left wing nut job, a terrorist supporter or a circus midget. The article in which I quoted from, said he was a terrorism expert and he said it was VX because it was the only chemical that could be mixed in the field. What could it have been? Mouthwash? What other chemical, when mixed together, could kill 80,000 people? I don't have to prove him right. I'm not defending him. I'm quoting what he said. I've taken no exception to what he said. You have the burden of proving him wrong, if that's what your intention is. If you believe he's "one right wing nobody nut job" then you've probably already made up your mind. Perhaps you would.
had to leave this misquote for the guy who loves to point out misquotes and also loves to do them himself as well, wow at least 2 misquotes in one post and I didn't even barely look. No wonder you can't find any proof to back up any of your statements and don't appear to realy know much of the facts as you are more worried about trivial issues than the actual merit.
I don't know that he is a right wing nut job, a left wing nut job, a terrorist supporter or a circus midget. The article in which I quoted from, said he was a terrorism expert and he said it was VX because it was . What could it have been? Mouthwash? What other chemical, when mixed together, could kill 80,000 people? Wow the misquote inspector misquotes again!
Now you suggest I have moderator status and can delete posts? going back to the originals: You left the quotes above in, because? Here's how you quoted him:
If only I could find the command to delete my post. Any other non-moderators see where they can delete their posts? Hrbl, would you kindly use the forum controls at your disposal to delete post number 673 to demonstrate how forum members can delete posts?
Cool, now I can use the "you deleted that last post just in time, good thing I was able to already copy and paste before you took it down" to frame someone! Nice trick, thanks for sharing!
I haven't deleted any posts. Post 674, which begins with: is clearly listed above. If I read your post correct, you are accusing me of deleting this post, but it is clearly there.
zman, go to the previous page and quote post number 674, where it begins with: This is the post hrbl is saying I deleted.