The WMD Inspector No One Heeded

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: syzygy
i triple and quarduple dare you to find one quote of mine where i said dr. kay proved iraq had wmds. you have resorted to outright
lies to build your demented pseudo-reality. given your worsening symptomology, it was only a matter of time before you reached
this debased point. very fitting.

yes, the report does play its cards close to its chest, to be safe against overstatement owing to recent history, but that hardly begins
to describe the loads of detail he fills page after page with. when dr. kay says he found a clandestine lab and safehouse network run
by the iraqi intelligence services, and he does not doubt that this was 'clandestine', a 'lab', a 'safehouse network', operated by the
'iraqi intelligence service', you scrape the edges for a grammatical morsel that can save your delusions from utter collapse. how can
you can live like that ?

ofcourse, this only appllies where dr. kay qualifies his discoveries. what about where he doesn't ? the north korean misssile deal isn't
so qualified, the continuing work on ricin and alfatoxin aren't similiarly qualified, new long range missile technology, illegal fuel propellant
production for scud variants, all iraqi intelligence service labs systematically santized ?!?!? hello ? you still there, you poor, poor thing.

and the clincher being even if we indulge in your childish games, innuendo or no innuendo, iraqi officials were still responsible
to declare all biological and chemical programs that could be weaponized. there is no innuendo in that fact that the iraqis
deliberately did not do this. they in fact worked to destroy, sanitize, and lie there way to a sanction-free state. i hope i have
made your innuendo a game reserve for the desperate beyond all hope.

oh, and not a word on your basketcase friend ritter ? don't like the alternate truths ritter has to share, eh ? he fits your
pathetic profile to a tee. its the second time i'm asking. try for a third ?

WMD. Related. Program. Activities.

ROFLMAO!

You were wrong. Get over it. Move on.

 

[Dari]

Why would a grown man like Scott ritter want to have sex with young boys and girls?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Dari
Why would a grown man like Scott ritter want to have sex with young boys and girls?

Fishing for a vacation? If you are so obsessed with Ritter's sex life, why don't you ask him? I hear he has a temper, perhaps he will solve your trolling problem once and for all.

Never mind, a cowardly twit like you likes to slander people safely behind an anonymous screen name. You lack the integrity to actually confront someone in person. You're a pathetic little boy who's not worthy of licking Ritter's boots. At least he did something for this country.

By the way, Ritter was right. You were wrong.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: syzygy

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: syzygy
your funny in a most unintentional way. you've had better and more noble failures. here you
are just parodying your own sorry history on this board with new lows and with no end in sight.

there is nothing to 'slink away' from; the stench of your spewage is tolerable . . . just barely.

more than once i have sited kay's report, quoted it verbatim, threw in blix's february 2003
presentation, quoted it verbatim, and laughed as your creative juices took each of them for
a dizzying ride - when you did take them for a ride. a number of times - like now - you create
an imagined history of successful challenges or just dismiss the whole point with childish
retorts.

as for ritter telling the truth, i agree . . . just read above his 1998 congressional testimony and
his 1998 pbs interview. the boy was barely a month removed from his principled stand. we knew
the man before and after his fling with ethical conduct. cheers.

LOL. Sure you did. You said Kay proved Iraq had WMDs. He did nothing of the sort. The entire report is littered with innuendo, "could have been". "might be used for", etc., ad nauseum. Every single time I refuted one of your delusions by quoting Kay's actual words, you ran away. When you include Kay's comments from recent interviews, you have a whole lot of nothing. Nada. Zilch.

You were wrong, get over it, move on.

i triple and quarduple dare you to find one quote of mine where i said dr. kay proved iraq had wmds. you have resorted to outright
lies to build your demented pseudo-reality. given your worsening symptomology, it was only a matter of time before you reached
this debased point. very fitting.

yes, the report does play its cards close to its chest, to be safe against overstatement owing to recent history, but that hardly begins
to describe the loads of detail he fills page after page with. when dr. kay says he found a clandestine lab and safehouse network run
by the iraqi intelligence services, and he does not doubt that this was 'clandestine', a 'lab', a 'safehouse network', operated by the
'iraqi intelligence service', you scrape the edges for a grammatical morsel that can save your delusions from utter collapse. how can
you can live like that ?

ofcourse, this only appllies where dr. kay qualifies his discoveries. what about where he doesn't ? the north korean misssile deal isn't
so qualified, the continuing work on ricin and alfatoxin aren't similiarly qualified, new long range missile technology, illegal fuel propellant
production for scud variants, all iraqi intelligence service labs systematically santized ?!?!? hello ? you still there, you poor, poor thing.

and the clincher being even if we indulge in your childish games, innuendo or no innuendo, iraqi officials were still responsible
to declare all biological and chemical programs that could be weaponized. there is no innuendo in that fact that the iraqis
deliberately did not do this. they in fact worked to destroy, sanitize, and lie there way to a sanction-free state. i hope i have
made your innuendo a game reserve for the desperate beyond all hope.

oh, and not a word on your basketcase friend ritter ? don't like the alternate truths ritter has to share, eh ? he fits your
pathetic profile to a tee. its the second time i'm asking. try for a third ?

And the trailers! Don't forget the trailers!

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Gaard
And the trailers! Don't forget the trailers!

The Winnebagos of Mass Destruction?

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Dari
Why would a grown man like Scott ritter want to have sex with young boys and girls?

Maybe he fantasizes that they're his mentors.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Dari
Why would a grown man like Scott ritter want to have sex with young boys and girls?

Fishing for a vacation? If you are so obsessed with Ritter's sex life, why don't you ask him? I hear he has a temper, perhaps he will solve your trolling problem once and for all.

Never mind, a cowardly twit like you likes to slander people safely behind an anonymous screen name. You lack the integrity to actually confront someone in person. You're a pathetic little boy who's not worthy of licking Ritter's boots. At least he did something for this country.

By the way, Ritter was right. You were wrong.

Cowardly twit, looking in the mirror much? Yeah, he did something for the country. He tried to molest some kids, now there's something to be proud of. I know you are. But if you are into that, who are we to judge.

KK

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Dari
Why would a grown man like Scott ritter want to have sex with young boys and girls?

Fishing for a vacation? If you are so obsessed with Ritter's sex life, why don't you ask him? I hear he has a temper, perhaps he will solve your trolling problem once and for all.

Never mind, a cowardly twit like you likes to slander people safely behind an anonymous screen name. You lack the integrity to actually confront someone in person. You're a pathetic little boy who's not worthy of licking Ritter's boots. At least he did something for this country.

By the way, Ritter was right. You were wrong.

Bow-wow, bow-wow, bow-wow. It seems like you are the one asking for a vacation. What I'm amazed at is your obsession with this pedophile. He flips on every issue like a trick doing her tricks, yet you only see one side of his diatribes. Of course he's going to be right if he covers both sides of the field.

As for the names you've called me, I'll assume it was out of (your usual) anger. However, should you really mean it, perhaps we could exchange names, numbers, and addresses and see who the real puss is. Provided that they're real, you'll definitely get to know me.

As for your pedophile friend, anyone that enjoys having sex with kids should be hanged by their nut-sack.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: KK
Cowardly twit, looking in the mirror much? Yeah, he did something for the country. He tried to molest some kids, now there's something to be proud of. I know you are. But if you are into that, who are we to judge.

KK

I hear you tried to molest some kids too. I'd think you'd be more sympathetic.

 

[Gaard]

As for the names you've called me, I'll assume it was out of (your usual) anger. However, should you really mean it, perhaps we could exchange names, numbers, and addresses and see who the real puss is. Provided that they're real, you'll definitely get to know me.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

A tough guy with a mentor. Man, I could write a comic book.

Do you have stacks of bodybuilding magazines next to your bed?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

<- glad he popped a bag of popcorn

CkG

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Dari
Bow-wow, bow-wow, bow-wow. It seems like you are the one asking for a vacation. What I'm amazed at is your obsession with this pedophile. He flips on every issue like a trick doing her tricks, yet you only see one side of his diatribes. Of course he's going to be right if he covers both sides of the field.

As for the names you've called me, I'll assume it was out of (your usual) anger. However, should you really mean it, perhaps we could exchange names, numbers, and addresses and see who the real puss is. Provided that they're real, you'll definitely get to know me.

As for your pedophile friend, anyone that enjoys having sex with kids should be hanged by their nut-sack.

What I'm obsessed with is low-lifes who will slander another person to further their political agenda. It's one of the first things that caused me to distrust Bush. People with integrity make at least some effort to be honest and fair about their opponents. They have enough confidence in their own worth to be willing to stand -- or fall -- on their own. People like you and Bush seem to lack that fundamental decency that separates men from cowards. You are OK with framing people like Scott Ritter, ruining the careers and endangering the lives of people like Valerie Plame, and launching smear campaigns to attack people like John McCain and Max Cleland. You are beneath contempt.

I guess if you and your ilk are so threatened by Ritter that you're compelled to bury this thread in trolls, I should relax and let it happen. While it may hurt Ritter's reputation with the ignorant, bleating sheep, it shows us all just what kind of person you are. Troll away. You have nothing useful to contribute anyway.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Gaard

As for the names you've called me, I'll assume it was out of (your usual) anger. However, should you really mean it, perhaps we could exchange names, numbers, and addresses and see who the real puss is. Provided that they're real, you'll definitely get to know me.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

A tough guy with a mentor. Man, I could write a comic book.

Do you have stacks of bodybuilding magazines next to your bed?

You're a distraction. Go away, housewife.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Dari
Bow-wow, bow-wow, bow-wow. It seems like you are the one asking for a vacation. What I'm amazed at is your obsession with this pedophile. He flips on every issue like a trick doing her tricks, yet you only see one side of his diatribes. Of course he's going to be right if he covers both sides of the field.

As for the names you've called me, I'll assume it was out of (your usual) anger. However, should you really mean it, perhaps we could exchange names, numbers, and addresses and see who the real puss is. Provided that they're real, you'll definitely get to know me.

As for your pedophile friend, anyone that enjoys having sex with kids should be hanged by their nut-sack.

What I'm obsessed with is low-lifes who will slander another person to further their political agenda. It's one of the first things that caused me to distrust Bush. People with integrity make at least some effort to be honest and fair about their opponents. They have enough confidence in their own worth to be willing to stand -- or fall -- on their own. People like you and Bush seem to lack that fundamental decency that separates men from cowards. You are OK with framing people like Scott Ritter, ruining the careers and endangering the lives of people like Valerie Plame, and launching smear campaigns to attack people like John McCain and Max Cleland. You are beneath contempt.

I guess if you and your ilk are so threatened by Ritter that you're compelled to bury this thread in trolls, I should relax and let it happen. While it may hurt Ritter's reputation with the ignorant, bleating sheep, it shows us all just what kind of person you are. Troll away. You have nothing useful to contribute anyway.

First off, come back to me when scott ritter finally settles on an opinion.
Second, I will rip apart any man that seeks to take advantage of little kids.
Third, if Scott Ritter or you can't stand the heat of American politics, leave.

 

[Gaard]

Sorry Dari. I must've been misunderstanding you this whole time concerning this mentor thing. My fault.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: chess9
Nitemare:

No, we expect you to admit you don't have a clue whether the charges were founded or unfounded. Since the charges were dismissed, they could have had the wrong person, or the case could have had some other serious defect. He is INNOCENT until proven GUILTY. Not the other way around as you would have it. LOL, you right wingers are like creation scientists, the truth is what you want it to be. Besides, even if he were a child molester, that doesn't mean what he says is wrong. LOL, you guys are pitiful.

-Robert

I will admit that he is as innocent of child molestation as Michael Jackson is. He plea bargained which is an admonition of guilt, just like Jackson paid off a kid to drop the case

That's what I'm trying to say. Nobody who leans to the right will call Nitemare, or anyone else, on the carpet for what they are doing.

Heatsurgeon throws a hissy for everyone stating as fact that Bush was AWOL. CAD chastises someone for using the word 'prove'.

So character history and credibility has no bearing on reality? Sorry but if someone does a complete reversal of fortune after receiving a large monetary gift and plea bargains rather than go to trial about him wanting to meet up with a young girl to have her watch him stroke his wang...he does not gain an ounce of credibility in my book.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
I will admit that he is as innocent of child molestation as Michael Jackson is. He plea bargained which is an admonition of guilt, just like Jackson paid off a kid to drop the case

Not hardly. A plea bargain is NOT an admission of guilt. It often isn't even a suggestion of guilt. A plea bargain means both sides agree that their cases aren't strong enough or the stakes aren't high enough to justify the time, expense, and risk of a trial.

While you gentlemen are quick to convict Ritter based on the innuendo of a sealed plea bargain, you seem to let the prosecution off without question. Why didn't the prosecution want to take this case to trial? What was the plea bargain? What was Ritter's punishment; anyone hear about him doing any time? If not, what exactly did the prosecution claim they had and why wasn't it important enough to warrant any notable punishment?

Did you ever think maybe the prosecution had nothing? Did you ever consider that this was a trademark Bush smear campaign, and that maybe Ritter had enough evidence to make that case to the public? You assume the seal was to protect Ritter. I think that's unlikely. If Ritter was as guilty as you all claim, the prosecution had no reason to let him off. My guess is the seal protects the prosecution and perhaps even the Bush administration. This possibility is just as likely as your slander.

The Michael Jackson comparison is specious. Jackson's case was a civil issue. Jackson paid off the plaintiff. Who, exactly did Ritter pay off, the prosecutor?

So character history and credibility has no bearing on reality? Sorry but if someone does a complete reversal of fortune after receiving a large monetary gift and plea bargains rather than go to trial about him wanting to meet up with a young girl to have her watch him stroke his wang...he does not gain an ounce of credibility in my book.

Ritter did not receive a "large monetary gift" from Iraq. That's another lie refuted in the messages above if you would bother to read the thread before posting.


Sorry gentlemen, but most of you are being hypocrites. You vigorously denounce any attempt to suggest Bush lied, crying, "You can't prove it." in spite of overwhelming evidence from literally hundreds of credible sources. You are equally eager to pronounce Ritter's guilt, however, based on a few unsubstantiated rumors. Are any of you honest enough to acknowledge your inconsistency?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Sorry Dari. I must've been misunderstanding you this whole time concerning this mentor thing. My fault.

 

[Alistar7]

"He gave up but pretended not to"


exactly, so who is to blame for believing him?