@the-pi-guy 

At the moment I'm dealing with the other guy, I don't have much time to engage you, but I will respond because you have threatened to pull out the moderator card again when you saw the other guy is loosing ground.

"Americans were generally well aware that there were no WMDs 6 months later."

I actually posted the link, which I will do so again:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/22/iraq-war-wmds-an-intelligence-failure-or-white-house-spin/

What are you talking about? What I reffered to is how the pretext for war never existed in the first place since the evidence presented by Dick Cheeney was unsubstantiated. 

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/03/1151160567/colin-powell-iraq-un-weapons-mass-destruction

If you read the second link, there was insuffient evidence presented to the United Nations Security Council who did not sanction the US invasion of Iraq and deemed an invasion of Iraq illegal. Now explain to me how it is trolling to show you the evidence?

"So you're telling us to watch a propaganda piece that you admit you haven't watched."

I haven't seen it yet, but I like to watch both sides of the argument so I can discern who is telling the truth. In this case I can't say if its a propaganda peice because I haven't see it, but then again neither have you.

"You could read more of the article:"

Check the article you are asking me to read:

"In September 2021, the Australian Government purchased an additional 1 million Moderna doses from European Union member states."

At the time of mandatory vaccinations the Australian Government purchased... You stopped at Moderna and made assumptions about the other 4. Let me help you with that:

"The Australian Government advises that the AstraZeneca vaccine is no longer available in Australia."...

"The Australian Government advises that the Novavax ancestral vaccine is no longer available in Australia."

As your next point:

"The Australian Government has entered into a 10-year partnership with Moderna and the Victorian Government that will see Moderna build an mRNA vaccine manufacturing facility at Monash University Victoria."

If you look at what I said, I actually said that its irrelevant whether Australia manufactures these vaccines or not because the respective American cooporations hold patents on these products so the end user can't know whats in them. I only used the manufacture argument because that guy who responded to my comment didn't read the link he posted. It looks like neither did you...

By the way a 10-year partnership usually dosen't mean that the vaccines are manufactured straight away, it means this is a 10-process. At the time of the vaccine mandate they wouldn't have been manufacturing at that point, since the time scale was 10 years, which you've kindly reminded us of.

"The EUA process for a vaccine is similar to the BLA, or full approval, process in most ways. A manufacturer must conduct laboratory research, followed by animal testing, and submit an application. Phase I, II, and III clinical trials run as they normally would, as does the FDA assessment of manufacturing practices."

"FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by CBRN threat agents when certain criteria are met, including there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. "

Unapproved medical products, only in the instant of no other medication being avaliable, in addition to the vaccines having not passed the clinical trials.

Its trolling to disagree with everything you say and provide evidence for it? Even when you provide the evidence yourself. Are you sure Vladimir Putin is the dictator here?

Also Perma is absolutely right Saddam was into using chemical weapons, something most people fail to acknowledge. Why don't you do some research on the Iraqi Chemical Weapons Program. There are some Kurdish survivors that could tell you about Mustard Gas, Tabun, and even Sarin Gas (do you remember the movie The Rock? I only ask since you keep referring people to Vice). Hell they tried unsuccessfully to develop VX gas. Did they have nukes, what most people associate with the phrase "weapons of mass destruction". No, they didn't have nukes (although Saddam was pursuing them), but they were not afraid to use chemical warfare on even their own people to quash those pesky uprisings. All that said did the US target the country responsible for 9/11 ... nope. It just sticks in my craw when people say " but but but Iraq didn't even have WMDs." They did (at least at points in time) and were not afraid to use them. If you tell me exactly where and when you are going to look for something, chances are I am going to be able to hide it from you.

We will deal with the first point later. With regards to what your saying.

"I only ask since you keep referring people to Vice"

Actually I cited two links and I will give you a third. I also citied Offical Secrets which is based on a book about the false lies that perpetiated the Iraq war. The war that was propaged by the Democrats and the Republicans for their interests in control of Iraq's oil reserve. Until Trump put a stop to that because it put American service men and women at risk for the interests of the cartel running Washington DC. Which he actually stated publically as well. Why have you ingnored the other links disproving this guy...

"If you tell me exactly where and when you are going to look for something, chances are I am going to be able to hide it from you."

Lets do some reading first:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html

If you want I can read for you and take direct citations about these 'chemical weapons'. Perhaps you would like an explanation. The United Nations could not find any evidence of weapons of mass destruction. The United States apparently 'found' chemical weapons in the country they invaded after they had invaded it. Yet where is the investigation by other countries?

Actually I will read for you:

"Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the pre-1991 era.”"

Now I'm not a big fan of The Times, but in this case they seem to disprove your conspiracy. Even them I'm distrustful of anything the US government 'finds'.

@Permalite

Lets continue with the first point. As I explained to you and showed you infomation the US Government illegally invaded Iraq. A country which had no links to terrorisim. Yet the Republicans at the time created a false pretext. The US claims were unsubstantiated and as a consequence the United Nations Security Council declared an invasion of Iraq would be illegal. To which you said:

@Permalite

Yet you are claiming to the contrary. Have a look at what your writing:

As I asked you before, would someone in your line of work fabricate evidence, present it to your superior officers and then act illegally in your own interests when your superior officers have declared your actions would be illegal?

As someone who is sworn to protect life, surely you can see the paradox in what you are saying. Actually lets take this a step further. A lot of American families would have sent their children to fight in a illegal war, where George Bush, Dick Cheeney, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and many others from both political parties acted in their own interests. The only person in Washington who called these criminals out was Donald Trump. In fact Trump pulled American men and women service men out of the Middle East and ended the forever wars. He's the only President in Washington who fought to protect the lives of those service men and women. I suppose thats not in line with your 'sworn duty' to protect life and property...

Then your telling what I already know. These countries are run by corrupt governments. Although I'm looking into information about Vladimir Putin but I haven't had a chance to watch his Tucker Carson interview yet.

Well we're getting somewhere now. You've gone from saying that these countries are your enemies to now admitting that the people in those countries are not your enemies but its their corrupt governments that are your enemies.

https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/about-rollout/vaccine-agreements

Not sure if you checked your own link, it dosen't say that there. It even says that 'the vaccine is manufactured overseas'. It irrelevant whether Australia manufuactures these products because the patient on these products are protected by American coporation laws meaning that it dosen't matter if your country is 'independent and sovereign' because the Australian government has no intellectual property rights over the manufacture of these products. In fact if you look into this the patient is designed so that the end user is not allowed to know the ingredients of whats inside these 'vaccines'.

Then you know that these vaccines have not passed the clinlical safety trials. They were brought to market under emergency use authorization. Its the technical term to indemnify the vaccine companies and the Government should you drop dead from their vaccine. Your Government is telling you something is safe and effective but it hasn't passed the clincal safety trials... Is that in line with your duty to 'protect life'?

You lost composure and played your moderator card to avoid informed debate. I had no choice. If you like we can get into that later, but you ignore what threatens your beliefs. We've only just got past the Iraq war, which your only just let slip was illegal. We will get the pandemic business when we get through the basic points first.

We will deal with the first point later. With regards to what your saying.

"I only ask since you keep referring people to Vice"

Actually I cited two links and I will give you a third. I also citied Offical Secrets which is based on a book about the false lies that perpetiated the Iraq war. The war that was propaged by the Democrats and the Republicans for their interests in control of Iraq's oil reserve. Until Trump put a stop to that because it put American service men and women at risk for the interests of the cartel running Washington DC. Which he actually stated publically as well. Why have you ingnored the other links disproving this guy...

"If you tell me exactly where and when you are going to look for something, chances are I am going to be able to hide it from you."

Lets do some reading first:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html

If you want I can read for you and take direct citations about these 'chemical weapons'. Perhaps you would like an explanation. The United Nations could not find any evidence of weapons of mass destruction. The United States apparently 'found' chemical weapons in the country they invaded after they had invaded it. Yet where is the investigation by other countries?

Actually I will read for you:

"Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the pre-1991 era.”"

Now I'm not a big fan of The Times, but in this case they seem to disprove your conspiracy. Even them I'm distrustful of anything the US government 'finds'.

" I've read enough of the replies back and forth that I really don't want to engage in what seems to be discussions slipping more and more off topic.  Have a good one."

You've engaged me to try and prove yourself the moderator who lost a lot of ground to me. I'm not sorry that hasn't worked out for you, but you chose this path, not me. Let me remind me of what you said:

"I only ask since you keep referring people to Vice"

I gave multiple links, but you ignored them, including the part where the United Nations did not sanction an invasion of Iraq because you were trying so hard to impress the moderators. You saw that guy lost so much ground you went into support his chemical weapons post, in which you then ignored the article I posted. You then tried to propose a conspiracy theory that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction:

"If you tell me exactly where and when you are going to look for something, chances are I am going to be able to hide it from you."

This is what you said, then you ignored the article I posted about chemical weapons:

"Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the pre-1991 era.”

You should read the whole article, its quite insightful. Either way, an invasion of Iraq was not sanctioned and US actions were illegal.

"Don't bother responding I was initially trying to help you out by trying to remedy what i thought may be a misinterpretation of your use of "covid hoax" but you didn't bother to  answer that."

Well the moderator felt threatend so he played the warning card so I couldn't talk about it, which you already knew, hence why you have coming running to his defence when you saw he lost so much ground. Is it my fault you chose to reply to a comment that you were never involved with in the first place?

You got it wrong. All that happened here is that a conservative distanced himself from someone on the far-right.